Here I go again.
Breaking my sacred vow of not discussing issues publicly. But I feel
that I just can't contain mayself. Now I am going to go even further
with my abondenment of this personal policy of mine, and not only
discuss politics, but religion as well. Oh my, this could get
interesting.
Over the course of about the last week or so, I have listened to many news stories discussing the issue of insurance being provided that covers a wide arae of services that not everyone believes in, in particularly specific organizations. I have listened to the bashing of a prominent organization, private organization that is, over who they determine is the place their donations should be sent and how their money is best spent to further their particular cause. The rise and fall of various political candidates and the reasons those individuals may rise and fall. And the list of issues in the news currently goes on and on and on. During these discussions, terms like "constitutional rights" and "freedom of speech" and "freedom of religion" come into play over and over. The only difference you find is how the different sides use those terms. You also hear terms such as "women's rights". I have no desire to get into a discussion with anyone on "women's rights" and the "right to choose" or any other moral choices we all make on a daily basis. I have my beliefs and appreciate others not trampling all over them, and so I will not trample any one elses belief. However, where the discussion should be in today's society should absolutely be more focused on the constitutional rights we are given, not the rights of women. There are issues at stake at this time in American history that are being confused as an attack on women's health and women's rights, when the bottom line is, that has nothing to do with the core of the issue.
Let's start with Susan B. Komen for the Cure foundation. This foundation, who as we see widely across the United States, is dealing with budgeting issues due to a slowed economy. They studied where they distribute their money too and determined that the money they were giving to Planned Parent hood, which was not being used for mamograms in the majority of clinics as it was supposed to be used for although they did offer referrals for this service, and the money could be better used by organizations who were providing services that actually help prevent breast cancer. Now, mule that over for a moment. An private organization who's sole goal in exsistance is to fight breast cancer, determines that they would rather send their money to an organization who provides services to fight breast cancer. That simple. Not a complicated desicision. A fiscal decision based on where the money is going to has been made. Very responsible? Well, according to all of the contreversay on the news, not so much. If a person strictly listened to media views and initial reactions of individuals with out knowing the facts, one would assume it is completely irrisponsible and against women's rights. Strange, this is an organization who's sole purpose of exsistance is to aid women in one of the most serious issues there is for women. And they are against women? What? The battle irrupted into a roar of discrimination that spanned from a war against birth control to flat out ambush on women as a whole. Then the informaiton that the VP was prolife became relevant some how and it became a "Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice" discussion, and in the end, Susan B Komen foundation caved to the mass hysteria created by mis-informed individuals. The decision the foundation made in the begining, was based on finacially sound investments. Through the course of the frenzy, it became much, much more than that. Is anyone really going to argue that the majority of Planned Parenthood facilities do not offer mamograms? Why is an organization who's sole purpose is to prevent breast cancer, dispursing funds to an organization that does not provide services to prevent breast cancer. This in not a "slam" to Planned Parent hood. It sounds rather fiscally responisble to me, from a strictly business perspective. When the grass is green and the cow is fat, feel free to share the meat with all your neighbors. When the grass dies and the cow is thin, you better reconsider how far you can spread your tidings. Look at the core information. No one was trying to trample anyone's rights. Susan B. Komen for the cure never said "Don't go get birth control." I don't remember them saying, "For gosh sakes, don't go to Planned Parenthood."
On to a similar, but yet different topic. They sort of fit hand in hand, but go much further into trampling all over our "constiutional rights" and our "religious freedoms". It is very discerning to me that the basis of the quarel regarding the health care mandetes, that have been heavily discussed in the news of late, has turned into a debate about whether or not the Catholic Church is for or against women's rights. What ever the church's beliefs are, which I'm pretty sure everyone in the country knows what they are, the issue here is whether or not this goes against the freedom of religion. Forget about birth control, forget about the day after pill, forget about abortion. The sole issue here is whether or not the government has the right to tell a religious institution they have do something that is against their belief system. This isn't about how many Catholic women are currently on birth control. It's not about Catholics not caring about women or their employees at these various organizations or businesses. Believe me, anyone who works at or goes to school at a Catholic institution, is going to be able to find birth control and resources to get that birth control, somewhere else. I mean, come on, they can go to Planned Parenthood, right? Anyway, the issue every citizen in America needs to be paying attention to is that the government is trying to force a religious instituition to provide coverage for something that they do not agree with. We have seen this in the news lately with several issues involving the Catholic Church. There is really no point in discussing what all of the various issues are and where the beliefs lie, because as I said, the bottom line is the govenment is trying to tell a religious organization to go against its beliefs, whether that is with covering birth control or any other issue. When there were groups who rose up against "religious" celebrations in schools, such as Christmas Parties, etc. Most schools put a stop to them. Why, because it infringed on the religious beliefs of those individuals (or their choice to not have religious beliefs, how ever you want to look at it). I have heard the statement regarding this not being an infringement of religious beliefs because it can be shown to be a sound medical practice. There are many religions that do not believe in the use of medicine or major medical procedures. Although I have heard many debates through out the years over it, as far as I know, no one has told those indviduals that they MUST use medicine. If I am of one of those religious organizations, when it comes time to vaccitnate my children for school, I can contest the notion of having to have them vacinated based on religious freedom. Does that mean that every member of that religious organization adhere's to those beliefs of the organization? Of course not. But the core organization, not the followers, can not be told to change its beliefs, or to enforce practices upon its followers that do not align with its beliefs. If we begin to destroy the freedom of a religious establishment to adhere to a belief system they hold sacred, than what happens to our constitutional rights as a whole. I may not agree with what other religions believe or what they teach, but it does not give me the right to tell them they no longer have the power to practice what they believe in.
In the end, I am not going to go into an "I am of the. . . political party", or "I am of the . . .religious beliefs". It really isn't the point here. Not every decsion to donate is based on religious or political motivation in its orginal form. Not every rights violation is based around a notion to destroy the rights of women. Some times (amazingly enough) its not about women's rights at all. But in stead, the rights of some other group to do what they see is in their best intrest. I know, its shocking that there may be other groups or organizations that have the right to have rights besides the women's groups. However, as far as I know, I live in the United States, I am an American, and I do have the right to have a voice and an opinion on topics, whether those topics are religion, women's rights or many other things.
Finally, although I do not agree with the fact that Susan B. Komen Foundation has decided to go ahead and fund Planned Parenthood (an this has NOTHING to do with BIRTH CONTROL, it is simple based on a fiscal fact that why would you send donations to an organization that is not providing services that help your cause), I will continue to donate for Breast Cancer. I will continue to where a pink ribbon from time to time. Why, because we have rights in this country. This foundation has the right to donate their money where they feel it is most useful (although I don't believe this to be a wise fiscal choice, it wasn't mine to make), Planned Parenthood has the right to use its funds how it sees fit, and I have the right to send my money where ever I so choose. I also maintain that regardless of how many Catholic women are on birth control, or how many Catholics in general feel that these services are ok, it is the right of the Catholic church as a religious organization to say that it is against their belief system and they cannot abandon their beliefs. Take all of this for what it is worth, because, as with any opinion, it is just the thoughts running around in my head. I will never tell anyone they have to believe in my way of thinking, after all, wouldn't that be a violation of another persons rights?
Over the course of about the last week or so, I have listened to many news stories discussing the issue of insurance being provided that covers a wide arae of services that not everyone believes in, in particularly specific organizations. I have listened to the bashing of a prominent organization, private organization that is, over who they determine is the place their donations should be sent and how their money is best spent to further their particular cause. The rise and fall of various political candidates and the reasons those individuals may rise and fall. And the list of issues in the news currently goes on and on and on. During these discussions, terms like "constitutional rights" and "freedom of speech" and "freedom of religion" come into play over and over. The only difference you find is how the different sides use those terms. You also hear terms such as "women's rights". I have no desire to get into a discussion with anyone on "women's rights" and the "right to choose" or any other moral choices we all make on a daily basis. I have my beliefs and appreciate others not trampling all over them, and so I will not trample any one elses belief. However, where the discussion should be in today's society should absolutely be more focused on the constitutional rights we are given, not the rights of women. There are issues at stake at this time in American history that are being confused as an attack on women's health and women's rights, when the bottom line is, that has nothing to do with the core of the issue.
Let's start with Susan B. Komen for the Cure foundation. This foundation, who as we see widely across the United States, is dealing with budgeting issues due to a slowed economy. They studied where they distribute their money too and determined that the money they were giving to Planned Parent hood, which was not being used for mamograms in the majority of clinics as it was supposed to be used for although they did offer referrals for this service, and the money could be better used by organizations who were providing services that actually help prevent breast cancer. Now, mule that over for a moment. An private organization who's sole goal in exsistance is to fight breast cancer, determines that they would rather send their money to an organization who provides services to fight breast cancer. That simple. Not a complicated desicision. A fiscal decision based on where the money is going to has been made. Very responsible? Well, according to all of the contreversay on the news, not so much. If a person strictly listened to media views and initial reactions of individuals with out knowing the facts, one would assume it is completely irrisponsible and against women's rights. Strange, this is an organization who's sole purpose of exsistance is to aid women in one of the most serious issues there is for women. And they are against women? What? The battle irrupted into a roar of discrimination that spanned from a war against birth control to flat out ambush on women as a whole. Then the informaiton that the VP was prolife became relevant some how and it became a "Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice" discussion, and in the end, Susan B Komen foundation caved to the mass hysteria created by mis-informed individuals. The decision the foundation made in the begining, was based on finacially sound investments. Through the course of the frenzy, it became much, much more than that. Is anyone really going to argue that the majority of Planned Parenthood facilities do not offer mamograms? Why is an organization who's sole purpose is to prevent breast cancer, dispursing funds to an organization that does not provide services to prevent breast cancer. This in not a "slam" to Planned Parent hood. It sounds rather fiscally responisble to me, from a strictly business perspective. When the grass is green and the cow is fat, feel free to share the meat with all your neighbors. When the grass dies and the cow is thin, you better reconsider how far you can spread your tidings. Look at the core information. No one was trying to trample anyone's rights. Susan B. Komen for the cure never said "Don't go get birth control." I don't remember them saying, "For gosh sakes, don't go to Planned Parenthood."
On to a similar, but yet different topic. They sort of fit hand in hand, but go much further into trampling all over our "constiutional rights" and our "religious freedoms". It is very discerning to me that the basis of the quarel regarding the health care mandetes, that have been heavily discussed in the news of late, has turned into a debate about whether or not the Catholic Church is for or against women's rights. What ever the church's beliefs are, which I'm pretty sure everyone in the country knows what they are, the issue here is whether or not this goes against the freedom of religion. Forget about birth control, forget about the day after pill, forget about abortion. The sole issue here is whether or not the government has the right to tell a religious institution they have do something that is against their belief system. This isn't about how many Catholic women are currently on birth control. It's not about Catholics not caring about women or their employees at these various organizations or businesses. Believe me, anyone who works at or goes to school at a Catholic institution, is going to be able to find birth control and resources to get that birth control, somewhere else. I mean, come on, they can go to Planned Parenthood, right? Anyway, the issue every citizen in America needs to be paying attention to is that the government is trying to force a religious instituition to provide coverage for something that they do not agree with. We have seen this in the news lately with several issues involving the Catholic Church. There is really no point in discussing what all of the various issues are and where the beliefs lie, because as I said, the bottom line is the govenment is trying to tell a religious organization to go against its beliefs, whether that is with covering birth control or any other issue. When there were groups who rose up against "religious" celebrations in schools, such as Christmas Parties, etc. Most schools put a stop to them. Why, because it infringed on the religious beliefs of those individuals (or their choice to not have religious beliefs, how ever you want to look at it). I have heard the statement regarding this not being an infringement of religious beliefs because it can be shown to be a sound medical practice. There are many religions that do not believe in the use of medicine or major medical procedures. Although I have heard many debates through out the years over it, as far as I know, no one has told those indviduals that they MUST use medicine. If I am of one of those religious organizations, when it comes time to vaccitnate my children for school, I can contest the notion of having to have them vacinated based on religious freedom. Does that mean that every member of that religious organization adhere's to those beliefs of the organization? Of course not. But the core organization, not the followers, can not be told to change its beliefs, or to enforce practices upon its followers that do not align with its beliefs. If we begin to destroy the freedom of a religious establishment to adhere to a belief system they hold sacred, than what happens to our constitutional rights as a whole. I may not agree with what other religions believe or what they teach, but it does not give me the right to tell them they no longer have the power to practice what they believe in.
In the end, I am not going to go into an "I am of the. . . political party", or "I am of the . . .religious beliefs". It really isn't the point here. Not every decsion to donate is based on religious or political motivation in its orginal form. Not every rights violation is based around a notion to destroy the rights of women. Some times (amazingly enough) its not about women's rights at all. But in stead, the rights of some other group to do what they see is in their best intrest. I know, its shocking that there may be other groups or organizations that have the right to have rights besides the women's groups. However, as far as I know, I live in the United States, I am an American, and I do have the right to have a voice and an opinion on topics, whether those topics are religion, women's rights or many other things.
Finally, although I do not agree with the fact that Susan B. Komen Foundation has decided to go ahead and fund Planned Parenthood (an this has NOTHING to do with BIRTH CONTROL, it is simple based on a fiscal fact that why would you send donations to an organization that is not providing services that help your cause), I will continue to donate for Breast Cancer. I will continue to where a pink ribbon from time to time. Why, because we have rights in this country. This foundation has the right to donate their money where they feel it is most useful (although I don't believe this to be a wise fiscal choice, it wasn't mine to make), Planned Parenthood has the right to use its funds how it sees fit, and I have the right to send my money where ever I so choose. I also maintain that regardless of how many Catholic women are on birth control, or how many Catholics in general feel that these services are ok, it is the right of the Catholic church as a religious organization to say that it is against their belief system and they cannot abandon their beliefs. Take all of this for what it is worth, because, as with any opinion, it is just the thoughts running around in my head. I will never tell anyone they have to believe in my way of thinking, after all, wouldn't that be a violation of another persons rights?
