more from the news
Rudy Giulliani made the news again this week for two reasons. The first is that he has become, (for the next ten minutes anyway), the leader of the pack in terms of polling numbers and campaign funds in the GOP. He also distinguished himself from the rest of the herd by appearing to hedge on the issue of abortion rights, which caused fellow candidate John McCain to remark that it would be very difficult for anyone not solidly pro-life to get the GOP nod.
Truth is, nobody knows how any of the candidates feel about this issue, we are simply going through one of those phases where every candidate tries to kiss as many asses as possible.
I will be brief with this point, but why is this still an issue? (I have an answer for that, but it is long and complicated and my typing fingers are tired...). The Supreme Court set a precedent in 1973, that gave a little something to both parties. The court upheld a right to privacy, and established a benchmark of fetal viability as the point of no return for a woman to "choose". As medical science and technology have pushed that threshold back, and as the practice of this variety of medicine has become something of a profitable concern, the issue has not died.
As for my opinion, I am an unashamed pro-lifer who tries to mind his business. I can live with the standard that the court set. I freely admit that I am male and don't know what it is like to be pregnant, or to face the decision that women sometimes face, but frankly, I think it is time for both sides to take stock of their positions and try to reconcile themselves to the reality that social as well as personal circumstances change. While these changes have the drawback of putting a bit more pressure on some individuals, they also have the benefit of saving a few lives, in terms of premature births combined with the problems associated with it. Get used to it.
For me, the issue is not abortion per se, it is the tendency to go back and try to win back all the battles lost or stalemates reached, (what is sometimes called compromise). If the radical right was to win this battle, what would be next? Voting rights? Workplace safety and working conditions? These are laws not because some bleeding heart decided to whine to the courts, but because it was seen to be in the best interests of the country to adopt them and move on.
In other news this week, the Senate passed a bill that would give the Food and Drug Administration broad new powers to safeguard the profits of the producers of food and drugs. In what was seen (and in fact, bragged on) as a bipartisan effort to protect the American public, the upper house of the Congress passed a bill that would give the FDA power to not only initially approve products, but to regulate use, distribution of medicines found to be disadvantageous to their constituency.
The truth here is that the FDA would no longer be authorized to collect fees from drug manufacturers to 'speed the review' of new products after September 1, and it was deemed critical to the campaign chests of many Senators and Congresspersons to keep that particular proviso in effect.
Bullshit.
That particular provision is a huge door to graft, corruption and high prices to the consumer. I have said this before, but it bears repeating, the primary constituency of government is business. The individual is merely fodder to guage the various levels of influence that a business or industry has. watch this issue as it moves through the House. Make your opinions known and be sure to vote your incumbents out next time.
Stay focused.
Truth is, nobody knows how any of the candidates feel about this issue, we are simply going through one of those phases where every candidate tries to kiss as many asses as possible.
I will be brief with this point, but why is this still an issue? (I have an answer for that, but it is long and complicated and my typing fingers are tired...). The Supreme Court set a precedent in 1973, that gave a little something to both parties. The court upheld a right to privacy, and established a benchmark of fetal viability as the point of no return for a woman to "choose". As medical science and technology have pushed that threshold back, and as the practice of this variety of medicine has become something of a profitable concern, the issue has not died.
As for my opinion, I am an unashamed pro-lifer who tries to mind his business. I can live with the standard that the court set. I freely admit that I am male and don't know what it is like to be pregnant, or to face the decision that women sometimes face, but frankly, I think it is time for both sides to take stock of their positions and try to reconcile themselves to the reality that social as well as personal circumstances change. While these changes have the drawback of putting a bit more pressure on some individuals, they also have the benefit of saving a few lives, in terms of premature births combined with the problems associated with it. Get used to it.
For me, the issue is not abortion per se, it is the tendency to go back and try to win back all the battles lost or stalemates reached, (what is sometimes called compromise). If the radical right was to win this battle, what would be next? Voting rights? Workplace safety and working conditions? These are laws not because some bleeding heart decided to whine to the courts, but because it was seen to be in the best interests of the country to adopt them and move on.
In other news this week, the Senate passed a bill that would give the Food and Drug Administration broad new powers to safeguard the profits of the producers of food and drugs. In what was seen (and in fact, bragged on) as a bipartisan effort to protect the American public, the upper house of the Congress passed a bill that would give the FDA power to not only initially approve products, but to regulate use, distribution of medicines found to be disadvantageous to their constituency.
The truth here is that the FDA would no longer be authorized to collect fees from drug manufacturers to 'speed the review' of new products after September 1, and it was deemed critical to the campaign chests of many Senators and Congresspersons to keep that particular proviso in effect.
Bullshit.
That particular provision is a huge door to graft, corruption and high prices to the consumer. I have said this before, but it bears repeating, the primary constituency of government is business. The individual is merely fodder to guage the various levels of influence that a business or industry has. watch this issue as it moves through the House. Make your opinions known and be sure to vote your incumbents out next time.
Stay focused.
posted by eccentric recluse at 5:16 PM
5 Comments:
Sounds kind of like the gas price fixing going on in Wisconsin. I suppose the politicians claim this is for the good of the people, huh?
I agree, why is abortion still an issue? Just about every other issue from the 70's has been put to rest. And why do people feel such a need to legislate everyone else's lives? I'm feeling about legislated to death here.
Just about every other issue from the 70's has been put to rest.
Not the War on Drugs. Then again, why is that still an issue?
Anyway you say e should make our opinions known like they even matter. We can make our opinions known all we want, and our representatives can go on the news and say "my people are against this bill, and therefore so am I". But when voting time rolls around they can vote "Yea" since no one watches CSPAN and news of their vote will get out 4 whole years later, a long time for the memory-impaired politician.
The "war on drugs" has done little except harrass kids driving 8 mph on Friday night. It's been about as successful as the "war on poverty." The "war on terrorism" will probably line right up in there.
Last comment was mine. -Roy.
there could be a whole blog on "the war on drugs" and the (apparent) perceiption by the police of teen drivers, but it is not a simple issue. they way things used to be is a far cry from the way things are today. I suspect that if the war were declared to be over, and if 'our' side won, we would still have limits that would be seen as arbitrary on this kind of activity.
more as I sober up...
e_r
Post a Comment
<< Home