In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Plans

Jill

421169827_b0596c2924_m.jpg

Supposedly everyone agrees that we need to lower the teen pregnancy rate. But when we take a look at what the plans actually entail, we see what the “pro-life” movement actually stands for. First, the Dems:

Both Obama and Clinton have backed and continue to support increasing spending on what they call comprehensive family planning programs, sometimes also called “abstinence plus.” These give information on abstinence, abortion, contraception and Plan B or the morning-after pill that can prevent pregnancy after sex.

Clinton and Obama are co-sponsors of the main Democratic family planning bill, the Prevention First Act, introduced by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., early last year. It would increase funding by $100 million the approximately $300 million spent annually by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for family planning and sex education.

The Obama campaign also stresses his bill, the Communities of Color Teen Prevention Act, introduced last year, to spend $65 million annually in grants to lower pregnancy rates among Latino and African-American teenagers.

Both strongly emphasize that they will appoint federal judges who will uphold abortion rights and both endorse the Freedom of Choice Act, a bill to ensure legal abortions remain available. Both also say they will push for health insurance plans to cover prescription contraception.

So: Comprehensive sex education. Contraception. Abstinence. Abortion rights. The very things that have been proven time and again to decrease the abortion rate — they just need to add in comprehensive social welfare policies (like childcare and aid to low-income families) and universal health care.

The Republicans?

Republicans have not put out detailed agendas, but support continued federal funding of abstinence programs. Huckabee and Romney pursued abstinence-only funding as governors. McCain voted in the Senate against expanding family planning programs with contraception education.

Huckabee has been outspoken about his support for abstinence education as the best approach to teen pregnancy, and his commitment to overturning the Roe v. Wade decision by the Supreme Court legalizing abortion. In responding to a query from the Christian Broadcast Network last year, he said, “I do not believe in teaching about sex or contraception in public schools. That is the responsibility of parents.”

Last February, McCain spoke of overturning Roe v. Wade before an abstinence rally in South Carolina, but he did not detail specific plans to reduce teen pregnancy. On his Web site, he says he favors adoption and will work to reduce abortions. “The pro-life movement has done tremendous work in building and reinforcing the infrastructure of civil society,” his Web site reads. “This work must continue and government must find new ways to empower and strengthen these armies of compassion.”

Romney, as the governor of Massachusetts, sought to provide federal abstinence-only education grants for programs in African-American and Latino communities. He told the Family Research Council’s Voter Values conference last fall that teen pregnancy is tied to the breakdown of the traditional family. He believes in incentives to encourage marriage and penalties to fathers who do not support their children.

“One of the biggest threats to the fabric of our society is out-of-wedlock childbirth. Ann and I will use the bully pulpit to teach America’s children that before they have babies, they should get married. It’s time to make out-of-wedlock births out-of-fashion again,” he said.

He stressed his support for an overturn of Roe v. Wade and favors returning the decision over abortion legality to the states.

And Republicans have… outlawing abortion and telling people to keep their legs closed until they’re married. The very things that never work. And they oppose the measures that have been proven to decrease the abortion rate. Because they’re pro-life like that.

10 thoughts on Plans

  1. One of the biggest threats to the fabric of our society is out-of-wedlock childbirth.

    Jeez… it’s that bad? My mommy didn’t marry my daddy and somehow I’ve avoided becoming a terrorist, a drug dealer, or a welfare queen. Of course, they were in their late twenties at the time. The idea that marriage is the solution to teen pregnancy wouldn’t give you anything but a bunch of miserable marriages.

    Anyway, I don’t know how you can be against teen/unwed childbirth and in almost the same breath condemn abortion. Are they nuts enough to think they could actually stop people (including, sheesh, plenty of unwed people who are not teenagers) from having sex? That’s crazy, won’t work, and wouldn’t be right if it did.

  2. I hope for a time in this country when we can see people in the mainstream able to argue for sexual agency and access to sexual health information as a human rights issue. Sadly, it seems the pearl clutchers are able to get everyone worked up in a frenzy and they have the mainstream media in their laps. We also have this children-as-property philosophy in the US that backs up the notion that parents have a right to keep information from teenagers about their own bodies and health, as if they will magically have everything they need to be adults the moment they turn 18 or get married and have all the blessings of society to go forth and f*ck.

  3. “One of the biggest threats to the fabric of our society is out-of-wedlock childbirth.”

    Really? I’m one of the biggest threats to the fabric of our society because I had two loving and devoted parents who just didn’t love each other enough to get married and stay together? Never mind that they were both an active and integral part of my life, never mind that they worked together to raise me (being a single mom is made quite a bit easier when dad is perfectly willing to come babysit whenever needed). Heck, I’d go so far as to say that they acted more like a partnership in raising me than most married couples do! But I’m the biggest threat to the fabric of our society…

    What gets me is that parents who molest their children, parents who think of their children as property and stifle them by withholding information they need to make good choices, parents who abuse their children, parents who are drunk and take no real interest or participation in their children’s lives, parents who just put their kids in front of the TV so that they can leave them unattended, parents (fathers especially, though I am sure some mothers do this too) who leave the entire responsibility of raising the kids on the other parent while they go out and have fun and live like teenagers – all of these, assuming they are and stay married, are less of a threat to society (and, I suppose, to the children they have) than my parents who just decided that “staying together for the kids” was just about the stupidest thing to do and instead “stayed apart for the kids.”

  4. ““One of the biggest threats to the fabric of our society is out-of-wedlock childbirth.”

    I guess my decision not to marry my son’s father will destroy society, too. The fact that I’m actually happy with that choice and am thankful that I won’t have to go through a nasty divorce now that the relationship has soured due to factors that have nothing to do with the child means I’m an evil harlot. Then again, they’d want me to stay in an unhealthy marriage because Jesus really hates divorce and I should just try to work it out.

    In responding to a query from the Christian Broadcast Network last year, [Huckabee] said, “I do not believe in teaching about sex or contraception in public schools. That is the responsibility of parents.”

    What if the parents had abstienence only education too and don’t know anything about contraception? Where are the children supposed to get accurate information regarding sext that could likely affect their sexual and reproductive health later in life?

    *sighs* When will logic ever enter the picture?

  5. Jade – While we’re at it, why is sex ed any different from math, science, or English? Teaching Sex Ed in schools is about giving kids the foundation they need to lead successful and healthy lives. That’s what all school classes are for. But suddenly, because one group “disagrees” with a class, it becomes the parent’s responsibility? The default, IMO, is providing kids with everything they need to know to get adulthood off to a good start – that includes sex ed. At home, parents who really care that much, can talk to their children and explain that while condoms are all well and good, Jesus wants them to save themselves so that they can give their future husband’s their right to deflower a virgin bride (cause Jesus is always looking out for those poor men who get these sorts of rights taken away from them routinely!). While they are at it, they can explain to them that the evolution they learned about in school isn’t real and that despite what secularists might say, triangles actually have four edges rather than three.

  6. Since other commentors adressed the “out of wed-lock threat” I’m going to adress this part:

    “The pro-life movement has done tremendous work in building and reinforcing the infrastructure of civil society,” his Web site reads. “This work must continue and government must find new ways to empower and strengthen these armies of compassion.”

    “civil society”? Is he joking? I hope he is. I seriously must question anyone who thinks women are too stupid to decide for themselves etc. is the making of a “civil society”.

    “armies of compassion” I hope this doesn’t refer to the terrorist organisations Army of God and Operation Rescue because then he is supporting terrorism against the american people/women. Mainly women although men are affected by these stupidities too. I think it is known what I am referring to.

  7. “It’s time to make out-of-wedlock births out-of-fashion again,” he said.

    Yes, because the most helpful thing we can do for our country is return the word “bastard” to it’s original usage. If we’d just demonize illegitimate children hard enough, I guess the dollar would rise and Osama bin Laden would spontaneously combust. Or something.

  8. Romney and Huckabee speak code words for a return to 1950’s society where women were not independent. I am reading between the lines and I am not hearing them want to remove divorce laws, just make single mothers pariahs of society. Any vote for a republican is anti-woman and anti-family.

    So parents are responsible for educating their children about sex. So what about parents that think sex is natural regardless of marriage. And parents that want to promote abstinence to their kids are up against film, tv and internet – media loaded with everything about sex. Good luck conservatives in a return to Pleasantville.

  9. Pingback: I Voted Obama

  10. I entirely agree with the rebublicans.
    Their views on abortion and abstinence are correct and allign with the laws of God.
    Holly, I applaud you for sticking to the straight and narrow and I agree that not everyone will follow those laws. But if they did, it would be right.
    Grimalkin, that statement’s purpose was to reveal that a lot of people are having children before getting married and then abondoning the welfare of their kids for their own greedy and self-gratifying ways. The idea is so people get married and are absolutely certain that they can care for a child. But government cannot moniter the latter and in their haste, lawmakers have forgotten it. For the most part, people who are born to unwed couples live a life as displayed daily on the Maury show, but there are few who sincerely love their child enough to devote their lives to their baby, without getting married. They see the danger when they don’t care enough. But I do agree with your thoughts on sex ed, evolution, and the triangle. Because God can make that triangle have four edges. 🙂
    LadyTess, no he isn’t joking. Over all the majority of people are just as you put it. They are, in fact, stupid. And they are building a civil society based on the Truth. They are in no way calling anybody stupid. They are just giving children a chance to live. And compassion is something all humans have capacity for, not just terrorists.
    Sophist, who is the real asshole here? Is it the people poking fun and name-calling? Or is it the child’s absent father? Anyway, you are sadly mistaken. You took a statement that supports the idea the EVERY CHILD SHOULD HAVE A SUPPORTIVE FATHER and completely took it out of context.
    Christine, no one is trying to steal away independence from women. That is a paranoid statement. They are only marketing for a change to do what is right. And I personally believe that is something every person with political power is obligated to do. It doesn’t matter what people think about sex being in or out of the binds of marriage. All that matters is reality.
    For example: the 9/11 terrorists thought it was right and just to bomb the WTC, but in reality they weren’t. Hitler thought he was accomplishimg a great deed by eliminating over 6 million Jewish people from the face of the planet, but he wasn’t.

Comments are currently closed.