"Pain-Capable" Is Back and as Devious as Ever

Anti-abortion legislation is the bread-and-butter of the right wing.  Followers are rabid and loud.  My guess is it is a much smaller group than they seem, but they seem bigger because they just. won't. stop.  They show up at Planned Parenthood clinics, ACLU meetings, statehouses and Congress.

One might think that the right-wing, so concerned about governmental invasion of privacy in the Affordable Care Act, would be opposed to anti-abortion legislation that would control medical care and enforce it through invasion of privacy in those same medical records they have claimed to be protecting.  Or right-wingers that go ballistic (yeah, it's a pun but it's not that funny, is it?) over the suggestion of background checks much less registration of gun owners for fear they would invade the privacy of those who seek to wield deadly weapons would look askance at these bills.  Or how about those freedom-of-the-marketplace right-wingers who are now fighting to prevent private pharmaceutical and health insurance companies from offering birth control and abortion services?

These right-wingnuts are the same people who block attempts to feed the poor, including the pregnant and children, much less provide health care or adequate housing.  Life seems a little less precious to them when it comes to protecting it after birth.

Here in South Carolina, on Tuesday, an infant died.  Less than a month old, with a 17-year-old mother, who has been charged with murder and child felony abuse.  What social services might have prevented this tragedy?  And, what's worse, who among our lawmakers even cares?

So once again Congress and our own state legislators are force-feeding us the 20-week abortion ban, which, despite proven science, is misnamed the "pain-capable unborn child prevention act."  This is a win-win for these cruel and creepy lawmakers.  Whether the bill passes or not, they are allowed to act morally superior, get lots of publicity, and garner the support of the most vocal, persistent and vicious of us.

Neither new Senate leader Mitch McConnell nor our own Senator Tim Scott care about the suffering of the poor, the hungry children, the emotionally disturbed who are forced to bear children without a support system.  And here in South Carolina, during the holiday season, our own Wendy Nanney couldn't wait to introduce the 20-week abortion ban.  The national organizations are all over this, helping write the laws that allow others to invade the privacy and personal lives of women; they are there to corrode liberty in each state and nationally.

The thing is, we should also be all over this.  Not just because it seeks to impose government control over what should be women's private health care and reproductive decisions, although that is more than enough.  This bill speaks lies and deception from its very name.  First of all, "pain-capable" -- what the hell IS that?  Apparently, it means that a fetus is "capable" of feeling pain, if only...?  How about a fetus is capable of feeling pain if the mother does not get the proper nutrition?  Or a fetus is capable of feeling pain if a pregnant woman is not properly housed, or has to work in unsafe conditions, or has to breathe polluted air?

Actually, no, a fetus still is not capable of feeling pain under those conditions.  However, a pregnant woman is capable of feeling pain in those circumstances.  And if a pregnant woman brings her pregnancy to term, an actual baby is likely to feel pain with inadequate nutrition, health care, environment.  It seems that all those right wingnuts stop caring whether there is pain once a living being is actually capable of feeling it.

And actually, abortions at twenty weeks are very rare, and most often done in wanted pregnancies, when serious health problems arise.  To hear the wingnuts talk, you would think droves of women sit around pregnant for five months and then impulsively decide they'd rather not have that baby.  We need to yell bullshit to the false, deceptive presumptions that give these bills air each legislative season.

I for one get tired of fighting for the rights that women were guaranteed when we had a Supreme Court that considered individuals and not their own personal biases.  I hate to think about it, because there may well come a day when our daughters will be denied those rights, in fact, have been gradually losing them over the past decades.  But, you see, those on the other side love nothing better than that good old self-righteous fight.  If they lose, they lose nothing, and it feels good to bash others.  And if they win, they will be smug and smarmy about it for awhile, and then redraw that line so we have to fight them or lose another freedom.

So we need to be louder, and more persistent, and angrier than all those who are once again standing up to defend their right to take away a woman's freedom and privacy.

The Real Perverts

Some twenty years ago, I was with my family in New York City.  It was Christmas season, and we annually celebrated my daughter's December 2 birthday by going to the city for a play, dinner, and of course to see the holiday sights.  She was somewhere around five years old.

We were approaching the line to see the famous window displays at Lord & Taylor.  As we approached I saw there was a commotion; some yelling on the sidewalk at what looked to be a street vendor.  As I got closer my mouth fell open in horror.  It was a woman standing by a table with a huge poster depicting a woman in full hideous, heart-wrenching bondage.  As I attempted to get my small child away from this scene I did yell something to the effect that she should be ashamed of herself, which of course, was the kind of attention she was seeking.

The purpose of this display was to point out to the public the abuses of pornography.  I would have been fine with that intent and her first amendment right to such a protest.  But it was abhorrent that she chose to do this where children were passing.  To my mind, she was as much a part of the pornographic culture as what she claimed she was protesting, but in a more deceitful and emotionally disturbed way.

This is what I see happening with all the nation's focus on abortion.  It has nothing at all to do with protecting life.  There is in fact an inverse relationship of concern about life before birth to life after birth.  Those who most loudly support abortion bans are the least likely to want to care for the pregnant woman herself, much less the newly born infant.  Proof of this is the lack of support for health and nutrition programs, and our pathetic infant mortality rate, the shame of civilized nations.

If it is not about protecting life, what is the anti-abortion movement about?  For one thing, it is control.  It is forcing women who have unprotected sex to lose control over their bodies and their lives.  And the anti-contraception movement is about forcing women to not have protected sex, further losing control of their lives.

And the reason for the vehemence of the supporters of this cruel and ignorant cause has more to do with voyeurism and exhibitionism than just about anything else.  Imagine spending as much time obsessing about sex and a woman's body as our legislators have done.  It would be a diagnosable condition if the false moral imperatives were not celebrated as "Christian values."  The combination of the positive and negative attention that this crusade engenders is no less than thrilling to these self-appointed arbiters of a woman's morality.  And the ironic cherry atop this disgusting sundae (if you will...) is the legitimacy that it gives to the prurience of the crusader.

So, much as the woman who masqueraded her fascination for pornography as a protest, our anti-abortion protesters focus their lives, and their political campaigns, around matters of a woman's body.  Creepy?  You bet.  And isn't it time we saw these really dysfunctional people for what they are?
  

Brave New World

I just heard our own Mark Sanford bloviating on the House floor.  He likes to twist things around, he does.  He called Paul Ryan's proposed budget "brave."  Okay, are you all done doing your double-take?  Because I'm still stunned by the man's nerve.  I'm talking about Ryan.  Sanford's just an idiot.

Jim Clyburn spoke just before Sanford.  Talk about pearls before swine.  He listed all the things that would be cut from Ryan's budget.  For example, seniors would have to pay more for medication -- if you were happy with the donut hole of the Bush prescription boondoggle, it's back.

We know about Paul Ryan's program, because the republicans have been trying to cram it down our throats for years.  Children, that other group of takers, will be denied school programs, food and nutrition programs, health programs.  Working parents as well as the unemployed will see safety nets cut out from under them; in fact, in Ryan's (and Sanford's) ideal world, there would be no minimum wage, no labor regulations at all.  Remember Newt Gingrich's plan to put poor kids to work as school janitors?  And forget about affordable colleges.  In fact, let these guys have at education so that they can privatize it -- more profit for their corporate buddies, less actual quality education for the dollar.

You might wonder what is "brave" about the Paul Ryan budget.  Maybe Sanford's talking about having to face us all after he's cut out support for basic human needs -- what they derisively call "entitlements."  You heard Ryan's former running mate Romney:  he was just appalled that people think they, as Americans, should expect food, a roof over their heads, health care.

I guess it must be "brave" to suggest to 47 percent of the people whose lives you govern that they are unimportant.  Unmotivated.  Undeserving.  Imagine thinking, much less stating, that some of us deserve better schools based on what we earn, that some children should be denied health care and nutrition, that losing a job when the rich have run the economy into the ground is no concern of the government.  Imagine not giving a damn about people who struggle every day to do right by their families.  Quoting Ayn Rand and her mythological capitalist American hero as though it was anything other than right-wing fantasy.

That's Paul Ryan.  Don't even get me started on Mark Sanford.  This is the man who stole from the state government because funding laws were not meant for him.  Who walked away from the governor's office without being responsible enough to let his staff (or his wife) know he was off on an assignation.  Who is happy to let the government pay for any-damn-thing he can get away with, and then deride social programs as pork.  This is the man who just called Paul Ryan's budget "brave."

We need to make lists, as did Clyburn today, extensive lists, and let everyone know what they will lose if Paul Ryan and Mark Sanford get the government they have dreamed of.  Because there is something in there that affects all of us.  We need to document each benefit that will be lost, because for example, just saying Obamacare will be cut is not the same as telling people they will no longer be protected if they have a pre-existing condition, they will no longer be able to keep children on their health plans till they are 26, they will no longer have free preventive health care.

And we need to tally up the huge costs of Paul Ryan's budget as he continues to give fistfuls of money to the biggest and wealthiest corporations, tax breaks to billionaires. And does away with regulations that will end up costing us dearly whenever a bridge collapses or a food-borne pathogen creates an epidemic of illness or Wall Street is allowed to play wildly with mortgages and retirement funds.

If Paul Ryan and Mark Sanford are allowed to enact their plans for the future of America, then we will truly see a brave new world.

Trial By Food Stamps

A Day In the Life

I was heartened to hear that some members of Congress had taken the "food stamp challenge" in order to experience life on the federally funded supplemental nutrition assistance program (SNAP).  While most of the members of Congress who took this challenge affirmed that eating on $4.50 a day was difficult, Texas congressman Steve Stockman was unconvinced.

No, he did not himself try to live on that food stamp budget, but had spokesman Donny Ferguson do it for him.  Predictably, this dude said after two days that it was "a breeze."  Well, I have to say that I have been fighting a losing battle with my weight all my life, and I can diet easily for two days.

So let me just say that I believe, Mr. Ferguson, congratulations, and you are now ready for the next level of the Poverty Game.

You work 40 hours a week -- that's 8 to 5 because you don't get paid for lunch.  You are earning a lush $10.00 an hour, well above minimum wage, but with a spouse looking for work and two school-aged children your Food Stamp Challenge is exactly that.  Your spouse drops you off at work with your one car in order to get the kids to school, limiting where and how often you shop for groceries.  Nice that the big box stores are now accepting that EBT card but you can rarely make the trip.

It's also nice that there are incentives for buying fresh fruits and vegetables, but that means getting the kids to eat the fruit and finding time to make that salad and find palatable ways to cook that broccoli.

And when you get home it's 6:00 and the kids are tired and hungry, unless your spouse has bought a frozen pizza and a bag of cookies.

A glass of wine would be nice when you can budget it in, and sometimes a glass of wine just won't do the trick.

Hey, Ferguson?  How about sharing with us what you eat (and drink) when you're not making that two-day sacrifice?

And Representative Stockman?  You've argued with your wife over the need to get the car repaired, which you've been trying to budget in for a year now along with the increasing price of gas.  And you've decided that that pain in your stomach will have to wait just a little longer before you can take the time off to see a doctor (You know after the co-pays and deductibles there are just going to be more costs and time off for tests and medications, if not appointments with specialists.).

Still feeling like you're living on "easy street?"

How about those looks you get from people like you when they see you load that cart up with those frozen pizzas?  Did you know that SNAP doesn't cover the fried chicken at your supermarket's deli counter?  So if you are in the mood for a little greasy relief, you are just going to have to cook it yourself.

And that birthday cake you bought with that EBT card?  There are some including my own South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley that concur with you that life should just not be that easy for those forced to accept government dollars.  Bake that cake your own self.  Your kids may not have seen you all day, you're asleep on your feet and still have a load of laundry to do, but that bit of extra effort will make you a better person. 

You may think you've taken the Food Stamp Challenge, Mr. Ferguson, but you haven't got a clue until you've done it day in and day out, along with all the other special experiences of living at poverty level in the US.

So perhaps you can stop feeling so smug, and perhaps you can pause a moment before you judge those whose lives are not quite so cushy as yours.

And don't forget, they may not pay a lot of income tax, but the taxes they do pay support your life on "easy street."