Conservatives Still Playing in the Planned Parenthood Sandbox

Standard

The world is in disarray; our sworn enemies are getting stronger and closer; with the release of the billion$ to Iran (after our Jihadist-in-Chief worked his magic) we are now one of the largest financiers of terrorist networks in the world and, simultaneously, we are assisting our most diabolical enemy in the creation of Nuclear warheads that will be pointed at us; our national Debt is near the breaking point; we have millions of uninvited guest living and working here and using resources that were only intended for U.S. citizens; our unemployment rate is ridiculously and dangerously high.

With all this (just the tip of the iceberg) and even more going on and threatening our existence, the so-called Conservative Republican contenders for President in 2017 are still going to extreme, nauseating lengths, planning a war with Planned Parenthood.

I agree with the basic Conservative principle of limited government, I champion a free market, I oppose excessive taxes and unnecessary regulations on business and I champion a strong national defense, but I loudly and firmly oppose any connection between organized religion and organized politics (only because there IS NO CONNECTION and there should not be one).

Mr or Ms Conservative candidate proudly proclaim, on a near-daily basis, the purely moral position that they are “pro-life.” Does that make them better at making the right political decision when the good of the country is at stake? NO, of course not! Politicians (even Conservative ones) should do their jobs and make decisions on the bases of Constitutionality and relevant law. Yes, we are all moral beings, that’s just part of our better nature and part how most of us were brought up; with ingrained rules that say this is right and that is wrong. A politician who self-identifies as either “pro-life” or “pro-choice” brings NOTHING to the table when it comes to doing the jobs they were elected to do. Yet that seems to be the primary “credential” for many of them in this (and past) election seasons.

Here’s a news flash for citizen, non-politicians who have been drinking the Religious Conservative Kool-Aid for so long that they believe that they can’t call themselves Conservative without being devoutly religious and advertising it! You’ve been duped! If you believe, as I stated above that I do, in the core Conservative values of small government, less regulation and a strong free market a strong national defense and responsible levels of taxation you ARE a Conservative. Don’t let Sean Hannity, Mark Levin or any other Conservative talker tell you otherwise because you disagree with them on the LEAST IMPORTANT issues facing America and Americans.

The Website About.com has an excellent “Overview of Political Conservatism”. What is excellent about this particular definition of Conservatism is the fact that it correctly identifies Conservatism as a two-part philosophy:

Part 1 is identified as “core tenets” of Conservatism. For me, these core tenets define what I call “Secular Conservatism. The “core tenets” of Conservatism are the basic beliefs in three principles: (from the article): “1) Economic liberty and the central role of free enterprise in American society, 2) A small, non-invasive government, (and) 3) A strong national defense focused on protection and the fight against terrorism.”

Part 2 consists of the “Ancillary Principles & Ideologies” of Conservatism. These ancillary principles are the things that Religious Conservatives see as potential threats to their religious beliefs: Attitudes about “traditional family values”, marriage, the commitment to faith and religion and the assumed right to life for still un-born potential citizens. Even the strongest Religious Conservative would have to scratch pretty hard to find an “Ancillary Conservative Principle” that will help them do the main job they were elected to do.

Nothing wrong with morality or religion, but my point is, when these things become the focal point of an elected official’s political life the importance and connotations of the words ‘freedom’ and ‘liberty’ as they were intended by our forefathers can become too easily lost in admonitions from bible verse. Also, when Religious Conservatism is forced down the country’s throat as the ONLY alternative to Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden, it begins to ‘taste and smell’ like sour milk.

One more thing, all this ranting and raving against Planned Parenthood is based solely on some videos that were produced by a group whose primary (and perhaps ONLY) goal is to cripple Planned Parenthood. Sounds suspicious to me!

Recommended:

Washington Post: “Why the war over Planned Parenthood will hurt the GOP in 2016

A Rational Look at Abortions and Planned Parenthood

Standard

Let’s start with Planned Parenthood.

Except in the case of medical necessity, abortion is a life choice that should be made by a woman and a medical professional; not by a politician, religious official or a government agency. As a life choice, unless the mother’s life or health is endangered, the choice to abort should be paid for by the woman, not by taxpayers. How or why Planned Parenthood ever started getting paid by the feds for performing abortions is irrelevant, that funding should stop! Not all funding!

Apparently Planned Parenthood performs many helpful services for women who cannot afford testing or medication on their own, Personally I have no problem with them getting our money for that, as long as the people who use their services actually need that financial help.

Unfortunately, some people who are well off financially got that way and stay that way by cheating the system: getting charity, assistance, food stamps, tax breaks, etc. that they don’t need or deserve. Those are the people who should be ‘cut off!’

As I started out saying, I believe that abortion or no abortion is a decision that belong solely to the prospective mother. I find it bizarre  that, when the prospective mother makes the decision to terminate her pregnancy, suddenly every moralistic idiot in our society finds something to say about it.

Born or Not Born

If a woman made the decision to “have a baby”, not one of the aforementioned moralizing idiots would know about that child until it is born (born defined by Websters: “brought into life by the process of birth”) The well being of that child would be the mother’s ‘legal responsibility. It would be a life protected under our laws and our Constitution. If that child then died by normal circumstance: disease, organ failure or accident, it’s a tragedy for that mother and for that family unit. If that child died through neglect or an intentional act, the law would attempt to bring someone to justice for the act.

If a woman decides, for whatever reason, NOT to have a baby, but she is already pregnant, I believe she should have the right to terminate the pregnancy at some point before the baby is born, i.e., “brought into life . . .”. That decision does not give anyone else a moral responsibility for that baby’s life. That decision does NOT make a woman’s baby public property — that decision does not suddenly make that baby EVERYONE’S child, everyone’s concern or everyone’s problem. The unborn baby is still inside the mother, still feeding on her nourishment, still requiring her blood and respiration. To assume, at that point, that ANYONE but the mother has ANY moral claim to that unborn baby’s existence is completely illogical as well as morally absurd.

The social rules were made centuries ago: women have children or do not have children the circumstances of either case should not be open to discussion or governed by anyone’s moral code, except for the woman’s and, in most cases, the biological father’s.

Planned Parenthood Selling Baby Parts??

(Selling Baby Parts: That’s what Planned Parenthood”s opponents call it because they want the public suitably shocked!)

Having watched some of the videos that have come out it seems that some of Planned Parenthood’s activities may border on illegality, if that is the case, the people who are acting illegally should be brought to justice, like every else who breaks the law. That may justify a federal government supervised reorganization, (since they are using tax money), but as usual the moralizers want to whip everyone into a frenzy and will continue to pretend that totally de-funding the organization is the only option.

Shutting down Planned Parenthood is a poor option. Their mission statement emphasizes reproductive health and education as well as abortions, unless you are ready to assume that Planned Parenthood does NO GOOD for the community, there is no reason to judge it based only on their ability to perform safe, legal abortions or based on someone’s self-righteous opposition to abortion.

The Corruption of a Political Entity

Standard

Here’s some great advise for Conservatives (we need not use the term “Religious Conservatives” any longer, the word “Religious” is implied if not flat-out stated by virtually every Conservatuve I’ve listened to or read for the past several years. The very term “Conservative” has been corrupted and redefined; Conservative no longer stands for ‘smaller government and free trade, it stands for “In God We Trust.”

The following is is a quote from a Fox News opinion piece. The title of the piece: “Jesus hates religion. He really does” is rather shocking considering it was written by Dr. Alex Himaya, the founding and Senior Pastor of one of the fastest growing churches in America: theCHURCH at BattleCreek, located in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Here’s the quote:

“I think we as Christians have a reputation as conversation stoppers. When we engage people on the other side of an issue, most of the time, the conversation doesn’t end the way we want it to. It (either) gets stopped short or our side of the issue ends up being misrepresented. And that’s largely our fault.  We prefer to be heard, as opposed to actually listening. We want the benefit of the doubt, but we’re reluctant to give it. Instead, we lead with our idea of what’s right and wrong, in our belief, instead of leading with love.

The best way to stop a conversation short is by being judgmental and ‘religious.’ By that, I mean we come off as confrontational and condemning, rather than relational and loving.

It happened just the other day when Dave Bratt beat out Eric Cantor for his seat in the House of Representatives. Here’s the lead-in for information about Dave Bratt from the New York Daily News: “Bratt, 49, casts himself as a Ronald Reagan conservative with a deep suspicion of government power. He’s also a devout Christian whose win demonstrated how “God acted through people on my behalf.” (What a conceited, obnoxious statement!)

Apparently ‘Dave the Bptist’ feels that the secret to his success is Divine Mind Control: i.e., God’s will was to have Christian/Baptist Dave Bratt beat out the man who the Jerusalem Press (http://jpupdates.com/2014/06/10/breaking-news-jewish-republican-congress-defeated-primary/) pointedly calls “the only Jewish House Republican”, Eric Cantor. (Who would have thought that God would hold a grudge that long.)

Okay, I’m just having a bit of fun poking fun at Dave Bratt but I don’t want to get too far away from the point of this post and that is:
The apparent underlying message in virtually every Conservative speech in recent years seems to be: Only Christians have morals, only Christians ‘do the right thing’ in regards toward their actions and attitudes to their fellow man.

Here’s a News Flash: Morality came along centuries before Christianity and you can be sure that anywhere you went in those BC days you would find kind, gentle and honest people who happened to worship idols, superstitions, animals, trees and anything else you might imagine including rock formations. In spite of what Conservatives seem to insist, the Christian religion does not have a “lock” on morality.

I’m NOT saying that Bratt’s Christian morals will in any way make him less of a great public servant or that there is anything wrong with Christian morals, what I’m saying is it’s stupid for Conservatives to take a public stance that implies that only Christian Conservatives can be trusted or, beyond that, that there is any logical link between being a Christian and being a Conservative (or a Liberal for that matter.) Who or what you worship has no guaranteed effect on your behavior or attitudes; who you REALLY ARE under your ‘holy garment’, where the ‘rubber meets the road,’ is all that really counts.

It may be a cheap shot but I can’t help being reminded of the countless number of children who have been molested and corrupted by men and women who wear those ‘holy garments’ while publicly proclaiming that they are servants of God.