Taking Aim at the Babies

The most heinous talking point some Republicans try and push in the abortion fight is that Democrats support infanticide. Abortions so late in pregnancy that the baby is born alive then killed. At first what can one say.

If it was born alive does it even qualify as an abortion and belong in this debate at all. Shouldn’t it just be a murder.

But then of course me being me my mind got rolling. And I got researching to see if my thoughts were backed up with some facts.

And it turns out it is the republicans in congress and in state houses that have attempted and sometimes succeeded in infanticide and other murder by denial from afar. Because they have time after time voted and sometimes succeeded in ending coverage for low income individuals/families of medicaid, aca insurance and CHIP. All these programs have reduced mortality rates of mothers to be during pregnancy and childbirth and infants and children. When Republicans vote to end them or reduce access to them they are pretty much saying they don’t care that it will mean women and infants and children will die do to inability to afford access to health care. They also have tried to cut in half WIC. Nutrition for pregnant mothers.

Is it really more important to give e a tax break to a millionaire or a billionaire or multinational businesses who already barely pay any taxes. Who won’t die if they don’t get the tax cut.

They say every life matters. But they vote like they don’t give a damn.

The Respect for Marriage Act…. Is it for everyone? And other thoughts it spun.

When I heard about this bill I sought it out to read what was included in it. I knew it was in response to the supreme courts ruling doing an end around on abortion rights. And the court right now has another case with a web designer wanting to disriminate against gay engaged couples. And based on their recent rulings they will likely allow this to happen. I will get to this lower down.

While I am glad that this bill was able to pass it has some issues which were included to get it to pass. First it does not require all states to marry gay couples, just to recognize marriages from other states that do. This to me is a major problem as seen in the abortion case the Supreme Court ruled on allowing states to set their own rules. So, again this will create an untenable burden on the poor. If you are a poor gay person in a state that won’t allow gay marriage you will have to somehow get the funds together to marry out of state. I have lived in low income public housing and this can be a lot harder than you might think. And I think an undue burden. Especially if the state will then have to acknowledge the marriage anyhow. If a heterosexual couple can just go to the courthouse and get married why should a gay couple have to go out of state and go through whatever the closest state requires to get married. It isn’t even separate but equal.

Second, why do they set out non-profit groups eat as not having to take part or offer services to gay and interracial couples right after section on conscientious objections. This part brings up the case in front of the Supreme Court. Churches are by definition non-profit so you one would think religiously exempt as would be an individual. This leaves for profit businesses. Which is where the Supreme Court is at. And it seems to want to give exemptions to profit companies and now even teachers at schools. But so far it has always gone towards Christian and catholic conservative beliefs. Which aligns with the majority of the justices religious beliefs. This is concerning.

Third, how things go with gay marriage will ultimately reveal what the majority of the real intentions were behind the pro-life movement were. If it was just pro-life. Then they will let gay people get married. Since gay people getting married in no way harms a living being. The same is true of transgender rights. And birth control. But if they fight gay marriage, or birth control, or trans gender rights. The it would seem it is about imposing their religious beliefs on society. Or/and controlling women.

Brith control and the hobby lobby ruling was a problem. Not just based on religion. But because they did not see to take into account or deal with how our system of medicine works in the US or how birth control is given out. Most insurance is obtained through work and that is what makes it affordable here. As opposed to most European countries that do it through the government. Individual plans are super expensive. Most female birth control requires seeing a doctor. Which pretty much requires insurance.

And for those who don’t believe in birth control at all that it is gods will when you have a baby why don’t you support child care or maternity leave. Also a large majority of people who believe this also believe sex only in marriage and for procreation. I want someone to stand in front of the Supreme Court justices and ask them if they only have sex when they or their wives are fertile. Or if they have stopped having sex when their wives hit menopause, Justice Thomas?

So many thoughts and they may not make sense.

But poor people should not always be the ones punished by laws. Everyone should be allowed to get married or get an abortion if needed.

And whose religious beliefs take precedence.

Woman X Inc. LLC

I must admit up front my news band width right now is almost non existant so I am mostly reading headlines and first paragraphs and watching just a few minutes of local, national and international news. So like everyone else I have heard about the leaked Supreme Court abortion document while unable to deep dive into its details my mind did spin off into thoughts.

And hear is one of them and well maybe a few more.

I have decided to become a company. If a company can have the rights of a human being I wan the rights of a company. Not the rights of the owner of the company but the company itself. I want to be able to make all my decisions based on what is best for my company i.e. myself based on my five year plan for fiscal growth and what is best for my brand. And since I have no stock holders I am beholden to no one but myself.

If I find myself with an unwanted pregnancy then I will evaluate its effect on my bottom and my brand. Then I will end it if it is not financially good for my companies bottom line. Just like hospitals do when they deny care to patients. Or drug companies who price the medications out of reach of people who will die if they can’t afford them. Or insurance companies who decide that the treatment for a disease is too costly and most likely won’t give a person more than a year or more life. But it might. But it is too expensive to take a chance.

And let’s face it being pregnant is a big financial outlay all in the red. And then it slows your productivity which could affect Woman X inc’s contracts with other companies costing me income. All of it hurting the bottom line and unacceptable. This unwanted employee must be fired and removed from my office forcibly if necessary.

Thats it, I want the right to operate like a company. To be ruthless. To not care about those who depend on their livelihoods from me. Who will go hungry when I fire them. Will lose there health care. More profits and less regulations. Who needs safety that could save my workers lives. They chose to work for me. It’s on them. I’m a corporation all I need to focus on is profits and my brand.

I could declare myself a country and not care about the life and death of others too. After all those people crossing our borders lives aren’t the same as real lives. But I think then I could end up in wars. And as a nation of one that would leave me in the weakest position.

So Woman X Inc it is. And think about the tax benefits.

Sorry if this makes little sense. It is ob the cuff. And my head is killing me. Which in a world like it is right now is understandable if not desireable.