From My Own Little Corner I was diagnosed with Lupus in 1993, and for the next 21 years, I had no insurance. I used Urgent Care Centers, Walgreen's clinics, and LOTS of prayer, along with diet and exercise to keep the flares under control. I also slept ALOT. Chronic fatigue is a constant companion to those with Lupus.
In 2013, the ACA marketplace opened, and I was up at 8 am, on my computer, attempting to sign up. It took until January of 2014 to get coverage, but finally, after 21 years of living under the constant fear of losing everything over a major flare or organ failure from the Lupus, I could breath again. I have insurance and it was a great policy at an affordable cost for me, due to the subsidies. Peace of mind is priceless.
In January 2015, I was diagnosed with Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma. It was Stage 4 and in my bones, tissue, and skin. It was a blow, but I had my insurance and I could afford the treatments. I had so many tests, and then the chemo, plus having a drug injected directly into the spinal fluid to protect my brain and nervous system, should this cancer come back (50/50 that it'll return in some form within 4 years). I am just about 26 months past my last chemo treatment for Non Hodgkins Lymphoma, which really knocked me down. It's been a rough 3 years, but one thing I didn't have to worry about was how we were going to pay for my treatments.
The cancer and/or it's treatments, sent my Lupus out of control, and it's still pretty much that way. Some days I really struggle just to smile. I wake up and think "I can't do life today, there's just too much pain and too much fatigue." I've been doing this chronic illness thing for 24 years, and I'm tired of it. I'm tired of never knowing if I'm going to feel like doing any of the things I have planned for tomorrow. I go to bed every single night, after taking the medications that keep me from having full body contractions and leg cramps that are so severe my feet turn out and almost touch my ankles, and I pray for tomorrow to be good, to let me be productive, to let me help Dan do the things that need to be done, without paying for it by being flat out down for 3 days afterward. Family and friends would be shocked to know that there are times I don't shower for 3 or 4 days; it's just too much. I hurt and I am too tired to even raise my arms to wash my hair. I'm in the middle of one of those episodes right now. I finally showered yesterday evening. It feels so good to feel the heat from the shower head relax my muscles. Why don't I do that everyday? Well, I have Lupus which really affects my energy levels and is painful. The chronic fatigue had always been the worst symptom. I would have skin issues if I was out in the sun too much, sores on my scalp, arms, upper chest, face, and ears. Now, this nasty little companion has added pain; pain that simmers at about a level 4, but can ratchet up to a 9 or 10 in a matter of minutes. It's not a pain that I can describe. It's an all over ache that is similar to how your body feels when you have the flu, multiplied 3 or 4 times. I also have some other issues, thanks to Lupus. On top of the intestinal problems, the joints that swell and hurt, the Raynaud's Syndrome, and the headache that never really leaves, I have arthritis of the sclera (white part of the eye). This makes itself known through pain and vision issues, such a visual migraines. These cause me to see everything as though it's through a kaleidoscope. It's colorful and interesting, but driving while having one of these is pretty impossible. I also have bruising pretty much everywhere. It doesn't take much of a bump and I'll look like someone has beaten me up. It's a good thing there are clothes to cover things up. The newest addition is petechiae, which is where the small blood vessels under the skin rupture.
Add to Lupus my latest friend, Fibromyalgia. Now it's a real party. For anyone who doesn't know what that is, it is another auto-immune disease, and this little gem makes just the clothes rubbing on your skin painful. Wearing a bra is torture, anything that doesn't hang loosely on my body, causes me to hurt. Getting a hug, running your hand up my back, patting me on the back, touching my knees together, hurts. I sleep with a full body pillow and no covers. The weight of the covers hurts. I can only sleep in one position, left side, with a body pillow from my ankles to my shoulders. Even then, the only way I rest (and I use that word loosely) is to take muscle relaxants every single night, an hour before bedtime. Typically, I am in bed 13-14 hours a night. I go to bed exhausted and I wake up tired. Fibro can also cause the spleen to swell. This is my life and it's not going to change anytime soon.
I push through as much as I can. I paint a smile on my face, I joke, I laugh, and when I'm alone in the shower, with no one else around, I cry. I cry because I hurt. I cry because I can't even go outside in the sunlight or if the temperatures are over about 75 degrees. I cry because my husband has to do most of the things I used to do. He never says a word, and he lets me pretend that I'm doing my fair share, but in truth, I'm not. What used to take me an hour or so to do, these days may take a week. I worked on the garage this spring. It took me a month to do a days worth of work. It makes me happy to do things like that, but there is a price to pay. Sometimes it's one days rest, sometimes it's a week or two.
As you might imagine, all of these issues tend to produce stress. Stress is the worst thing in the world for auto-immune diseases. It can send you into a flare in a heartbeat. Flares can knock me out of commission for weeks. I take medication for the Lupus and Fibromyalgia. I pray every day that God helps me stay healthy. I've gotten very good at hiding how bad I feel, how tired I am, and how deep my depression can be.
Until now, one thing I didn't have to worry about was health insurance. That is about to change. I got an email from Anthem BC/BS stating that due to what is happening in Washington and the uncertainty of the insurance market, they are dropping most of the plans they were offering in Missouri. They were the only insurance company that offered coverage for the state, since Missouri congress, in it's infinite wisdom (insert sarcasm font here) decided not to accept the Medicaid expansion. In other words, Missouri basically opted not to participate in the ACA Marketplace.
I know that there are things about the ACA that need to be fixed. It's not perfect, but for people like me, it is a Godsend. I am alive to see my granddaughter, to be a grammy, to spend time with my husband, my children, my sisters, my brother, my SIL, my BILs, my nieces, my nephews, my friends, because I had insurance coverage when I got cancer. I dread the thought of having to go through this again without insurance. We will have to file bankruptcy, sell our home, our car, and probably live with one of our sons and their wife. I can live with the issues from my illnesses, but without insurance, there will be no meds for my Lupus or my Fibromyalgia, and no treatment if my cancer returns. No one should have to live with that hanging over their head, every single minute, of every single day.
Please let your congress people know that healthcare isn't a privilege, it's a right, to just let their constituents have the insurance coverage and peace of mind that they have. It's the right thing to do!
May God bless you and keep you safe and healthy!
~Stef~
Saturday, September 16, 2017
Friday, July 22, 2016
THE "TRUE" SILENT MAJORITY
From My Own Little Corner I am watching the news about the shooting in Munich, and once again, I am heartbroken at all the senseless violence...the attack on passengers on the train between Ochsenfurt and Wurzburg, the truck slaughter in Nice, France, the bombing at the Ankara, Turkey airport, the ambush slaughtering of the public servants who have vowed to protect us, by several people who may have had mental issues, and the killing of citizens for what appears to be no reason, by a very few of those who are expected to protect and serve. I feel old and I don't understand this violence.
We lived in Germany when I was a child...as a matter of fact, we lived in Ochsenfurt. My sister and I went to elementary school in Wurzburg. We traveled all over each summer when dad had his annual 30 days off. We went to as many countries as we could. We had friends that only spoke Deutsch and we only spoke English...we were friends and we found ways to communicate. When we first arrived, we didn't live in military housing, we lived in an apartment amongst the residents of Ochensfurt. My first "boyfriend", Grundig, was a young German boy. When we left to go to Ludwigsburg, he gave me an Indian head penny...I still have it.
We also lived in Turkey. I was too young to remember, but I never heard my mom or dad say they felt unsafe. We were a military family, and we went where the Air Force sent us. We were part of the family of men and women that inhabit this planet, and we (for the most part) had each other's backs. Our reasons for being there weren't to take over or to try to force our ideals on the people who lived there, we were there to protect their interests and ours.
My niece, nephew, and a friend, as well as my aunt and her great nephews, just returned from separately timed trips to Italy, and while I was excited for their opportunities to see the amazing architecture, art, food, and lifestyle, I would be lying if I said I didn't worry every time I heard that there was another terror attack on foreign soil. I can remember being with my aunt when she and my uncle came to visit us when we lived in Germany, and the sights we saw are some of my fondest memories. I have friends that have spent the last week in Nicaragua, doing mission work, and I have been praying for the safety of all of them, not just while in Italy and Nicaragua, but also while on the flights to and from these places.
I just can't understand the kind of hatred people have for another to be able to do these kind of things. I simply don't... I turn on the news and see Donald Trump and the things he says are stirring a hatred that I thought we, as a nation, had made amazing progress against. But we haven't! There are people in THIS country, that are BORN here, RAISED here, who claim to love this country and ALL that it stands for, that have so much bigotry, misogyny, xenophobia, homophobia, and Islamophobia buried so deeply within their hearts that I don't know if they even realized it, until Donald Trump came along, and by words and actions, told them it was okay to discriminate against anyone who doesn't look, talk, walk, act, or think like they do. Many of these people claim to be Christians. If they are true followers of Christ, then, guess what? It is time for them to get on their knees and ask God to forgive them for the hatred in their heart, their minds, and coming out of their mouths. We are not better than these people. "Pride goes before destruction, and haughtiness before a fall." Proverbs 16:18 I pray that they come to realize that they are doing towards their fellow man exactly what Donald Trump claims he is going to protect us from.
We would all do well to remember (or if any have never read it, read now) what is stated on the Statue of Liberty, which by the way, was a gift from France, one of our NATO allies...
The New Colossus
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand,
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightening, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon hand
Glows world wide welcome; her mild eyes command
the air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
We also lived in Turkey. I was too young to remember, but I never heard my mom or dad say they felt unsafe. We were a military family, and we went where the Air Force sent us. We were part of the family of men and women that inhabit this planet, and we (for the most part) had each other's backs. Our reasons for being there weren't to take over or to try to force our ideals on the people who lived there, we were there to protect their interests and ours.
My niece, nephew, and a friend, as well as my aunt and her great nephews, just returned from separately timed trips to Italy, and while I was excited for their opportunities to see the amazing architecture, art, food, and lifestyle, I would be lying if I said I didn't worry every time I heard that there was another terror attack on foreign soil. I can remember being with my aunt when she and my uncle came to visit us when we lived in Germany, and the sights we saw are some of my fondest memories. I have friends that have spent the last week in Nicaragua, doing mission work, and I have been praying for the safety of all of them, not just while in Italy and Nicaragua, but also while on the flights to and from these places.
I just can't understand the kind of hatred people have for another to be able to do these kind of things. I simply don't... I turn on the news and see Donald Trump and the things he says are stirring a hatred that I thought we, as a nation, had made amazing progress against. But we haven't! There are people in THIS country, that are BORN here, RAISED here, who claim to love this country and ALL that it stands for, that have so much bigotry, misogyny, xenophobia, homophobia, and Islamophobia buried so deeply within their hearts that I don't know if they even realized it, until Donald Trump came along, and by words and actions, told them it was okay to discriminate against anyone who doesn't look, talk, walk, act, or think like they do. Many of these people claim to be Christians. If they are true followers of Christ, then, guess what? It is time for them to get on their knees and ask God to forgive them for the hatred in their heart, their minds, and coming out of their mouths. We are not better than these people. "Pride goes before destruction, and haughtiness before a fall." Proverbs 16:18 I pray that they come to realize that they are doing towards their fellow man exactly what Donald Trump claims he is going to protect us from.
We would all do well to remember (or if any have never read it, read now) what is stated on the Statue of Liberty, which by the way, was a gift from France, one of our NATO allies...
The New Colossus
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand,
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightening, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon hand
Glows world wide welcome; her mild eyes command
the air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Emma Lazarus
Notice especially this part of what is written:
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Of course, there are those who say close the borders to keep the immigrants and refugees out, look what is happening in Germany, France, and Turkey, and yes, there are concerns. However, those countries have had 100's of 1000's of Syrian refugees come into their countries. The United States has much stricter rules regarding immigration and refugees, especially those from Syria. For them to get into our country, they must undergo a rigorous vetting process, one that takes 2 years, according to Congressman Adam Schiff, member of the House Permanent Committee on Intelligence, which oversees, among other things, homeland security, and only then are they allowed to enter. What they should worry most about is the ones that are born, raised, and taught here, in this country, toward their fellow Americans. If you think that isn't a problem, take a look at this...
"There is a conventional wisdom that terrorism in the US is the province of foreigners and is seen as a problem of infiltration," says David Sterman, a senior program associate with the international security program at the New America Foundation. "And while there is certainly a reason for that perception, as the September 11 attacks were conducted by people who came in from abroad, in the 330 cases we’ve examined since September 11, we found 80 percent are US citizens."
Now it is time for the real silent majority to stand up to the hate and fear...now is the time to love and love, loudly!
Please pray for peace and enlightenment. May God bless, and keep, you and yours.
source:
1.http://www.vox.com/2015/11/23/9765718/domestic-terrorism-american-citizens-omar-mateen
Notice especially this part of what is written:
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Of course, there are those who say close the borders to keep the immigrants and refugees out, look what is happening in Germany, France, and Turkey, and yes, there are concerns. However, those countries have had 100's of 1000's of Syrian refugees come into their countries. The United States has much stricter rules regarding immigration and refugees, especially those from Syria. For them to get into our country, they must undergo a rigorous vetting process, one that takes 2 years, according to Congressman Adam Schiff, member of the House Permanent Committee on Intelligence, which oversees, among other things, homeland security, and only then are they allowed to enter. What they should worry most about is the ones that are born, raised, and taught here, in this country, toward their fellow Americans. If you think that isn't a problem, take a look at this...
"There is a conventional wisdom that terrorism in the US is the province of foreigners and is seen as a problem of infiltration," says David Sterman, a senior program associate with the international security program at the New America Foundation. "And while there is certainly a reason for that perception, as the September 11 attacks were conducted by people who came in from abroad, in the 330 cases we’ve examined since September 11, we found 80 percent are US citizens."
September 11, 2001, marked the worst international terrorist attack on American soil, killing more than 3,000 people and wounding countless others. But 9/11 is an outlier. In the 14 years since, not one domestic terrorist attack has been committed by a foreign terrorist organization, including the latest mass shooting in Orlando, Florida. Omar Mateen was an American citizen.
In the same time frame, however, there have been 26 deadly domestic terrorist attacks perpetrated by homegrown terrorists. Homegrown terrorism commonly refers to terrorist acts committed by a government's own citizens. While sometimes used to describe an Islamic extremist threat, homegrown terrorism isn't tied to any one ideological background. (1)
Donald Trump followers may say they are the "silent majority" and if that is true, then the country that I grew up in, that my dad defended and served for over 20 years, that my father-in-law defended in the Pacific theatre, that my uncles, nephews, nieces, cousins, and friends fought for, doesn't exist anymore. We are better than Mr. Trump's hate rhetoric, we are the UNITED STATES of AMERICA.
As a Christian, I am called to love my enemies, I am called to love my fellow man, as Christ has loved me. There are no conditions. There are no "excepts". There are no excuses. We CANNOT survive hate by returning it in kind. As Dr. Martin Luther King said "Darkness cannot drive out darkness: Only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: Only love can do that.", but he also told us this, "There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe nor politic nor popular, but he must take it because his conscience tells him it is right."Now it is time for the real silent majority to stand up to the hate and fear...now is the time to love and love, loudly!
Please pray for peace and enlightenment. May God bless, and keep, you and yours.
source:
1.http://www.vox.com/2015/11/23/9765718/domestic-terrorism-american-citizens-omar-mateen
Saturday, July 09, 2016
THE HATE MUST STOP...BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE
From My Own Little Corner My heart is hurting, I just can't believe how much violence I see. I truly believe that until we learn to love one another, all of us, that we will not be able to move forward as a nation. Jesus told us, in John 13:34 - 35 "A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. 35 By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.” I am seeing very little love these days, and that includes coming from those who proclaim that they are Christians. We are not called to hate those that don't agree with us, we are not called to turn our backs on them, we are not called to walk away from them, and we most certainly are NOT called to KILL them. If we resort to the same tactics of extremists, then we are no better than they are. If we continue to label people based on skin color, where they were born, how they "look", the clothes they wear, or what someone on a website or social media calls them (by this I mean those that say if you don't agree with what they say, you must be a "mooslum". I have been called that on numerous occasions for saying exactly what I am saying today), then we will never accomplish the Great Commission. If you are one of those fanning the flames of discord by repeating and reposting these inflammatory memes and hateful statements, and you say you are a Christ follower, then I suggest that you re-read the 10 commandments, especially number 9..."Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor". I FACT CHECK every single thing I read or post before doing so, because I truly believe that disobeying this commandment is the greatest cause of the divisiveness and violence that we see today. My husband always says, "There is no defense against a liar." and that is exactly why commandment number 9 is so important. We can't be so cavalier with "facts", and expect that people will not react in a negative way. Please, please, for the love of all that you hold dear, and for the love of our Father, think before you fan the flames. I am a follower of Christ. I believe that there is good in every person. I support our police, I support the rights of people to PEACEFULLY protest when they feel like they are treated unfairly as well, regardless of race, as do the majority of the people that I know, including the police. If they didn't, they wouldn't be there protecting them. There are always those few, though, that will take advantage of any situation.
All this being said, I believe that love is the greatest healer and it is the answer, not violence against the children that God has made in His image. Every time I see ANYONE killed, I feel God cry in my heart. God loves all of His children, and I am positive that as He looks down, He is heartbroken over the way that we treat each other. It is time to love like we have never loved before, it is time to forgive as we have been forgiven, and it is time to stop the hate rhetoric that has become so prevalent in today's society. It is time for prayer and peace to replace hate speech and blood shed.
I am praying for peace and I hope you will all join me. The hate must stop, now, before it's too late.
Sunday, November 04, 2012
WILL ROE v. WADE EVER BE OVERTURNED?
From My Own Little Corner For decades now, a large part of the Republican party platform has been it's stance on overturning Roe v. Wade. Of course, there are other issues, but a large part of it's basic platform is it's pro-life stance. I am a pro-life, pro-choice Democrat, and before anyone says that I can't possibly be both, please understand this, abortion is not something I would choose for myself, however I don't feel that I have the Constitutional right to force my personal decision on another woman, with no understanding of the circumstances they may find themselves in. My views on this were altered radically when I was faced with a situation that could have required the termination of my last pregnancy, at 5 1/2 months, in 1987. I had a difficult pregnancy, and there was a real concern that my youngest had no bladder or kidneys and so could never have survived outside the womb. Dealing at the time with my daughter's illness and impending death, the thought of having to watch another of my children die, knowing there was no hope, changed my views. I had a long week of waiting, crying, and praying while traveling to Cardinal Glennon every day to be with my severely damaged daughter. Thank God, I wasn't forced to make that decision, but it changed the way I viewed the legality of Roe v. Wade.
Knowing how I feel, and having been confronted recently with the opinion from others that if I am pro choice, I cannot possibly also be a Christian (which by the way I am...I have accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Saviour, and have been baptized as an outward symbol of that decision), I decided to do some real research on Roe v. Wade. I found a lot of interesting information about the original ruling and subsequent revisits by the Supreme Court of the United States. I would like to share this with you, and then share MY thoughts on why after all these years, with all the drama, hand wringing, bombings, disagreements, political posturing, and promises to overturn it, it is still the law of the land, other than the constitutionality of it. Please understand I am in no way attempting to change anyone's mind, nor am I telling you that your belief on this subject is the wrong one. I am simply presenting what I have found and my hypothesis as to why it will never be overturned.
First, a little history on Roe v. Wade.
Although opponents to Roe V. Wade would like to believe that this ruling was the first time that abortion was legal in this country, that is simply not true. In the 1700's and early 1800's the term abortion only applied to termination of pregnancies after "quickening", or the first feelings of movement. There were pills readily available to women, called "Female Monthly Pills", that were taken when women wanted to end unwanted pregnancies.
In 1827, Illinois passed a law that taking these pills was illegal and punishable by up to 3 years in prison. Many states soon followed suit, but the pills were still widely available until the middle of the 19th century. Abortion did not become a serious offense until between 1860 and 1880, and contrary to popular belief it was not based on any moral outrage, but rather pursued by doctors that felt that the practitioners of abortion were competition and were taking business away from them. Until that point in time, even the Catholic church had accepted the ending of unwanted pregnancies up until the time of quickening, but soon joined forces with the doctors.
By the turn of the century all states had laws that banned abortion, but these were rarely enforced, and if the woman had enough money, abortion was still available to her. By the late 1930's the laws were being strictly enforced. Soon the crackdown led to a reform movement whereby abortion bans were lifted in California and New York, even before the supreme court ruled on Roe v. Wade. (1)
On January 22, 1973, the SCOTUS issued it's ruling on Roe v. Wade. This suit had been brought by Jane Roe, an alias for Norma McCorvey. It was originally brought on her behalf against the state of Texas, alleging that the abortion law there violated her constitutional rights and the rights of other women. The defendant was the District Attorney of Dallas County, Texas, Henry B. Wade. Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee were counsel for the plaintiffs and John Tolle, Jay Flowers, and Jay Floyd argued for the defense. A lower court's decision striking down the abortion law was based on the 9th Amendment, part of the Bill of Rights, which states "the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." and protected a person's right to privacy. The Supreme Court of the United States, chose to base it's ruling on the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, and was decided primarily on the due process clause. A criminal statue that did not take into account the stage of the pregnancy or other issues, such as the life of the mother, was a ruled to be a violation of due process. As a result the courts upheld the lower courts decision and issued these guidelines.
1. In the first trimester, the state(that is, ANY government), could treat abortion only as a medical decision, leaving medical judgement to the woman's physician.
2. In the second trimester (before viability), the state's interest was seen as legitimate when it was protecting life of the mother.
3. After viability of the fetus (the ability of the fetus to survive outside and separated from the uterus), the potential of human life could be considered as a legitimate state interest, and the state could "choose to regulate, or even proscribe abortion" as long as the life and health of the mother was protected.
All state laws prohibiting the access to abortion during the first trimester were invalidated by Roe v. Wade. State laws restricting access during the second trimester were upheld only when the restrictions were for the purpose of protecting the health of the pregnant woman. (2)
In other words, Roe v. Wade held that a woman, with her doctor, could choose abortion in the earlier months of pregnancy without restriction, and with certain restrictions in later months, based on the Constitutional right to privacy.
Sitting on this court were the following:
Harry Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Chief Justice Warren Burger, William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall, Lewis Powell, Potter Stewart, the majority, and William Rehnquist and Byron White, the dissenters. The majority opinion was written by Harry Blackmun, with concurring opinions by Potter Stewart, Warren Burger, and William O. Douglas. Both Justice Rehnquist and Justice White wrote dissenting opinions. The interesting thing is the make up of the political appointments of these judges. People often think the justices were all liberal judges appointed by Democratic presidents, when in actuality the opposite is true. Blackmun, Powell, and Burgher, as well as Rehnquist, were all appointed by President Richard M. Nixon, Brennan and Stewart by President Dwight D. Eisenhower. Douglas was appointed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Marshall by President Lyndon B. Johnson, with White being appointed by President John F. Kennedy. So, of the 7 judges who upheld Roe v. Wade, 5 were appointed by Republican presidents, 2 by Democratic presidents, and of the 2 dissenting judges, one was appointed by a Republican and one by a Democratic president. (3)
This ruling has been revisited through the years, and in 1992 in Casey v Planned Parenthood, the decision was upheld again. In releasing the much anticipated decision, the SCOTUS first declared that "a woman's decision to get an abortion implicates important "liberty interests" and "privacy issues" that the Constitution's Due Process clause protects against state interference. Together these interests form a "substantive right to privacy" that is protected from state interference "in marriage, procreation, contraception, family relation ships, child rearing, and education." This right also protects the abortion decision, the court again argued, because it implicates equally intimate questions of a woman's personal autonomy, personal sacrifices, emotional and mental health, and fundamental right to define her life." (4) Roe v Wade was upheld by a slim 5-4 margin, although there were high hopes that since the make up of the court had changed, it would be overturned. The court now consisted of Harry Blackmun, Anthony Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, David Souter, John Paul Stevens (Justices for the court) and William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Byron White (dissenting Justices). Of these Justices, 8 were appointed by Republican presidents, 5 of those by President Reagan and President Bush, both well known for their opposition to Roe v. Wade. (5)
Now, with this history in mind, I have to wonder why so many continue to believe that the SCOTUS will overturn Roe v. Wade if it is brought before the court in the future. In upholding it, the justices have stated that it is unconstitutional to limit a woman's access to abortion services on more than one occasion.
I have thought about this a lot, especially recently when my Christianity has been called into question, and this is what I think. In my opinion, no matter how vociferously the republican candidates declare otherwise, Roe v. Wade will never be overturned. It is a rallying cry for the base of the Republican party. When all else is going wrong, when the candidate that they have is weak and the support of the base is lackluster, the candidate will always go back to the pro-life stance and the promise of overturning Roe v. Wade to shore up support. If they were to overturn Roe v. Wade and outlaw abortion (which, as history has shown us, will never happen, even when the majority of the Supreme Court justices are republican appointees) they lose a very powerful way to motivate their base. If the republican party was truly serious about outlawing abortion and overturning Roe v. Wade, they had the perfect opportunity, between January 2001 and January 2007, when the Republican president, George W. Bush, had a super majority.
So, when a Republican candidate says he will strike down Roe v. Wade, I have serious reservations about his intention to truly do so, and those who are voting for him with this hope in mind, are very likely to be disappointed.
1. http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/roe-v-wade
2. http://womenshistory.about.com/od/abortionuslegal/p/roe_v_wade.htm
3. http://vox-nova.com/2008/05/21/are-liberal-judges-to-blame-for-roe-v-wade/
4. http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/rights/landmark_casey.html
5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_v._Casey
Knowing how I feel, and having been confronted recently with the opinion from others that if I am pro choice, I cannot possibly also be a Christian (which by the way I am...I have accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Saviour, and have been baptized as an outward symbol of that decision), I decided to do some real research on Roe v. Wade. I found a lot of interesting information about the original ruling and subsequent revisits by the Supreme Court of the United States. I would like to share this with you, and then share MY thoughts on why after all these years, with all the drama, hand wringing, bombings, disagreements, political posturing, and promises to overturn it, it is still the law of the land, other than the constitutionality of it. Please understand I am in no way attempting to change anyone's mind, nor am I telling you that your belief on this subject is the wrong one. I am simply presenting what I have found and my hypothesis as to why it will never be overturned.
First, a little history on Roe v. Wade.
Although opponents to Roe V. Wade would like to believe that this ruling was the first time that abortion was legal in this country, that is simply not true. In the 1700's and early 1800's the term abortion only applied to termination of pregnancies after "quickening", or the first feelings of movement. There were pills readily available to women, called "Female Monthly Pills", that were taken when women wanted to end unwanted pregnancies.
In 1827, Illinois passed a law that taking these pills was illegal and punishable by up to 3 years in prison. Many states soon followed suit, but the pills were still widely available until the middle of the 19th century. Abortion did not become a serious offense until between 1860 and 1880, and contrary to popular belief it was not based on any moral outrage, but rather pursued by doctors that felt that the practitioners of abortion were competition and were taking business away from them. Until that point in time, even the Catholic church had accepted the ending of unwanted pregnancies up until the time of quickening, but soon joined forces with the doctors.
By the turn of the century all states had laws that banned abortion, but these were rarely enforced, and if the woman had enough money, abortion was still available to her. By the late 1930's the laws were being strictly enforced. Soon the crackdown led to a reform movement whereby abortion bans were lifted in California and New York, even before the supreme court ruled on Roe v. Wade. (1)
On January 22, 1973, the SCOTUS issued it's ruling on Roe v. Wade. This suit had been brought by Jane Roe, an alias for Norma McCorvey. It was originally brought on her behalf against the state of Texas, alleging that the abortion law there violated her constitutional rights and the rights of other women. The defendant was the District Attorney of Dallas County, Texas, Henry B. Wade. Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee were counsel for the plaintiffs and John Tolle, Jay Flowers, and Jay Floyd argued for the defense. A lower court's decision striking down the abortion law was based on the 9th Amendment, part of the Bill of Rights, which states "the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." and protected a person's right to privacy. The Supreme Court of the United States, chose to base it's ruling on the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, and was decided primarily on the due process clause. A criminal statue that did not take into account the stage of the pregnancy or other issues, such as the life of the mother, was a ruled to be a violation of due process. As a result the courts upheld the lower courts decision and issued these guidelines.
1. In the first trimester, the state(that is, ANY government), could treat abortion only as a medical decision, leaving medical judgement to the woman's physician.
2. In the second trimester (before viability), the state's interest was seen as legitimate when it was protecting life of the mother.
3. After viability of the fetus (the ability of the fetus to survive outside and separated from the uterus), the potential of human life could be considered as a legitimate state interest, and the state could "choose to regulate, or even proscribe abortion" as long as the life and health of the mother was protected.
All state laws prohibiting the access to abortion during the first trimester were invalidated by Roe v. Wade. State laws restricting access during the second trimester were upheld only when the restrictions were for the purpose of protecting the health of the pregnant woman. (2)
In other words, Roe v. Wade held that a woman, with her doctor, could choose abortion in the earlier months of pregnancy without restriction, and with certain restrictions in later months, based on the Constitutional right to privacy.
Sitting on this court were the following:
Harry Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Chief Justice Warren Burger, William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall, Lewis Powell, Potter Stewart, the majority, and William Rehnquist and Byron White, the dissenters. The majority opinion was written by Harry Blackmun, with concurring opinions by Potter Stewart, Warren Burger, and William O. Douglas. Both Justice Rehnquist and Justice White wrote dissenting opinions. The interesting thing is the make up of the political appointments of these judges. People often think the justices were all liberal judges appointed by Democratic presidents, when in actuality the opposite is true. Blackmun, Powell, and Burgher, as well as Rehnquist, were all appointed by President Richard M. Nixon, Brennan and Stewart by President Dwight D. Eisenhower. Douglas was appointed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Marshall by President Lyndon B. Johnson, with White being appointed by President John F. Kennedy. So, of the 7 judges who upheld Roe v. Wade, 5 were appointed by Republican presidents, 2 by Democratic presidents, and of the 2 dissenting judges, one was appointed by a Republican and one by a Democratic president. (3)
This ruling has been revisited through the years, and in 1992 in Casey v Planned Parenthood, the decision was upheld again. In releasing the much anticipated decision, the SCOTUS first declared that "a woman's decision to get an abortion implicates important "liberty interests" and "privacy issues" that the Constitution's Due Process clause protects against state interference. Together these interests form a "substantive right to privacy" that is protected from state interference "in marriage, procreation, contraception, family relation ships, child rearing, and education." This right also protects the abortion decision, the court again argued, because it implicates equally intimate questions of a woman's personal autonomy, personal sacrifices, emotional and mental health, and fundamental right to define her life." (4) Roe v Wade was upheld by a slim 5-4 margin, although there were high hopes that since the make up of the court had changed, it would be overturned. The court now consisted of Harry Blackmun, Anthony Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, David Souter, John Paul Stevens (Justices for the court) and William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Byron White (dissenting Justices). Of these Justices, 8 were appointed by Republican presidents, 5 of those by President Reagan and President Bush, both well known for their opposition to Roe v. Wade. (5)
Now, with this history in mind, I have to wonder why so many continue to believe that the SCOTUS will overturn Roe v. Wade if it is brought before the court in the future. In upholding it, the justices have stated that it is unconstitutional to limit a woman's access to abortion services on more than one occasion.
I have thought about this a lot, especially recently when my Christianity has been called into question, and this is what I think. In my opinion, no matter how vociferously the republican candidates declare otherwise, Roe v. Wade will never be overturned. It is a rallying cry for the base of the Republican party. When all else is going wrong, when the candidate that they have is weak and the support of the base is lackluster, the candidate will always go back to the pro-life stance and the promise of overturning Roe v. Wade to shore up support. If they were to overturn Roe v. Wade and outlaw abortion (which, as history has shown us, will never happen, even when the majority of the Supreme Court justices are republican appointees) they lose a very powerful way to motivate their base. If the republican party was truly serious about outlawing abortion and overturning Roe v. Wade, they had the perfect opportunity, between January 2001 and January 2007, when the Republican president, George W. Bush, had a super majority.
So, when a Republican candidate says he will strike down Roe v. Wade, I have serious reservations about his intention to truly do so, and those who are voting for him with this hope in mind, are very likely to be disappointed.
1. http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/roe-v-wade
2. http://womenshistory.about.com/od/abortionuslegal/p/roe_v_wade.htm
3. http://vox-nova.com/2008/05/21/are-liberal-judges-to-blame-for-roe-v-wade/
4. http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/rights/landmark_casey.html
5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_v._Casey
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
IGNORANCE IS...BLISS???
From My Own Little Corner On Sunday morning, as I was preparing to leave for church, I was watching the Jaco report on FOX 2, something I do every Sunday. Charles Jaco's guest was Todd Akin, the republican nominee and contender, for the Senate seat that is now held by Claire McCaskill. As I was listening to this interview, I learned a lot about Mr. Akin's personal and political views and much has been made (rightly so) of his views on abortion and "legitimate rape". I will get to that in a bit, but first, let me see if I can try to understand some of his "less controversial" ideas.
He is against student loans, they are the "3rd stage cancer of socialism". Really? I have many relatives and friends that have college degrees because these loans were available to them, including a sister that works for a large company. She has worked for this company her whole career (one that spans over 20 years), and her success would not have been possible if not for the student loans that helped her pay for her degree in mechanical engineering, and then let her pay it back after she got her job. From what I gleaned from Mr. Akin he thinks that the student loan program should be run by private lenders and they should be the ones that control this program. Oh, I see, then privately run, money making entities, the ones that are so upstanding, and "whose assets now exceed half the size of the US economy" (1), would be the ones that decide who gets the funds to go to college and who doesn't. Oh yes, that is so much better than the federal government ensuring that ALL people have access to college funds. Lets ask the general public and middle class, just how well that has worked for them in other lending arenas, especially the minorities that wanted the funds to build a home. I suspect that they might have a different opinion about how effectively private banking entities would run the student loan program.
Mr. Akin is also not a fan of the federal school lunch program. Here again, he thinks that the states should run this program, because the states are so much better at "sorts of things" than the federal government is. My question would be where exactly the funds for this program would come from? Would they come from federal grants or would there be a need to raise state taxes? Or perhaps your real estate taxes will go up to cover these costs? Would it be like the idea of "privatizing" social security or vouchers for medicare for those who are over 65 or are disabled? Let me see...these vouchers could be used to buy insurance from any vendor (read private insurance company) you would like. Wow...what a great idea, then the government wouldn't be in the insurance business, there would be be an open market, which would drive down insurance rates, which in turn would reduce the federal deficit...or you could just stay in the medicare program. What? How exactly do they figure that would change anything? The government would be giving the recipient of Social Security a voucher to pay for health insurance through private entities, and if the voucher amount wasn't enough for the insurance coverage you wanted, you would pay out of pocket. If the voucher is for more than the insurance costs, you get the keep the extra. Wonder how many times the latter would happen? We have an open market system now, and we are experiencing just how well that works at keeping premiums down! I suspect that if this proposal gains ground and is the future of medicare, you are going to see a lot of seniors that will have even less money in their pockets to pay for those annoying extras like groceries, utilities, and medicine.
As for his idea about how to fix the economy...well, duh! Cut taxes for those businesses that are paying so much. If we do that, then the companies can hire more people, and those people that are hired will pay more taxes. Huh? Let's examine some of these companies that are paying so much in taxes that they have no money left over to hire more workers.
Poverty is rampant. Hunger is widespread. But don't worry about America's largest corporations -- they're doing just fine.
Fortune released its annual list of the country's 500 biggest companies this week, and it turns out to have been a good year for corporate America. In 2011, the Fortune 500 generated a combined $824.5 billion in earnings -- an all-time record, and a 16 percent jump from the previous year.
The report echos others indicating corporate America is experiencing boom times.U.S. corporate profits returned to pre-recession levels, according to the International Institute for Labour Studies released Friday, hitting 15 percent of gross domestic product.
The larger economic picture hasn't been so rosy of course. Twelve and a half million people are still out of work. Many of the new jobs that have been created lately arelow-paying food service gigs. A record 46 million Americans are in poverty, and millions more are only just clinging onto financial stability -- one emergency is all it would take to tip them into disaster.
But much like the too-big-to-fail banks -- whose assets now exceed half the size of the U.S. economy, and which have made more profits since the financial crisis than they did in the eight years prior -- corporations don't seem bothered by the bleak weather on Main Street. They just keep growing.
In fact, many have benefitted on the backs of workers that in some cases are underpaid or at risk of losing their jobs. Among the largest companies on Fortune's list is Walmart, at number two, which was recently hit with a $4.8 million fine from the government for allegedly failing to pay its workers overtime; General Electric, at number six, which may have paid an average federal tax rate of just 2.3 percent over the past decade, according to the group Citizens for Tax Justice; and General Motors, at number five, which amassed $9.1 billion in profits last year and recently froze pay for its work staff of 26,000.
Further down the list are Lockheed Martin, which recorded $2.6 billion in profits last year and offered buyout plans to more than 6,000 employees; and Pfizer, which took in $10 billion in profits and announced plans to lay off more than 16,000 workers.(1)
Let me get this straight...these companies need more tax breaks, so they can make more profits, so they can lay off more people??? GE paid a tax rate of just 2.3% over the last 10 years and they need bigger tax breaks, because their exorbitant tax rates are keeping them from hiring more workers. The CEO's of the insurance industry (you know, the industry that Paul Ryan and Todd Akin want us to use vouchers to buy health care coverage from, because it would be more fiscally sound) make an average of $4 million dollars a year, with the highest paid being Aetna's CEO, Ronald A Williams, at $38.125 million a year.(2) Interesting that there are those that think the middle class would get a fair shake from these guys.
Charles Jaco:
“On abortion, you’ve been pro-life your entire career.”
Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.):
“Yeah.”
Charles Jaco:
“You’ve been very staunchly pro-life. Are there any circumstances in your mind in which abortion should be legal?”
Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.):
“Well, I think that sometimes people talk about life of the mother as a situation, Charles. And in my sense, one of the foundational things America is built on is a respect for life. So I would say you optimize life.
“So, for instance, a woman has a tubal pregnancy or something. Well, technically by my understanding life begins at conception, so you technically had conception. But the child doesn’t have a chance and will soon kill a mother, okay? So I would say in those kinds of situations, you try to optimize life.
“But, you know, my case in this, Charles, has been even if you sort of separate a little the whole abortion question out, one of the things I love about this country is the fact that Americans do consider life really important.
“And it’s not because of some theoretical thing – you’re on a talk show and somebody asks you about it – but you have Sept. 11 and you’ve got these guys that are running into a building that’s about to collapse. They find somebody in a wheelchair. They never checked their ID or anything like that or whether they’re important. They grab them and get them to safety, and they run back and get another one.
“Same kind of thing that we saw – Ollie North has some footage. You know, he’s been right there in the front with cameras taking footage. This is over in Iraq. And there’s a Marine – a big guy, and he’s got this guy who’s wounded over his shoulder and he’s running. The bullets are flying around. And there is a cameraman in a safe position saying, ‘Hey, that guy’ – and the guy’s fatigues are just up and you can see that this is an Iraqi citizen. This isn’t the U.S. soldier. Says, ‘Hey, that’s an Iraqi citizen. Why are you risking your life there?’ This Marine turns around and he looks straight into that guy’s camera and he said, ‘Because that’s what we do.’
“And that spirit of America, I think, is so important for us to protect that idea of the importance of all of us.”
Charles Jaco:
“Okay, so if an abortion can be considered in the case of, say, tubal pregnancy or something like that, what about in the case of rape? Should it be legal or not?”
Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.):
“Well, you know, uh, people always want to try to make that as one of those things, ‘Well, how do you – how do you slice this particularly tough sort of ethical question.’
“It seems to me, first of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.
“But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something. You know, I think there should be some punishment but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.” (3)
So, he thought that it might be okay to "optimize life" by allowing the mother to have a tubal pregnancy terminated. Well, it is my understanding (to borrow a phrase from Mr. Akin) that kind of pregnancy is going to terminate, whether it's okay by him or not, and in most cases will result in the loss of the fallopian tube where the embryo has embedded itself, which is outside the uterus. If the tube ruptures before the pregnancy is discovered, there is a real chance that the mother's life could be in jeopardy. But the most shocking part of this interview was his assertion that if a woman is a victim of "legitimate rape" she won't get pregnant, because "the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down." Wow...so if the woman gets pregnant, then it wasn't really rape, she must have consented in some way. Maybe she didn't fight hard enough or she had on lipstick that was too red? Perhaps she forgot to lock her bedroom window or front door? Or maybe that 13 year old girl looked like she was 21 and was dressed inappropriately? Who knows? The truth is that 32,101 pregnancies result from rape each year. Medical estimates of a 5% pregnancy rate are for one time, unprotected sexual intercourse (4) is the same percentage of pregnancy that occur each year through this despicable act.
In my opinion, Mr. Akin is an ill-informed misogynist and there is no way he should ever have any kind of power to make decisions for the female population of this country, let alone sit on the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. His views on rape and pregnancy are right in line with 13th century England, which held the legal position that pregnancy disproved a claim of rape, according to medical historian Vanessa Heggie. Hmmmm, that couldn't possibly have been because if a woman accused a man of rape, he could deny it, except when a pregnancy resulted from that forcible act of violence. Pregnancy was proof, so if you take away the ability to get pregnant when raped, then there couldn't possibly have been a rape. This is, of course, tied to the age old fable that you can't get pregnant unless you have an orgasm, and if that happens then you must have enjoyed it, hence, pregnant...NO RAPE! Brilliant! With advocates like Todd Akin, women don't need enemies.
I am sure that there are those who would disagree, and that is your right. This is what makes this country so great...we have rights, and that includes the right to choose who represents us. But more importantly, it gives us the right to choose what we do with our bodies. No one else has the right to tell us what to do with our bodies, but us and that goes for both women and men! That doesn't mean I am pro-abortion, it means that I don't feel I have the right to tell anyone else, male or female, that they have to agree with me, and live by my code of conduct.
May God bless each and every one of you!
1.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/07/fortune-500-company-earnings_n_1497593.html
2.http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/16/health-care-america-now/health-care-advocacy-group-blasts-insurers-ceo-pay/
3.http://www.whatthefolly.com/2012/08/20/transcript-missouri-gop-senate-candidate-todd-akin-on-whether-abortion-should-be-allowed-in-cases-of-legitimate-rape/
4.http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-victims
He is against student loans, they are the "3rd stage cancer of socialism". Really? I have many relatives and friends that have college degrees because these loans were available to them, including a sister that works for a large company. She has worked for this company her whole career (one that spans over 20 years), and her success would not have been possible if not for the student loans that helped her pay for her degree in mechanical engineering, and then let her pay it back after she got her job. From what I gleaned from Mr. Akin he thinks that the student loan program should be run by private lenders and they should be the ones that control this program. Oh, I see, then privately run, money making entities, the ones that are so upstanding, and "whose assets now exceed half the size of the US economy" (1), would be the ones that decide who gets the funds to go to college and who doesn't. Oh yes, that is so much better than the federal government ensuring that ALL people have access to college funds. Lets ask the general public and middle class, just how well that has worked for them in other lending arenas, especially the minorities that wanted the funds to build a home. I suspect that they might have a different opinion about how effectively private banking entities would run the student loan program.
Mr. Akin is also not a fan of the federal school lunch program. Here again, he thinks that the states should run this program, because the states are so much better at "sorts of things" than the federal government is. My question would be where exactly the funds for this program would come from? Would they come from federal grants or would there be a need to raise state taxes? Or perhaps your real estate taxes will go up to cover these costs? Would it be like the idea of "privatizing" social security or vouchers for medicare for those who are over 65 or are disabled? Let me see...these vouchers could be used to buy insurance from any vendor (read private insurance company) you would like. Wow...what a great idea, then the government wouldn't be in the insurance business, there would be be an open market, which would drive down insurance rates, which in turn would reduce the federal deficit...or you could just stay in the medicare program. What? How exactly do they figure that would change anything? The government would be giving the recipient of Social Security a voucher to pay for health insurance through private entities, and if the voucher amount wasn't enough for the insurance coverage you wanted, you would pay out of pocket. If the voucher is for more than the insurance costs, you get the keep the extra. Wonder how many times the latter would happen? We have an open market system now, and we are experiencing just how well that works at keeping premiums down! I suspect that if this proposal gains ground and is the future of medicare, you are going to see a lot of seniors that will have even less money in their pockets to pay for those annoying extras like groceries, utilities, and medicine.
As for his idea about how to fix the economy...well, duh! Cut taxes for those businesses that are paying so much. If we do that, then the companies can hire more people, and those people that are hired will pay more taxes. Huh? Let's examine some of these companies that are paying so much in taxes that they have no money left over to hire more workers.
Poverty is rampant. Hunger is widespread. But don't worry about America's largest corporations -- they're doing just fine.
Fortune released its annual list of the country's 500 biggest companies this week, and it turns out to have been a good year for corporate America. In 2011, the Fortune 500 generated a combined $824.5 billion in earnings -- an all-time record, and a 16 percent jump from the previous year.
The report echos others indicating corporate America is experiencing boom times.U.S. corporate profits returned to pre-recession levels, according to the International Institute for Labour Studies released Friday, hitting 15 percent of gross domestic product.
The larger economic picture hasn't been so rosy of course. Twelve and a half million people are still out of work. Many of the new jobs that have been created lately arelow-paying food service gigs. A record 46 million Americans are in poverty, and millions more are only just clinging onto financial stability -- one emergency is all it would take to tip them into disaster.
But much like the too-big-to-fail banks -- whose assets now exceed half the size of the U.S. economy, and which have made more profits since the financial crisis than they did in the eight years prior -- corporations don't seem bothered by the bleak weather on Main Street. They just keep growing.
In fact, many have benefitted on the backs of workers that in some cases are underpaid or at risk of losing their jobs. Among the largest companies on Fortune's list is Walmart, at number two, which was recently hit with a $4.8 million fine from the government for allegedly failing to pay its workers overtime; General Electric, at number six, which may have paid an average federal tax rate of just 2.3 percent over the past decade, according to the group Citizens for Tax Justice; and General Motors, at number five, which amassed $9.1 billion in profits last year and recently froze pay for its work staff of 26,000.
Further down the list are Lockheed Martin, which recorded $2.6 billion in profits last year and offered buyout plans to more than 6,000 employees; and Pfizer, which took in $10 billion in profits and announced plans to lay off more than 16,000 workers.(1)
Let me get this straight...these companies need more tax breaks, so they can make more profits, so they can lay off more people??? GE paid a tax rate of just 2.3% over the last 10 years and they need bigger tax breaks, because their exorbitant tax rates are keeping them from hiring more workers. The CEO's of the insurance industry (you know, the industry that Paul Ryan and Todd Akin want us to use vouchers to buy health care coverage from, because it would be more fiscally sound) make an average of $4 million dollars a year, with the highest paid being Aetna's CEO, Ronald A Williams, at $38.125 million a year.(2) Interesting that there are those that think the middle class would get a fair shake from these guys.
Now, let's get to the part of the interview that really grabbed the nation's attention...the "legitimate rape" comments.
Charles Jaco:
“On abortion, you’ve been pro-life your entire career.”
Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.):
“Yeah.”
Charles Jaco:
“You’ve been very staunchly pro-life. Are there any circumstances in your mind in which abortion should be legal?”
Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.):
“Well, I think that sometimes people talk about life of the mother as a situation, Charles. And in my sense, one of the foundational things America is built on is a respect for life. So I would say you optimize life.
“So, for instance, a woman has a tubal pregnancy or something. Well, technically by my understanding life begins at conception, so you technically had conception. But the child doesn’t have a chance and will soon kill a mother, okay? So I would say in those kinds of situations, you try to optimize life.
“But, you know, my case in this, Charles, has been even if you sort of separate a little the whole abortion question out, one of the things I love about this country is the fact that Americans do consider life really important.
“And it’s not because of some theoretical thing – you’re on a talk show and somebody asks you about it – but you have Sept. 11 and you’ve got these guys that are running into a building that’s about to collapse. They find somebody in a wheelchair. They never checked their ID or anything like that or whether they’re important. They grab them and get them to safety, and they run back and get another one.
“Same kind of thing that we saw – Ollie North has some footage. You know, he’s been right there in the front with cameras taking footage. This is over in Iraq. And there’s a Marine – a big guy, and he’s got this guy who’s wounded over his shoulder and he’s running. The bullets are flying around. And there is a cameraman in a safe position saying, ‘Hey, that guy’ – and the guy’s fatigues are just up and you can see that this is an Iraqi citizen. This isn’t the U.S. soldier. Says, ‘Hey, that’s an Iraqi citizen. Why are you risking your life there?’ This Marine turns around and he looks straight into that guy’s camera and he said, ‘Because that’s what we do.’
“And that spirit of America, I think, is so important for us to protect that idea of the importance of all of us.”
Charles Jaco:
“Okay, so if an abortion can be considered in the case of, say, tubal pregnancy or something like that, what about in the case of rape? Should it be legal or not?”
Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.):
“Well, you know, uh, people always want to try to make that as one of those things, ‘Well, how do you – how do you slice this particularly tough sort of ethical question.’
“It seems to me, first of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.
“But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something. You know, I think there should be some punishment but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.” (3)
So, he thought that it might be okay to "optimize life" by allowing the mother to have a tubal pregnancy terminated. Well, it is my understanding (to borrow a phrase from Mr. Akin) that kind of pregnancy is going to terminate, whether it's okay by him or not, and in most cases will result in the loss of the fallopian tube where the embryo has embedded itself, which is outside the uterus. If the tube ruptures before the pregnancy is discovered, there is a real chance that the mother's life could be in jeopardy. But the most shocking part of this interview was his assertion that if a woman is a victim of "legitimate rape" she won't get pregnant, because "the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down." Wow...so if the woman gets pregnant, then it wasn't really rape, she must have consented in some way. Maybe she didn't fight hard enough or she had on lipstick that was too red? Perhaps she forgot to lock her bedroom window or front door? Or maybe that 13 year old girl looked like she was 21 and was dressed inappropriately? Who knows? The truth is that 32,101 pregnancies result from rape each year. Medical estimates of a 5% pregnancy rate are for one time, unprotected sexual intercourse (4) is the same percentage of pregnancy that occur each year through this despicable act.
In my opinion, Mr. Akin is an ill-informed misogynist and there is no way he should ever have any kind of power to make decisions for the female population of this country, let alone sit on the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. His views on rape and pregnancy are right in line with 13th century England, which held the legal position that pregnancy disproved a claim of rape, according to medical historian Vanessa Heggie. Hmmmm, that couldn't possibly have been because if a woman accused a man of rape, he could deny it, except when a pregnancy resulted from that forcible act of violence. Pregnancy was proof, so if you take away the ability to get pregnant when raped, then there couldn't possibly have been a rape. This is, of course, tied to the age old fable that you can't get pregnant unless you have an orgasm, and if that happens then you must have enjoyed it, hence, pregnant...NO RAPE! Brilliant! With advocates like Todd Akin, women don't need enemies.
I am sure that there are those who would disagree, and that is your right. This is what makes this country so great...we have rights, and that includes the right to choose who represents us. But more importantly, it gives us the right to choose what we do with our bodies. No one else has the right to tell us what to do with our bodies, but us and that goes for both women and men! That doesn't mean I am pro-abortion, it means that I don't feel I have the right to tell anyone else, male or female, that they have to agree with me, and live by my code of conduct.
May God bless each and every one of you!
1.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/07/fortune-500-company-earnings_n_1497593.html
2.http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/16/health-care-america-now/health-care-advocacy-group-blasts-insurers-ceo-pay/
3.http://www.whatthefolly.com/2012/08/20/transcript-missouri-gop-senate-candidate-todd-akin-on-whether-abortion-should-be-allowed-in-cases-of-legitimate-rape/
4.http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-victims
Saturday, August 11, 2012
ONCE AGAIN IT SNEAKED UP ON ME...
From My Own Little Corner
August 11 always sneaks up on me. I try desperately not to think about it, but I suppose it is ingrained into my psyche, and so makes itself known even when I attempt to ignore it's coming. Today is the anniversary of the day that I gave birth to my first child, my only daughter, my sweet Jessica. It is the day that my life changed forever, the day that I lost a large part of my innocence. She was so beautiful. Dark hair, violet eyes, a tiny little thing at 5 pounds 7 ounces. Her birth was the most anticipated event of our lives. My brother used to come over and practice being an uncle, wheeling stuffed animals around and around, through the hall, into the living room, through the bedroom and back again, in the stroller. From there the little stuffed animal would go into the swing, to be swung until it wound down. We were so ready for this little child. All the hope, joy, and planning...months of it! We went to the hospital on August 10th, full of excitement and anticipation. It was finally time!!! After hours of labor, my water broke and it was dark green and thick. Not good. Then the baby's heart rate started falling and then stopping. After 5 hours of watching that monitor, the doctors finally decided that a C-section was necessary. I got an epidural, and after another delay of about an hour and a half, we were off to the delivery room. I can remember all of it with such clarity. The doctors, the nurses, my dear hubby standing at my head on the right side, then the sound of horror in the doctor's voice at the amount of meconium, them handing our daughter to the pediatrician, asking "How long?" with the response "5". The OB yelling at the nurses to hold me shut, and going to the warming tray, telling the pediatrician she had her own patient to deal with she couldn't be doing his job too, and them finally getting Jessica intubated. I remember them telling the nurse to get Dan out of there, he looked like he might pass out. I can still recall the smell of the cauterization as the doctor closed my incision. But, what I remember the most about that day is the love I felt for that tiny little girl. The fierce feeling that I was going to do everything I could to take care of her, no matter what, and that is exactly what we all did. Her birth severely damaged her fragile brain...she would never grow up, she would never do any of the things that we dreamed of while I was carrying her. She was a fighter, and she stayed with us for 4 1//2 years and while she was here, the lives she touched were changed forever . Being her mother is one of my greatest joys! Thank you God for sharing such an amazing gift with us!
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, JESSICA...mom and dad love you!
~Stef~
August 11 always sneaks up on me. I try desperately not to think about it, but I suppose it is ingrained into my psyche, and so makes itself known even when I attempt to ignore it's coming. Today is the anniversary of the day that I gave birth to my first child, my only daughter, my sweet Jessica. It is the day that my life changed forever, the day that I lost a large part of my innocence. She was so beautiful. Dark hair, violet eyes, a tiny little thing at 5 pounds 7 ounces. Her birth was the most anticipated event of our lives. My brother used to come over and practice being an uncle, wheeling stuffed animals around and around, through the hall, into the living room, through the bedroom and back again, in the stroller. From there the little stuffed animal would go into the swing, to be swung until it wound down. We were so ready for this little child. All the hope, joy, and planning...months of it! We went to the hospital on August 10th, full of excitement and anticipation. It was finally time!!! After hours of labor, my water broke and it was dark green and thick. Not good. Then the baby's heart rate started falling and then stopping. After 5 hours of watching that monitor, the doctors finally decided that a C-section was necessary. I got an epidural, and after another delay of about an hour and a half, we were off to the delivery room. I can remember all of it with such clarity. The doctors, the nurses, my dear hubby standing at my head on the right side, then the sound of horror in the doctor's voice at the amount of meconium, them handing our daughter to the pediatrician, asking "How long?" with the response "5". The OB yelling at the nurses to hold me shut, and going to the warming tray, telling the pediatrician she had her own patient to deal with she couldn't be doing his job too, and them finally getting Jessica intubated. I remember them telling the nurse to get Dan out of there, he looked like he might pass out. I can still recall the smell of the cauterization as the doctor closed my incision. But, what I remember the most about that day is the love I felt for that tiny little girl. The fierce feeling that I was going to do everything I could to take care of her, no matter what, and that is exactly what we all did. Her birth severely damaged her fragile brain...she would never grow up, she would never do any of the things that we dreamed of while I was carrying her. She was a fighter, and she stayed with us for 4 1//2 years and while she was here, the lives she touched were changed forever . Being her mother is one of my greatest joys! Thank you God for sharing such an amazing gift with us!
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, JESSICA...mom and dad love you!
~Stef~
Thursday, August 09, 2012
CAR SEATS AND CRITTERS DO NOT MIX
From My Own Little Corner
Well, yesterday started out with a bang! I got up with a migraine, took some medicine and had my coffee while watching the news. There was a great story on Channel 2 about the black bears that are making a comeback in this area, and the cameras that they are using to see what they do. One of the bears lost his camera, walked about 100 feet, stopped, thought about it, turned around, went back to the camera, and attacked it. I got dressed and, at about 8:30, headed out to take mom to the doctor. As I walked up to open my car door, this is what greeted me:
This WAS the rear seat of "Baby", my 1994 Cutlass Supreme. It would appear that a critter, and a pretty strong one at that, decided to climb through the window and completely decimate the seating area of the bucket seat on the driver's side. We have been leaving the windows down, since it has been so blazing hot, and the heat isn't good for the leather. Obviously, neither are the wild things that live in the country!
I am not sure what exactly did this, but it was strong and it was ticked off. The metal frame on the seat was twisted into an "U" shape and the leather ripped to shreds. There was stuffing strewn about the rear floorboards, but oddly enough there were no claw marks or teeth marks on any of the rest of the car.
At least it was the back seat and I was still able to drive to mom's, but I was terribly upset that Baby had been so severely ravaged!
After I got back home yesterday, I started checking for replacements and the cost was unbelievable. For new cloth ones, it was $375. I signed up for a service that will help track down parts for my car, since they no longer make Oldsmobile and my car IS nearly 20 years old (although she only has 90,000 original miles on her), so parts are hard to come by, even used. Seems that most salvage yards don't keep cars that are this old when they come in, they go immediately to the crusher! How sad is that??? Anyway, this service, http://www.SeekAutoParts.com, cost me a mere $6.99, they do all the leg work, and send me emails so that I can follow up and find what I need. I had notifications in my inbox within minutes. Unfortunately, some were too costly ($500) and others did not have the seat that I needed. However, this morning, I had more and was able to find a replacement seat for my car for $40 plus S&H, and the salvage yard is a mere 2 hours from here. The seat is maroon, and will need a cover or re-upholstering, but hey, at least I have a seat back there, it didn't cost me an arm and a leg, and it should be here by the beginning of next week! How about that???
Now to catch whatever critter did this to my poor baby, and as one of my FB friends said, dig a pit and roast the sucker!
Remember, keep those windows rolled up, especially if you live in the country...you never know what might decide to climb in and have a little fun!
God bless!
~Stef~
Well, yesterday started out with a bang! I got up with a migraine, took some medicine and had my coffee while watching the news. There was a great story on Channel 2 about the black bears that are making a comeback in this area, and the cameras that they are using to see what they do. One of the bears lost his camera, walked about 100 feet, stopped, thought about it, turned around, went back to the camera, and attacked it. I got dressed and, at about 8:30, headed out to take mom to the doctor. As I walked up to open my car door, this is what greeted me:
This WAS the rear seat of "Baby", my 1994 Cutlass Supreme. It would appear that a critter, and a pretty strong one at that, decided to climb through the window and completely decimate the seating area of the bucket seat on the driver's side. We have been leaving the windows down, since it has been so blazing hot, and the heat isn't good for the leather. Obviously, neither are the wild things that live in the country!
I am not sure what exactly did this, but it was strong and it was ticked off. The metal frame on the seat was twisted into an "U" shape and the leather ripped to shreds. There was stuffing strewn about the rear floorboards, but oddly enough there were no claw marks or teeth marks on any of the rest of the car.
At least it was the back seat and I was still able to drive to mom's, but I was terribly upset that Baby had been so severely ravaged!
After I got back home yesterday, I started checking for replacements and the cost was unbelievable. For new cloth ones, it was $375. I signed up for a service that will help track down parts for my car, since they no longer make Oldsmobile and my car IS nearly 20 years old (although she only has 90,000 original miles on her), so parts are hard to come by, even used. Seems that most salvage yards don't keep cars that are this old when they come in, they go immediately to the crusher! How sad is that??? Anyway, this service, http://www.SeekAutoParts.com, cost me a mere $6.99, they do all the leg work, and send me emails so that I can follow up and find what I need. I had notifications in my inbox within minutes. Unfortunately, some were too costly ($500) and others did not have the seat that I needed. However, this morning, I had more and was able to find a replacement seat for my car for $40 plus S&H, and the salvage yard is a mere 2 hours from here. The seat is maroon, and will need a cover or re-upholstering, but hey, at least I have a seat back there, it didn't cost me an arm and a leg, and it should be here by the beginning of next week! How about that???
Now to catch whatever critter did this to my poor baby, and as one of my FB friends said, dig a pit and roast the sucker!
Remember, keep those windows rolled up, especially if you live in the country...you never know what might decide to climb in and have a little fun!
God bless!
~Stef~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
From My Own Little Corner For decades now, a large part of the Republican party platform has been it's stance on overturning Roe v. Wa...
-
From My Own Little Corner Last fall I rejuvenated some nasty cast iron skillets that needed to be redone. I didn't get any pictures be... -
From My Own Little Corner Well, I have never done anything like this before, but here goes. I am going to start writing a little everyday an...