- ‹ previous
- 5772 of 8941
- next ›
Texas Tots for Sale
Ok, so Texas isn't really selling tots -- they're selling babies. Well, maybe. Republican State Senator Dan Patrick recently proposed the Adoption Incentive Program, which some are calling the "Texas Baby Purchasing Act of 2007." Patrick's bill calls for the development of a program to encourage adoption over abortion and mandates that every woman who chooses to carry her baby and then yield her parental rights in lieu of having an abortion receives $500. I am pretty sure this type of proposed legislation is a first (if I'm wrong, do let me know) although obviously not the first tactic to be used by pro-lifers to coerce women into not having abortions. There are many. Just last week, Nicole wrote about South Carolina passing a bill that "requires women to view their own ultrasounds before having the procedure."
So, besides the fact that it is just creepy to buy and sell babies and that the price isn't really right ($500 is just $.07 an hour to carry a child for nine months), as the folks over at Culture Kitchen point out, isn't it illegal? Apparently, the Texas senator dealt with this minor barrier. The act reads: "Penal Code, does not apply to the grant or acceptance of money under this section." Now, surely this legislation is unlikely to go anywhere and is pure wingnuttery, but it is definitely symbolic. As the Huffington Post notes, this act is "reflective of just how little 'pro-life' politicians and leaders actually care about women." The Huff Post has more great insight about this program. Worth a read.
As a male of the species, I still think it's playing into the hands of the anti-abortionists to use their term, "pro-life."
Are they protesting the deaths in Iraq--of our soldiers and thousands and thousands of Iraqi non-combatant nationals?
Are they protesting the indeterminate detention of other human beings in our prisons, our "black sites," etc.?
Are they advocating and supporting the adoption of pre-existing children? (That's children who can walk and talk--the ones who are hardest to "place.")
Are they mentoring children in the slums of our nation? And lobbying for better schools for those children, living wages for their parents, or mothers alone?
Are they donating to poverty-fighting NGOs the world over? Or protesting the genocide in Darfur?
If they're not doing those kinds of things, then they are definitely NOT pro-life. They're just anti-abortion. And, more than likely, any time you see males running these anti-abortion efforts, they're merely attempting to wrest the control of a woman's body and from her. Male control and domination, masquerading as a "Christian" concern for "the unborn."
Wouldn't it be better to pass a law giving $500 to the adoption service that successfully places the baby, or to the adoptive parents? Or to schools for sensible sex education?