Money Where Your Mouth Is
SD Watch continues his good blog carpentry, hitting this nail squarely on the head: Governor Rounds still projects a $24M increase in state revenues (see FY2009 Governor's Budget Summary Book, p.9), still plans raises for state employees, but says we can't afford to scrape together $4 million to cover the Zaniya Project's proposal to expand Medicaid coverage to low-income pregnant women. Editorializes Epp emphatically:
It is sadly ironic—but not unexpected—that the allegedly “pro-life” Governor is willing to “protect” the unborn but not scrape up a few more dollars to help those fetuses turn into healthy babies. And healthy babies and mothers will actually save the taxpayers money in the long run as they won’t need to seek as many health services in the future.
I think it is safe to say that Gov. Rounds is “pro-life”—as long as it doesn’t cost anything.
Disgusting.
But let's see how much in secret donations the HUH crowd (Hunt-Unruh-Howie) are willing to spend on propaganda, petition drives, and other useless moral grandstanding. Disgusting indeed.
If You Have to Ask...
Perusing my SiteMeter stats, I find a referral from a web surfer in Sioux Falls who Googled the question "What's wrong with child abuse?" Yikes.
To address the first part of this issue, as spending stands now, I'm not aware of great suffering on the part of poor mothers. I don't think any babies are going to suffer if the Zaniya Projects recommendations don't get implemented.
ReplyDeleteBesides, there are private pregnancy care centers spread around the state which can help mothers of modest means, and there are also churches that can help. Heaven forbid, friends, families and neighbors might even help--who knows, we might actually do what humanity did for thousands of years before the welfare state came along (do things for ourselves, in the private sector).
And to answer the second, and probably the more relevant part of your beef, people who support abortion don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to crying about the needs of mothers and unborn children. Not providing additional wealth redistribution is a LONG way from supporting the murder of unborn children.
Making this argument is simply and solely an attempt to make pro-lifers and their cause look bad while obscuring the fact that some people support the murder of these unborn children.
Sorry, but that dog don't hunt.
And to answer the second, and probably the more relevant part of your beef, people who support abortion don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to crying about the needs of mothers and unborn children. Not providing additional wealth redistribution is a LONG way from supporting the murder of unborn children.
ReplyDeleteThat's not a substantive response to the point Cory made in any way.
Anna, I believe it should be obvious to even an 8th grader exactly why it was wholly and pointedly substantive to both Cory's and Todd's statements. Think about it REAL hard and I'm sure it'll come to you, unless you just don't want to get it.
ReplyDeleteAnna, I apologize to you. I was a jerk to you in the tone of my last comment. Still, if you haven't already figured out why my original comment was relevant and substantive to the post, keep thinking about it and I'm sure it'll come to you.
ReplyDeleteWho's got the legs here? if you want to go there, pro-lifers don't have a leg to stand on when they won't put their money where their mouth is. Less grandstanding, less ideology, more practical help for moms and babies -- that's where I'm at. To suggest that my opposition to futile, intrusive, and mostly unconstitutional laws negates my authority to speak on public health issues is a non sequitur par excellence.
ReplyDeleteCory, pro-lifers put their money where their mouth is all the time. Plenty of pro-lifers volunteer at pregnancy care centers and relief agencies and donate money to them, and the same goes for adoptions and adoption agencies. And many people help in this regard even without an official connection to such an agency. Most pro-lifers believe in helping others OURSELF, rather than reaching inside our neighbor's pocket when we feel like being generous.
ReplyDeleteThat's yet another falsehood (the notion that pro-lifers don't really care beyond the fetus) pro-abortion folks like to whip out to make pro-lifers look bad and make themselves feel better about advocating the murder of unborn children.
That dog don't hunt, either.
What real, long-term assistance do crisis pregnancy centers provide to women? I've heard of them providing a few baby outfits and bags of diapers, but that's not the sustained help that women often need when they have a baby. That's not paying medical bills when the child gets sick, or ensuring that women receive adequate prenatal care.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all we need to recognize that people should be responsible for meeting their own needs. Not having sex outside of marriage will ensure that most mothers have the resources they need to take care of themselves and their children, and also avoiding divorce (making wiser decisions about who to marry can reduce this). The vast majority of welfare and poverty situations are found in single-parent homes, which are usually the product of extra-marital sex and divorce.
ReplyDeleteHowever, when mothers aren’t able to meet their own needs for whatever reason, crisis pregnancy centers and other private agencies and even individuals extend their help out of the goodness of their hearts.
Pregnancy centers offer anything and everything from counseling, parenting classes, referrals for medical care, referrals for other community services (food banks, women’s shelters, housing, Salvation Army, etc.), maternity clothes, baby clothes and other supplies, cribs, and often ultrasound. Clients often continue to come back for help and support for years after a pregnancy. Some clients even end up working or volunteering at a pregnancy center later. There are dozens of volunteers at the one here in Rapid City, and many more people that give of their time and money to support the organization. You should go visit one, sometime. You might be surprised.
There are also churches that minister in this area, and private individuals who become aware of a need, including family and friends. That can include help with bills and child care.
At the risk of sounding like Hillary Clinton’s “village,” community can and often does come together around people in need. Our welfare system has done a lot to tear down our sense of community, but it’s still there, and will come back even stronger if we have the courage to move away from government handouts to real relationships. And that results in healthier children, healthier women and healthier families.
Why is it that it's always most important to you to point out the ways in which other people have sinned/made mistakes? I sincerely don't understand your enthusiasm for pointing out other people's faults.
ReplyDeleteI think I understand why you believe I enjoy pointing out people's mistakes, but I don't.
ReplyDeleteHowever, if mistakes are what created an unpleasant situation, it does no one any good to ignore that. If we pretend we don't know why an unpleasant situation arose, chances are, that same type of situation is going to keep arising again and again and again.
In fact, I think that's why we DO see so many problems in our society. We as individuals certainly don't want to face our own mistakes and culpability, and when those around us (i.e. society) is also afraid to say, "Hey, that was wrong" or "Hey, that wasn't smart" then pretty soon people are deluded into believing that their actions had nothing to do with their present circumstances.
No, my gambling addiction had nothing to do with why we don't have grocery money. No, the fact that I'm now a single parent had nothing to do with the fact that I married a man I knew beforehand was a verbally abusive and lazy idiot. No, the fact that I had sex during high school, got pregnant and had to drop out of school has nothing to do with why I have no substantial income and have to live off the compassion of others. No, the fact that I can't hold a job has nothing to do with the fact that I like to drink too much.
Choices have consequences. As unpleasant as they are, we should all have to face them. The main reason is that when we face up to them and admit them, there's a pretty good chance we won't make that mistake again, though if we can keep blaming some imagined injustice or just ignore the cause altogether, then we can keep doing the same thing that caused us a problem in the first place.
I, as the fellow member of society, would rather people face responsibility for their actions for two reasons.
One, because I don't enjoy seeing people hurt, even if it is their own darn fault. God hurts when people hurt, even if they did it to themselves, and because I try to see things through God's eyes, I also hurt. That's why I donate money and volunteer--to try and alleviate some of that suffering while helping folks figure out what caused the problem, so they don’t fall into the same trap again.
The second reason is admittedly more selfish and practical. I'd rather not keep bailing folks out--with my tax dollars and my willing contribution of time/money--for making the same mistakes over and over. I don’t think there’s any of us that wouldn’t rather spend our time and money in more positive ways.
I don't get any self-righteous joy out of pointing out other people's mistakes--I'm too aware of my own mistakes and shortcomings to get much of a thrill out of someone elses. But when people's mistakes create an overall societal atmosphere of suffering and decay, I have an obligation as a fellow citizen to say something. I also have an obligation as a Christ follower to be “salt and light” as Jesus put it, which is to help people find the truth and find a better way to live. On a more pragmatic note, I also have a right and duty to say something as a taxpayer, when my taxes are going to pay for people to keep making the same mistakes over and over again, with no acknowledgement or acceptance of responsibility.
Does that make sense?