In a recent speech to the residents of Bettendorf, Iowa, Governor Perry not only took on the amount of money that elected representatives make and their seemingly permanent positions in Washington, but he also announced that part of his plan was to remove federal funding for Planned Parenthood so that our tax dollars will not go to kill innocent, unborn babies.
This would be a hard fought battle, as Planned Parenthood paints itself as more than an abortion provider, but also as a provider of women’s health.
Part of the problem that he faces is what Mississippi faced with its recent attempt at a personhood Amendment to their Constitution. You see, the abortion debate has placed the rights of the woman up against the rights of the child.
You see, the pro-choice movement has dehumanized the baby in the womb. They have to in order to justify the fact that they are simply looking at the woman’s rights and disregarding the baby’s rights.
In the article How Mississippi’s Vote Today Could Put Pregnant Women Under State Control, AlterNet’s Amanda Marcotte theorizes that if the baby in the womb is truly a person, then the state might have to practically lock women up to make sure that they carry the baby to term:
To make all this even more frightening, the law would define personhood as beginning at fertilization, which is before a woman is even pregnant, since pregnancy often begins days after fertilization, when an egg implants in the uterine lining. Even after a pregnancy officially begins, many women don’t detect it for weeks. This would mean that a personhood law would turn all women of reproductive age into a class of people who could, in theory, have “persons” inside them, regardless of their actual or perceived pregnancy status. This has infinite potential in giving the state power to restrict the choices and movements of all women of reproductive age, in order to protect the theoretical people inside them.
This is the common debate tactic used by both Republicans and Democrats. Take the extreme possibility, cast it as highly likely, creating a strawman argument, and then bash it.
Change the Culture
The interesting thing is that, while Roe v. Wade has not changed in these many years since the Supreme Court’s decision, America’s attitude towards abortion has. That’s why you see all of these laws spring up. That’s why the pro-abortion movement is on the defensive. It’s where the true power lies.
You see, government has a problem with dealing with individuals—specifically, the Federal Government. It’s why they can’t seem to be efficient in welfare, social security, the postal service, and soon health care. There are too many variables.
In this case, I believe Perry’s right, the government shouldn’t be funding abortions. The government shouldn’t view abortion as anything other than taking a life.
The power to change and get rid of abortion comes from the people, not from the top down. So while we should welcome any legislation that saves an innocent life, we must not stop working hard to show others that there is a life in there that is worth saving.
One thought on “Perry: Eliminate Funding to Planned Parenthood”
I believe that the government is only partially right in bringing this change. I feel that there must be certain amendments made to the law based on the reason for which the abortion is taking place.