House of Horrors - Is the solution Punishment or Better Service

In one incident took the ambulance 20 minutes to get a patent on a stretcher through the clutter, but was unable to save the patent's life. Amazingly the place stayed open for over two decades. The National Abortion Federation turned the clinic down for membership, inspected the place and called it filthy and dangerous because of a padlocked emergency exit, although, “A but didn't call 911 or compain to any agency. Although a doctor from the Children’s Hospital hand-delivered a complaint to the Health Department after numerous patients returned from Gosnell’s facility with venereal disease from unsterilized instruments” according to Nation magazine.

So on December 22, Governor Corbett signed a touch new law to prevent this from happening again, that requires among other things, wide hallways, that will make abortion more expensive. Those accustomed to being poor will cry for help if they want an abortion, but the working poor sometimes hide the fact they are poor, even to themselves, so no one will know there is a problem until the mother is arrested for having the baby locked in the car in front of work when she unexpectedly was called in, or hired a not yet competent young babysitter to watch her child, that is, if this leads to something going wrong. I think the pro-life movement should want to, even have to, pay for children they helped bring into the world. It's not only the poor; someone with a reasonable job, if told there's chance their baby would require a full time nurse, would risk losing their house before the state might pay for a permanent nursing aid. And some politicians who claim to be pro-life wouldn't want the government assisting even after the child's parents lost their house through debt.

In America moral arguments seem to usually end with both sides trying to get some people in jail as long as possible. This is especially the case when it comes to miscarriages caused by drunk drivers. Drunk and cell phone distracted driving is a serious crisis. Once upon a time if one was killed or ten died, as a result of a drunk driver, the punishment would be the same. The pro-life movement pushed that if both a mother and fetus die after an accident, the drunk driver would serve double time. While the pro-choice movement has managed to prevent miscarriages, without the mother also dieing, from leading to murder charges. Instead of all sides of every argument trying to make more jail time, why not with the first conviction, for being a drunk or distracted driver (accident or not) that the probation be a listening device be put on one's car that gives a little beep every thirty seconds with a gyroscope to monitor if a car is being driven erratically? Maybe special insurance necessary where when in a bar a drunk can leave a message with his insurance company as to the time and route and have another person paid to drive him and his car home with the insurance covered. Maybe the bar having to pay, in advance, $5 toward the ride home or to a cabby. The system now is to punish the bar if a bartender serves someone noticeably drunk instead of making them partly responsible for the ride home.

Delaware County Rep. Margo Davidson, a new Democrat who booted out a Republican and earlier did a lot to get woman jobs and who did a lot to help the poor especially alcoholics and drug users supported the bill and said the abortion clinics had plenty of access to money to make the changes, was constantly mentioned by supporters in passing the bill,
http://articles.philly.com/2011-01-24/news/27045902_1_state-house-seat-democratic-turnout-davidson

I have a suggestion for her. Rep. Davidson could propose a bill where the state of Pennsylvania will pay for an abortion for desperate economic emergency, where the family might end up with malnourishment, or a child left in a car in front of work, or if a baby has a likelihood of a deformity which might require a full time nurse. However the pro-life movement could appeal to stop a abortion for economic necessity simply by providing child care or an insurance policy for the potentially handicapped child so that mommy and daddy won't lose their house paying for a full time nurse, than at that point the state taking over in an institution far from home.

To change the subject, Occupy Omaha tried to win brownie points (not the more frequent way of trying to get brutal cops in jail) but by shoveling the snow off the sidewalk and the streets in the park where they were staying.

I would like to suggest brownie points for the pro-life movement. In Louisiana a woman's shelter is being sued by lawyers for kicking a pregnant women out. Her boyfriend was in a men's shelter nearby and just got a job and wanted to save up for an apartment. The shelter offered carfare to her relatives, but she refused to leave her husband. When a lawyer complained the shelter offered room in a hotel, not in walking distance for her husband to walk to. Again the offer was turned down. A big lawsuit is now involved.

Now for a related subject, both the Mormon and Catholic Church hierarchies oppose abortion and oppose criminalizing and jailing undocumented immigrants. The Pope also strongly opposes Capitol Punishment. Hispanic Mormon activists constantly lobby their church to do more on immigration. Romney has to be careful not to criticize immigration too hard so as not to get in trouble with his church. For some reason, immigration and anti-death penalty activists who are Catholic don't lobby their church to excommunicate Rick Sanatorium, who when he was Senator from Pennsylvania constantly quoted the Pope on abortion while he violated everything the Church believes on immigration and the death penalty. Up to 50-years-ago the Catholic Church got criticism and intense pressure in the South for not being segregated, but never relented to pressure to comply.

Rick Santorum is making a splash vying to try to win the Iowa Republican primary spending a lot of time condemning Ron Paul. He is spreading the image that he is the one pro-moral candidate that practices what he preaches, wants to cut food stamps as a favor to the poor so they won't eat so much and likewise offers similar so-called Christian military help around the world, claiming the Ron Paul policy of not getting involved is unchristian. Ron Paul by contrast said "if we don't cut military spending, then we'll have to cut food stamps, and I don't think that would be the way to go,
http://www.nj.com/njvoices/index.ssf/2011/12/rick_santorum_is_the_knucklehe.html

I think even non-Catholics urging the Pope to ex-communicate Rick Santorum would clip Santorum's wings in his claim that he would offer Christian military help around the world. The polls keep changing in Iowa. In several Paul is ahead. The polls change over whether the Christian vote will split or solidify in one-direction. Calling Santorum's policy unchristian, and urging the Pope to excommunicate him would help in several different ways.

I had personal experience with Santorum's idea of fighting obesity with starvation. Getting out of college I decided to pay off my college debt by integrating the Washington DC construction union, which was to start building the Washington DC subway which was paying $5.77 an hour. Sitting in the union hall waiting there day after day waiting to be called. Unknown to me a worker was just electrocuted working in the underground pipes at PECO energy. When the project was over I continued to receive that pay as a heavy construction laborer. Anyway old times urged me to stop being a vegetarian, but thought high-protein candy bars would substitute for meat. Later I was in Philadelphia unable to concentrate never hearing about hypoglycemia. The able-bodied were kicked off welfare, and without food-stamps yet in the system, I begged for change, but realized though I couldn't concentrate that a cup of coffee filled with sugar was making it worse. I constantly fought an urge to spend my panhandled change on a cup of sugar filled coffee and fought with myself not to drink sodas and candy bars left in the trash cans. Less educated bums were eating wrapped hamburgers out of the McDonald’s trash dumpster. Smelling the hamburger no proof that it wasn't filled with dangerous bacteria. All these products nutritionists urge us not to eat, whether from the service counter or the trash cans. I never relented to eating out of the trash cans but did one finish a cup of coffee a hurried computer left at the 40th and Baltimore subway-surface stop. President Rick Santorum would militarily spread “Christ's love” not only to the obese homeless here in America but to non-Christians around the world the way al Qaeda spreads “Allah’s compassion”, until the US currency collapsed. It's sick that Santorum could be considered part of the pro-life movement and part of the Catholic Church, Whether one is or isn't Catholic or pro-life, let's all urge the Pope to change this.

At this point in the election cycle having a few but persistent people claiming that rather Ron Paul's non-involved foreign policy is unchristian, Santorum's “'tough love' for the world” is, could make a significant difference.

Comentarios

Sorry, but this statement really jumped out at me

Submitted by Rich Gardner on Mar, 12/27/2011 - 12:50pm

"In America moral arguments seem to usually end with both sides trying to get some people in jail as long as possible."

Wha-a-ah?!?!?!? Since when have pro-choicers called for anybody to go to jail?!?!?

Okay, very simply, pro-choicers occupy both the middle and the left wings of the abortion debate. Pro-choicers subscribe to the middle-ground belief that we, the American people, should make abortion unnecessary to as far a reasonable extent as possible by providing women and their chosen partners (if any) with the means to raise happy, healthy children. It should never be necessary for any woman to say "I can't afford to raise a child." America should have a strong enough child-raising infrastructure to make poverty a non-reason.

Pro-choicers are also on the left wing of the debate by saying "It's her choice. Period. End of story. Y'all damned male chauvinists who want to keep her barefoot and pregnant just need to STFU."

The anti-abortionists who occupy the right-wing do so out of hatred for women and a desire keep women barefoot and pregnant. If they ever want to show that their concerns are wider than that, they can start by coming over to the middle ground. They don't need to be coaxed or convinced, they just need to do it. They've had several decades to do so and haven't budged, so I conclude that they aren't going to and that they simply need to be voted down and pushed out of power.

responder

Punishments for drunk driving sexual harassment and child molest

Submitted by RichardKanePA on Mar, 12/27/2011 - 2:05pm

Punishments keep getting longer in every direction. Including hate speech. Anyone aiding an abortionist wasn't arrested before Roe vs Wade. Even if it can only be proved that a coach only took a shower with little boys without touching them that is enough to call to end statue of limitation laws, to reinterpret the incidents for punishment.

We in the peace movement cry when in hindsight Lynne Stewart's punishment is upped after trial and cheer when the same thing happens to Vincent J. Fumo, complaining that his sentence was only upped six months.

As for those opposing abortion hating women please check out Pax Christi and Consistent-Life.org

People blind themselves to the differences between Ron Paul and Rick Santorum by stereotypes of anti-abortionists hating women.

The jails are full and the Occupy Movement is mad that other businessmen besides Bernard Madoff weren't sentenced to 150 years in prison. I think just two years for both Newt Gingrich and Bernard Madoff would be appropriate.

responder

The Roman Catholic clergy

Submitted by Rich Gardner on Mar, 12/27/2011 - 5:16pm

that put together the two websites you recommended is about the least qualified group of people on the planet to discuss issues of birth and family and abortion. Being both men and celibate means that pregnancy/abortion is a strictly abstract issue for them. There's a real demographic split on the issue. The number of unmarried women of child-bearing age in the ranks of the anti-abortionists is very small. The number of middle-aged and elderly males in those same ranks is quite large.
Think it makes no difference whether a person has personal experience with an issue? Remember Dan Qualye, Vice-President to the elder George Bush? He took a very strong, uncompromising stance on abortion. But then he was asked about what he'd do if his daughter wanted one. Without hesitation, he took a completely pro-choice view that wasn't qualified or limited in any way. Why? Obviously, because if his own family was involved, then the issue was no longer an abstract one. It was no longer just a matter of some mental construct in his head, it was a real, living, breathing person that he had to consider.
You can find specific pieces on those sites if you want (I looked around for about 20 minutes and couldn't find any pieces specifically on the issue), but remember how the feminist characterized that short film “The Silent Scream,” “It paints the woman involved as a plastic, transparent Tupperware @ container!” The point being that pregnancy/abortion is not as simple as “Let it live,” it's also a question of asking someone to dedicate several decades of their life to doing something that rather do later or not at all.

responder

It's a big world with many views

Submitted by RichardKanePA on Mié, 12/28/2011 - 3:15pm

It's a big world with many views. “Abortion as a right” viewpoint is in America among certain age groups. Most Americans felt especially happy with President Clinton's claims of making Abortion safe, legal and rare. And most Americans are angry that some parts of the world uses abortion for sex selection, self-contradicting those who see it as a right.

Somehow the efforts of some to make abortion hard to get though encouraging financial costs ends up leading to social services in general being hard to get which will suite Newt Gingrich just fine. Gloomy economic outlook especially on a personal level encourages abortion.

A President Rick Santorum's proposed efforts to cut food-stamps to fight obesity would create a spike in the abortion rate even if he countered that spike with jail time.

Something is wrong in how we define things if we call Ron Paul's position on abortion the same as Sanatorium's. Ron Paul wants to cut military spending so as not to have to cut food-stamps. Less people and objects (if you want to call a fetus an object) will be cut up if Ron Paul was President than with any other candidate.