I am pro-choice. I am also pro-life. I know that on the surface, these two things don’t seem to be able to coexist, so let me clarify. I am pro-choice to that extent that a person should have the ability to choose how he or she acts, so long as it doesn’t infringe upon the rights of others.

I cannot steal, because it takes away another person’s right to own property. I am pro-life because abortion takes away a human being’s most basic right of all — the right to life.

I feel confident that most people in the United States agree that people not convicted of heinous crimes don’t deserve to have their lives cut short. The end of a life is tragic, and the premature ending of one is even sadder. The death of a child? Well, has anyone ever gotten through My Girl without at least half a box of tissues?

Yet somehow, abortion rights supporters have misled many people to believe that a fetus isn’t a human being. Dead babies are sad, yet dead unborn babies are to be worn like a badge of honor.

I read two stories on The Stir this week that made me ponder why more people don’t ponder more when that right to life begins.

The first story was the tragic tale of a newborn baby flushed down an airplane toilet. The second was a review of the TV show Friday Night Lights, in which a teenage girl gets herself pregnant by choosing to have sex, and then decides to have an abortion rather than facing the challenges God gives her as a direct result of her own actions.

The problem with abortion is that it’s impossible to figure out where the line of life is.

Read More

Brittany Cohan joins me for conservative chick chat on Rep. Etheridge (D-NC) and the Gulf of Mexico Oil Leak, plus Cocktail Time with Mike G.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

The right to do what you want with your own body.

This is the call of the pro-abortion crowd. Let the woman choose what to do with her body! It’s her right!

I’d like to make the case that by using the “my body, my choice” line, you’ve just given men the right to rape.

Just follow my logic, ok?

We all have rights. God given rights. In America, we have a government that protects those rights. In protecting each individual’s personal rights, sometimes there are restrictions imposed. For example, I have the right to own property, but not the right to steal it from someone else, because that infringes on that person’s right to the property which they have earned or been given.

Basically, any time you have two individuals, you have to navigate carefully where rights are concerned, and one person’s rights do not supersede another person’s rights.

That’s why it’s not cool to rape, murder, steal, plunder, etc.

There are more people involved than just a woman when an abortion takes place. Mother, father, and baby are all affected, and the choice of the mother infringes upon the father’s right to not have his kid’s life ended prematurely, and of course the baby’s most elemental right, the right to life is taken away.

The rights of the father and the child are completely obliterated by a woman’s right to “choose”. Why does a woman’s right in this arena supersede the rights of two other individuals?

In what other areas does a person have more freedom of choice than another person? Rape? When a man rapes a woman, he takes away her right to choose what to do with her own body. Why is her right to not be raped not sacrificed at his right to sexual satisfaction?

Why is a child’s right to live not more important than the mother’s desire to not be pregnant?

It seems that everyone has rights except for the more helpless population of all: The unborn.

Remember Bart Stupak? He was the “pro-life” House Democrat that caved to peer-pressure and voted for the health care bill along with ten of his cronies. The next day, the bill was signed into law by President Obama. But don’t worry, President Obama signed an executive order that would outlaw federally funded abortions. Except for the fact that that order isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.

Why would they cave, I wonder? What could be the cost of 11 votes that would tip the scale on the health care bill that has nothing to do with health care? Apparently it costs $3.4 billion.

The 11 House Democrats led by Rep. Bart Stupak who dropped their opposition to health care reform legislation mere hours before the final vote have requested $3.4 billion in earmarks — and one watchdog group wants to know whether the money represents business as usual or political payoffs.

Stupak’s office said there’s absolutely no link between the earmarks and the health care bill’s passage.

Sure. There’s absolutely no link between my happy hubby and my new pair of shoes either. Give and take. Making deals. You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours. It’s part of being human. But we’re not playing with other people’s money. Democrats are.

Hey everyone!

I started a weekly op-ed column over at CafeMom’s new site- The Stir.  Does this officially make me a mommy-blogger?  Do I have to attend BlogHer now? Hmm… things to ponder.  Actually, a couple of days in NYC this summer sounds great.  (My poor hubby is sitting at work on his lunch break reading that and getting worried.  Love you Honey! *mwah*)

While Leif tries to figure out if I’m seriously joking or jokingly serious about attending another conference, check out my first article.

Both.

Tim Tebow is a Heisman trophy-winning quarterback for the University of Florida.  As a home-schooled kid from a Christian family, he shatters the stereotype that kids taught by their parents at the kitchen table grow up to be abnormal, socially stunted adults.  Arguably the best college football player in the country, Tebow remains centered in his faith and family.

Pam Tebow was serving as a missionary in an orphanage in the Philippines with her husband Bob and Tim’s older siblings when she was pregnant with Tim.  She suffered from a parasitic infection, and doctors predicted a still birth and advised Pam to abort the baby for her own health.  She refused, and gave birth to a healthy, full term baby boy.

Focus on the Family has sponsored a 30 second add to appear during Superbowl XLIV, which features the Tebows and include some sort of “choose life” message.  And you know how pro-women groups feel about people choosing life.  They really can’t stand it, can they?  It’s interesting to me that they get so angry about it.  I mean, if there’s nothing wrong with abortion, why do they get so upset about women choosing not to do it?

The Women’s Media Center and the National Organization for Women are going absolutely bonkers, accusing Focus on the Family of being “extremely intolerant and divisive and pushing an un-American agenda,” and pushing an “anti-abortion vitriol has resulted in escalated violence against reproductive health providers and their patients.”  Whoa, that’s harsh.

So what does Tim Tebow have to say about the ad and about his mother’s decision to choose life?

“I know some people won’t agree with it, but I think they can at least respect that I stand up for what I believe…[T]hat’s the reason I’m here, because my mom was a very courageous woman. So any way that I could help, I would do it.”

Bravo to the Tebow family for standing firm in their beliefs in the face of tough opposition.  I applaud you for not being afraid to exercise your 1st amendment right to free speech.  Even if that speech is difficult for some people to hear.  And to those that would deny the Tebows, Focus on the Family, and CBS the 30 second advertisement, I have two words for you: mute button.

Well, it looks like the Senate has its 60 votes to pass the health care bill through.  A bill so fantastic that votes had to be bought by Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE), Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL), Rep. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), and Lord knows how many others.  There were a few whose votes couldn’t be bought.  So the Democratic leaders resorted to threatening their family members unless they supported the bill.

Not only is the health care bill so stellar that Senators had to be bribed and threatened into voting for it, but it’s going to be voted on at 1 o’clock in the morning, four days before Christmas.  Some perspective for you- no one will see any benefits from this bill until 2013 (if ever), yet it’s being rushed through in the middle of the night during a time when most Americans have turned off their TVs and put down their newspapers in the hopes of having a joyful holiday season with their friends and family.  I understand doing what we have to do, but this is NOT something that couldn’t easily wait until January.

During debate on the Senate floor today, Senator Tom Coburn made some excellent points and observations on why this health care bill is not a health care reform bill, but only an unsustainable health care coverage expansion.  Sen. Coburn is one of only two practicing physicians in the Senate (the other is Senator John Barrasso), so he speaks from the unique perspective of being both a doctor and a politician.

Sen. Coburn pointed out that there are zero guarantees that taxpayers won’t finance abortions, zero prohibitions on the rationing of health care, and zero Senators required to enroll in either Medicaid  or another government run option.  The Republicans proposed amendments to disallow the use of federal funds to finance abortions or the rationing of health care, but the Democrats voted down the measure.  Let me ask you this: If funding for abortions and rationing of care aren’t part of the plan for this bill, why wouldn’t the Democrats put those amendments in?  That’s like a bookie betting on a game to get others to bet as well, without actually putting any money into the pot.  The bookie ends up making money, and I’ve read enough crime dramas to be pretty sure that that’s highly illegal, not to mention immoral.

What does this health care bill do besides use tax payer money to provide abortions and limit care to those the government deems “unworthy” due to age or lifestyle or previous health?  It creates ten new taxes, and seventy-one new government programs.  There are 1,697 times that the Secretary of Health and Human Services will write regulations, and 15,000-20,000 new government jobs will be created to carry out this legislation.  That’s funny, I thought the idea was to create more DOCTORS to treat more patients at an affordable price, but I guess a job-is-a-job-is-a-job, right?  Maybe those four out of ten doctors that said they’d consider quitting the practice of medicine if this bill passes can apply for a job with the government.

Another thing in the bill is the word shall.  It’s in there a lot- 3,607 times at last count.  What’s significant about the word shall?  It takes away your options.  The bill does not say, “You may choose to purchase health care insurance in the event that you become ill or injured,” it says, “You shall purchase health care insurance, whether you want it or not!”

That’s the individual mandate that you’ve been hearing about.  It is the first tax in United States history that will tax you for simply existing.  It’s not based on your work or purchases or decision as to whether to take the toll road or surface streets.  It’s a tax that you can choose not to pay by choosing not to breathe.  And even though I’m not a doctor, I’m fairly certain that breathing is pretty important.

That’s not right! You may be saying to yourself.  No, it isn’t right. It’s completely unconstitutional. And more likely than not, it will be completely unenforceable in court.  Which means that no one will buy health insurance until they are sick or injured. And given that the bill will require health insurance companies to provide coverage for pre-existing conditions, and place limits on how much they may charge their customers, they will inevitably go bankrupt.  Leaving the only option the government option.  That, my friends, is called socialized health care, and it has never worked well.

The government is not compassionate. We already see rationing in government run health care systems like Medicare and Medicaid.  The government already comes between elderly and/or underprivileged patients and their doctors, deciding what treatments and procedures may be done, regardless of the patient’s personal history or the doctor’s recommendation.  Why on Earth would it be a good idea to expand government control of health care, when Medicare and Medicaid are inarguablly broken and on the verge of bankruptcy?

People are compassionate. Doctors are compassionate. Neighbors and family and benefactors are compassionate.  Let’s focus on incentivizing the prevention and treatment of chronic disease, creating transparency so that we can choose and purchase our own health care insurance based on value and quality, and assisting those facing tough times that need some extra help.  That’s true reform.  This bill is nothing but smoke and mirrors to lead our once liberty-loving country into a single-payer health care system.

In the words of Ronald Reagan during a 1961 radio interview:

One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project, most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can’t afford it.

The government is not compassionate.

I always giggle when I hear that tag line, a fun way to remind women to do self breast exams in between their annual *girly* doctor visits.  It’s easy to do, but easy to forget about.  Seriously Chicas, 5 minutes once a month, feel your boobies!  The main thing you’re looking for is change.  Some bumps and lumps are normal, but anything that feels like a pebble, or any noticeable changes warrant a call to the doctor.

My mom taught me that when I was a teenager.  My gynecologist reminds me every year to do it.  During the entire month of October (breast cancer awareness month), I’m bombarded with reminders to feel my boobies!

Breast cancer is fairly common (about 12% of women will develop it at some point in their lives), and extremely treatable if found early (the five year survival rate exceeds 96% for cancer found early).  Which is why it’s important that all women pay attention to their breasts!

It’s hard to imagine anyone with half a brain in their head saying otherwise. Yet somehow, a bunch of someones are saying just that:

The new U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines, published Monday in the Annals of Internal Medicine, state that routine mammograms aren’t necessary for women of average cancer risk in their 40s, and that women between 50 and 74 years old don’t need to undergo mammograms more often than every other year. They also recommend that physicians abstain from teaching women how to examine their breasts for signs of cancer because of a lack of evidence that it is of any benefit.

What is the U.S. Preventative Task Force, anyway?  As it turns out, it’s a government funded panel of doctors that makes recommendations to medical community on how best to prevent illness and disease.  Government funded?  Sounds like someone’s not wanting to pay for all those unnecessary mammograms if that health care bill passes the Senate.  Yeah, much better for that money to fund elective abortions.

What will the Preventative Task Force panel come up with next?  Denying that using condoms help prevent the spread of STDs and protects against pregnancy?  Maybe hand-washing isn’t really effective in stopping the spread of viruses or infections.  Do pregnant women really need to see doctors or give birth in a hospital?  Maybe they’ll ban in home thermometers, because they cause too many false alarms with parents rushing their child to the doctor when there’s nothing wrong with them other than a fever.

Gosh, people on a panel that will be able to make recommendations to the government on what treatments should or should not be offered on the government health care plan… What was that term again?

Oh yeah.

Death panels.

The Secret Service is investigating a poll posted on Facebook recently.  The poll asked: “Should Obama be killed?” The possible answers were “no,” “maybe,” yes,” and “yes if he cuts my health care.”

Bob Beckel, one of my favorite love-to-hate liberals, came out swinging against the person responsible for the poll, demanding that he or she be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

“This is the kind of garbage that’s generated from the extreme right against Obama, and it’s going way over the line…It’s got to be stopped. Find him, prosecute him and put him in jail…If they don’t like what Obama is doing, then maybe they ought to go out and vote for someone else.  But relying on this kind of attack is un-American and unacceptable.”

Those of us on the right apparently just can’t help ourselves sometimes.  We’re so full of angry hate and hateful anger that we do things like throw bricks and sticks at cops while we’re protesting.  Wait, those were liberal, anti-capitalist protesters?

Well, it’s those Fox News Channel worshipers that bring posters to rallies depicting President Obama as Hitler.  Or was it the fringe group La Rouche, which advocates a single-payer health care system (not exactly a right-wing position)? At least we never saw Bush-as-Hitler propaganda from liberals during the eight years he served as our President.  Nope.  Never.  Not once. Ok, maybe once or twice…

Who killed Dr. Tiller, the man who preformed partial birth abortions on babies that would have most likely survived outside of the womb?  That one HAS to be a right winger.  Definitely a crazy, anti-choice, right-wing extremist.  Or maybe accused gunman Scott Roeder was a nut job that refused to pay taxes, believed himself to be above the law, and was clearly not associated with either liberals or conservatives?

Was it former Republican President George W. Bush that called everyone who disagreed with his politics racists and accused them of being part of a conspiracy?  Or was it former Democratic Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton?  These things are so hard to keep track of, you know.

If the Secret Service ever finds the person that posted the “Obama death poll” on Facebook, I would like to politely ask Mr. Beckel to apologize for associating him or her with the right-wing.  Because I can speculate with some confidence that that person is NOT a right-winger.  After he apologizes, maybe Mr. Beckel can point out some instances of the “garbage that’s generated from the extreme right against Obama,” because I sure can’t find it.  All I can find are concerned citizens that are finally speaking up for themselves and the welfare of our country.  They had the audacity to ask Congress to reign in the spending of money that we don’t have.  Some of those crazy right-wingers actually asked their congressmen to read the bills on their desk before they signed them!  The horror!

Questioning our representatives is not garbage.  Holding our elected officials accountable is not garbage.  Attending peaceful protests, town hall meetings, or city council meetings is not garbage.  Don’t let anyone tell you that it is.

For the past few weeks, my mind has been wrapped around the health-care debate.  Just hearing the words government option sends chills down my spine.  My body (which incidentally enjoys being taken care of by quality health-care) responds to those words with an increased heart rate and sweaty palms.  The idea of government taking part in the practice of medicine SCARES the heebeejeebees out of me.

The main line of defense for the pro-government-health-care-option (or whatever it’s being called today… co-ops, isn’t it?) crowd has been to mock that fear; to question it and make it seem ridiculous.  They say I’m backwards and uninformed for not wanting to follow Europe’s example of socialized health-care, where life is apparently much better than it is here in the US.  They say I’m silly for thinking I won’t get to keep my private health insurance.  They say I’m mean and selfish for not wanting to pay higher taxes to provide health-care for those that cannot afford it.  They say that due to the preventative treatment allowed by government run health-care, quality of life for all will improve, babies will never die, and we’ll finally achieve immortality (or something like that).  How could I be afraid of all of that goodness?

What am I afraid of?

I’m afraid I’ll lose my private health insurance. President Obama has stated point-blank that his plan is to lead the US into a single-payer system, using a so-called government “option” as a transitioning period.  Let me break it down for you.  The government says, “Don’t worry, of course you can keep your private health insurance (although we’re going to tax you so much that you won’t have any other realistic option than to accept the government plan)!”  Do you see how this hurts the middle class?  Only the extremely wealthy will be able to afford private health insurance once you add in all the taxes and fees associated with it.  The rest of us will be forced to accept the government care if we want any coverage at all.  The middle class is the one that will suffer the most, as they are forced to surrender their private insurance and accept the waiting lists and rationing that come with government health-care.

I’m afraid of waiting lists and rationing.  I’m afraid of getting too sick or too old, when the cost-benefit ratio for keeping me alive is no longer worth it to a nameless, faceless bureaucrat. Health-care will be rationed in a socialized system, as we’ve seen in the UK, in Finland, in Canada, and many others.  I’m afraid of being told it’s my patriotic duty to die, so the cost of keeping a person alive can go to someone perceivably healthier than myself.  I’m afraid of unnatural selection, when at 22 weeks pregnant and in premature labor, I might be denied drugs like magnesium sulfate and terbutaline (which would stop contractions and mature the baby’s fetus’s lungs), because not only are they expensive, but the cost of caring for a preemie in the NICU can be upwards of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

I’m afraid that my quality of care would plummet.  If I need life saving treatment, I don’t care if my doctor is a one-armed albino that speaks in haiku’s and has a tendency to skip everywhere he goes.  I just want him to be an expert in the area I need treatment.  At the same time, I don’t think someone should become a doctor just because he or she might add “diversity” in the medical field.  It is discriminatory to give grants/promotions/benefits/special treatment to people based on their skin color, height, weight, the size of their ears, or because they pick their nose.  Ok, I take that last one back.  Anyone that picks their nose during a medical school entrance interview should not be allowed to become a doctor.  At the same time, the pool of intelligent and dedicated individuals willing to work themselves to the bone to become good doctors would shrink.  Too many people considering medical school might take a look at the bureaucratic red tape nightmare of government health-care and say, “No thanks!”

I’m afraid breakthroughs in medical technology will come to a halt. Since 1945, 87 of the 143 Nobel Prizes in Physiology or Medicine awarded have gone to Americans.  American doctors and scientists have pioneered transplant surgeries, chemotherapy, and vaccinations in the 20th and 21st centuries.  Will there still be breakthroughs when the government decides what kinds of care physicians can provide to what kinds of patients?

I’m afraid that my children and grandchildren will be paying for this.  French health-care is often touted as one of the best systems in the world, yet it is currently causing a huge deficit in their economy.  In the US, Medicare and Medicaid are already bankrupting us and leading to higher taxes and inflation.  How long before our country bankrupts itself?

I’m afraid that my tax dollars will be used to fund abortions, something that I’m morally opposed to.  Religious schools don’t receive tax-payer money because it would be unfair to require people morally opposed to religious education to pay for it.  How is requiring me to pay for abortions any different?

I’m afraid this is just be the beginning, as Ronald Reagan warned in a 1961 radio interview:

One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project, most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can’t afford it.

What am I afraid of?

Government health-care, that’s what.