Opinion L.A.

Observations and provocations
from The Times' Opinion staff

« Previous Post | Opinion L.A. Home | Next Post »

Women's rights: Let's abort the bills proposed by Christopher H. Smith, Joe Pitts and Mike Pence

Planned Parenthood

I was riveted by Hanna Rosin's July/August cover story for the Atlantic Monthly, "The End of Men," about how women came to outpace men in a post-Industrial America. I read it twice, and forced everyone I know to read it as well. While there were elements of Rosin's reporting that made me want to wave my feminist flag up high, mostly I felt bad for our young men entering a new world that might not have a place for them. What women want -- have always wanted -- is equality. (Reference Sweden.)

But then there are politicians and lawmakers such as Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.), who’s pushing the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, and Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Pa.), who’s sponsoring Protect Life Act, who remind women that we still have to fight for our rights. It may be easier for us to get a job in 2011, but there’s still the threat that we may not be able to make our own medical decisions.

In Wednesday's Opinion pages, the editorial board weighs in with "Chipping away abortion rights." They write:

Abortion is a legally protected medical procedure. And though the federal government can legitimately limit what it will pay for in the way of healthcare for budgetary reasons, congressional opposition to abortion has nothing to do with its cost; the procedure is less expensive than carrying a pregnancy to term. Congress should not rewrite tax law so as to interfere with private and personal health insurance decisions made by patients, their employers and insurance companies.

And then there's Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), who's sponsoring a bill to bar the government from funding any organization that offers abortions. Addressing the issue in "The Siege of Planned Parenthood," the New York Times' Gail Collins snaps back, "Planned Parenthood doesn’t use government money to provide abortions; Congress already prohibits that, except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother." She continues:

But here's the most notable thing about this whole debate: The people trying to put Planned Parenthood out of business do not seem concerned about what would happen to the 1.85 million low-income women who get family-planning help and medical care at the clinics each year. It just doesn’t come up. There’s not even a vague contingency plan.

"I haven't seen that they want to propose an alternative," said Richards.

There are tens of millions of Americans who oppose abortion because of deeply held moral principles. But they’re attached to a political movement that sometimes seems to have come unmoored from any concern for life after birth.

On our comments board, "Surreptitious" offers:

If we roll back abortion rights, men need to assume more responsibility for their actions. It takes two to get pregnant. Where is the accountability?

While it's valid to point out that men should take accountability for their actions, we can't expect it. And, of course, there are those unfair situations where a woman makes a decision to terminate a pregnancy despite her partner's wishes. Yet that doesn't begin to address extenuating circumstances such as rape. Ultimately, though, it's a woman's body, and it's her decision. We shouldn't have to keep fighting the same fight.

RELATED:

Chipping away abortion rights

Rape flourishes in rubble of Haitian earthquake

-- Alexandra Le Tellier

Photo: A statue representing women's empowerment stands in front of a Planned Parenthood facility in Tucson, Ariz. Credit: Ross D. Franklin / AP Photo

 

Comments () | Archives (5)

The comments to this entry are closed.

AimeeX

"...they're attached to a political movement that sometimes seems to have come unmoored from any concern for life after birth." Pro-choice supporters are obviously disdainful of life before birth, as they are so indifferent about destroying it. "...it's a woman's body, and it's her decision." If a woman wants to kill her unborn child, she'll find some way to do it whether it's legal or not. Any anti-abortion laws should penalize the doctors, clinics, and hospitals performing the abortions.

Mitchell Young

Hmmm, what does this say about equality, (and immigration and assimilation)

Son-biased sex ratios in the 2000 United States Census
1. Douglas Almond * , † and
2. Lena Edlund * , ‡
http://www.pnas.org/content/105/15/5681.abstract

We document male-biased sex ratios among U.S.-born children of Chinese, Korean, and Asian Indian parents in the 2000 U.S. Census. This male bias is particularly evident for third children: If there was no previous son, sons outnumbered daughters by 50%. By contrast, the sex ratios of eldest and younger children with an older brother were both within the range of the biologically normal, as were White offspring sex ratios (irrespective of the elder siblings' sex). *We interpret the found deviation in favor of sons to be evidence of sex selection, most likely at the prenatal stage. * [my 'emphasis]

Mitchell Young

Hmmm, what does this say about equality, (and immigration and assimilation)

Son-biased sex ratios in the 2000 United States Census
1. Douglas Almond * , † and
2. Lena Edlund * , ‡
http://www.pnas.org/content/105/15/5681.abstract

We document male-biased sex ratios among U.S.-born children of Chinese, Korean, and Asian Indian parents in the 2000 U.S. Census. This male bias is particularly evident for third children: If there was no previous son, sons outnumbered daughters by 50%. By contrast, the sex ratios of eldest and younger children with an older brother were both within the range of the biologically normal, as were White offspring sex ratios (irrespective of the elder siblings' sex). *We interpret the found deviation in favor of sons to be evidence of sex selection, most likely at the prenatal stage. * [my 'emphasis]

Coriolana

Let's. And while we are at it, let's get rid of the tools pushing these evil bills.

cabaret voltaire

First off, I've read this 'End of Men' propaganda and its absolutely ridiculous. This type of rhetoric shows how feminism went from an equal rights movement to a supremacy movement. Its become a war against men which benefits no one, including women. The only people who benefit from this 'war' are the small percentage of hyper sensitive women who adhere to feminist propaganda. As for Alexandra Le Tellier feeling bad for young boys who have no place in society -- men don't need your pity. You see, we don't see ourselves as victims and know are role in society is vital for the progression of the human race. Continue to raise your feminist flag and most people will just role their eyes.


Connect

Advertisement

In Case You Missed It...

Video


Categories


Recent Posts
Reading Supreme Court tea leaves on 'Obamacare' |  March 27, 2012, 5:47 pm »
Candidates go PG-13 on the press |  March 27, 2012, 5:45 am »
Santorum's faulty premise on healthcare reform |  March 26, 2012, 5:20 pm »

Archives
 


About the Bloggers
The Opinion L.A. blog is the work of Los Angeles Times Editorial Board membersNicholas Goldberg, Robert Greene, Carla Hall, Jon Healey, Sandra Hernandez, Karin Klein, Michael McGough, Jim Newton and Dan Turner. Columnists Patt Morrison and Doyle McManus also write for the blog, as do Letters editor Paul Thornton, copy chief Paul Whitefield and senior web producer Alexandra Le Tellier.



In Case You Missed It...