Defund PP Vote Today. Call Your Senator.

Defund PP Vote Today. Call Your Senator. August 3, 2015
Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by DonkeyHotey https://www.flickr.com/photos/donkeyhotey/
Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by DonkeyHotey https://www.flickr.com/photos/donkeyhotey/

The United States Senate says it will vote today on defunding Planned Parenthood.

I know I’ve predicted that this vote will fall short. But every so often I’m wrong. Push your senators to help prove me wrong.

Call both our senators and ask them to vote yes.

You can find their emails and phone numbers here.

"I didn't state that very well, sorry. Nothing wrong with the link, I just couldn't ..."

The Fallout: How to Help Women ..."
"You don't remember Lyndon Johnson doing any such thing because he didn't do any such ..."

Dr Christine Ford in Hiding Because ..."
"I haven't had the opportunity to read the FBI investigation. I'm not in the habit ..."

The Fallout: How to Help Women ..."
"Was there something wrong with the link?"

The Fallout: How to Help Women ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment

14 responses to “Defund PP Vote Today. Call Your Senator.”

  1. Both of my Senators will likely take the side of poor women. They need no encouragement from me to do so. It is the obvious, moral and responsible thing to do.

    • Agree, Sophia! And if the Republican party wants to be truly “pro-life”, they will follow these words: Sister Joan Chittister puts it best…

      “I do not believe that just because you’re opposed to abortion, that that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed. And why would I think that you don’t? Because you don’t want any tax money to go there. That’s not pro-life. That’s pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is.”

      • I have to disagree with Sister Chittister, if indeed she said this. There is not, ever, a reason to create an either-or dichotomy between the basic right to life of all human beings, and the basic needs for life of all human beings such as housing, education, food, etc.

        I am aware that politicians — on both sides of the aisle, not just Republicans — engage in this kind of false dichotomy all the time. It’s a commonplace, when a political party is challenged on their chicanery, for them to point out the failings of the other other political party.

        The way this is expressed in the comment above is from the viewpoint of the Ds. The Rs have their own version. Both are self-serving and based on a false premise.

        That false premise (in this instance) is that because some politicians say they are pro life but would deny children basic needs such as education, housing, etc, (and some politicians undeniably do this) then this inconsistency on the part of some politicians leads to the conclusion that killing the children is a legitimate moral choice.

        Abortion is killing a child. That is not a premise. It is a fact. No other evil can justify killing an innocent child. That does not make other evils good. It simply means that you cannot justify your desire to murder an innocent person by pointing out that someone else wants to deny this innocent person some of their basic human rights such as access to food and shelter.

        • I think I want to make the point that if you want to be truly “prolife”, one must change the root causes that make a woman choose an abortion. And the plain fact of the matter is that BIRTH CONTROL reduces abortions. And since pregnancy can and does endanger a woman’s health, she must have the ability to protect her own life.
          http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/30/1407166/-Catholic-Nun-Explains-Pro-Life-In-A-Way-That-May-Stun-The-Masses#

          • I agree that we must address the root causes of what makes women choose abortion. For far too long, our society and faux feminists have tried to use abortion as the antidote to misogyny, when in fact it is a great misogyny enabler. However, if birth control was going to solve the problem, it already would have done so. I can get birth control at any pharmacy or off any shelve in Wal Mart or Target, coast to coast. As for pumping women full of dangerous chemicals and implants in the name of contraception, that is just another form of misogyny. The greasy kid stuff works, if you use it.

          • Pregnancy is much less dangerous that abortion, in the short and long term.
            In case you are going to quote the false statistics of maternal mortality and morbidity, HHS, in the U.S. has a peculiar way of devising these statistics.
            After a woman becomes pregnant, if she dies for any cause for one year after delivery or termination of pregnancy, HHS counts that as a maternal death. No one else in the world uses that kind of criteria.

      • I’m pro-life from conception until natural death. I want to defund Planned Parenthood and use that money for WIC, SNAP, and TANF until every mother has financial support from conception until age 18.

      • Why do pro-abortion people want poor women to kill their children?
        http://family-studies.org/why-poor-women-with-unintended-pregnancies-are-less-likely-to-get-abortions/
        This study says that wealthier women are more likely to have abortions than poor women because poor women are more pro-life. Once again, we learn from the lesson of the poor, something I value after living for years in very poor countries.
        My intention is that poor wome, children and families will have what they need and be able to climb out of poverty.
        Sr Joan Chittister is a notorious heretic. Funny you would quote her.
        Btw, when was the last time that you bought diapers for the emergency food bank? I did it last week.

      • Well, Sr. Joan blithly dismisses her sisters religious (male religious as well) who worked their lives to build and staff schools, hospitals and orphanages (now family services). You would think she would be more honest about the distinction between a moral imperitive and the means to realize that imperitive. The former we must, as Catholics, accept. We can disagree on the policies. Except that Sr. Joan says we can’t.

        Well, of course, one can be “anti-abortion” yet not pro-life, theoretically. But can one protect the abortion license and still be “pro-life”, however much one supports government social programs? As Rebecca points out, this is, of course, a false dichotomy. But as a Catholic, I cannot accept the lie that we only support the child until birth. That’s simply false.

    • Poor women? So the best you can do for poor women is to kill their children?

      If that is being on the side of poor women, then they don’t need any enemies, their friends are hateful enough.

      • I have nothing against poor women and children. It is the recent effort to deny health services to poor women that I take issue with.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.