Gov. Greg Abbott’s attempt to champion himself as a fighter for individual liberties is under fire… from Gov. Abbott.
Abbott’s administration has dropped Planned Parenthood from its Medicaid program. Part of the official reason for this decision is due to controversial videos of Planned Parenthood clinics released earlier this year.
The only problem with this is that the videos have already been proven to be edited. So what other reason would the administration have for this decision? To prevent abortions.
Abbott is pro-life, like many of his fellow Texan Republicans. He does not believe in abortion, and he skirts around saying whether he believes in the exceptions for abortion, such as rape, incest and other situations.
It appears that the overall focus of defunding Planned Parenthood is to end abortions in the state of Texas. The problem with this logic is, by defunding Planned Parenthood, he would not be ending abortion altogether. He would only be making it much more difficult to have a safe one.
There are also other negative consequences to Planned Parenthood being shut down.
Data shows that when Planned Parenthood clinics close down, the number of unintended pregnancies rises. The reason for this is because the expectation that other clinics would take the responsibility of reproductive healthcare does not always come true.
Abbott’s claim of protecting women’s health and individual liberties not only paint him as a liar, but a dangerous one. He is not protecting reproductive healthcare by defunding Planned Parenthood, and in fact, he is not only affecting women with this decision.
“(Planned Parenthood offers) women’s reproductive healthcare, abortion care (and) birth control,” said Women’s Resource Center Program Coordinator Malkia Hutchinson. “They provide STD screenings for men, vasectomies for men, and they have a full range of services for people (other than) cis-gendered women.”
Not every woman is outraged by this decision, however. The pro-life movement has seen this as a victory for what they view as a preservation of life. They view the fetus as an individual person, and the termination of that fetus is considered to be equivalent to murder.
“Even though (abortion) is legal in this country, it doesn’t make it right,” biochemistry and biomedical engineering alumni Isabel Rubio said. “I do believe that we should defund Planned Parenthood because of what they’re doing: they’re killing babies. They’re ripping apart babies in the womb.”
Regardless of one’s view of abortion, defunding Planned Parenthood is a dangerous path to take. This will affect UH students because many rely on the healthcare services provided by Planned Parenthood.
“I know students who have come who needed help getting resources for finding a healthcare provider because they were uninsured or their parents were uninsured,” Hutchinson said. “If something like defunding (Planned Parenthood) would happen, I think it would be a larger burden to getting students who come to us (who are looking to) just be pointed in some kind of direction in where they can get a gynecological exam; that shuts off one resource that we have to help them.”
Hopefully, those students searching for the resources that they need can find that help at the University Health Center. There’s no doubt the Health Center will be receiving more patients looking for services that are no longer available to them.
I hope for their sake they can find that help safely.
Opinion columnist Sam Pichowsky is a political science sophomore and may be reached at [email protected]
PP will not shut down. The State funds are a small part of the budget. Abortion supporters will fund the organization. A rather shallow argument that unfunding was prompted based on edited video as the sheer volume of evidence is undeniable. Regardless, I do not see where killing our young betters society. The State should not be involved in the culling of mankind through sponsorship using our tax dollars.
Good job writing an Opinion article that cites a quote from an opposing opinion. However, when you say: Abbott is pro-life, like many of his fellow Texan Republicans,” you made no mention of Democrats who oppose abortion.
My take on all this … the issue here is not the people pro-abortion or pro-life (or whatever the politically terms of the day happen to be), it about making people who silently avoid the subject have to think about abortion.
You’ll never see me out in front of PP with a sign, but I do agree with firestacker in that state and federal funds should not directly go a “business” like PP. Like any other business which sells services for a fee, they should create a budget based on projected “sales” and create a competitive business model which thrives under responsible management.
Nonetheless, PP apparently offer services that are in great demand. And, to be clear, I don’t mind “government” money in the form of individual benefits being spent there. If a person qualifies for Medicare/Medicaid benefits and that is the health care vender they choose to use, then that should be their right.
Having said that, I think the “stick in the craw” for many people is if PP is just getting government checks issued to prop up their business. Like most people, I don’t know the real numbers flying around here, but if PP is setting a budget, and basing executive salaries, etc., off a false budget then we don’t see a true face of a PP.
I’ve never used PP for any services so I don’t know the quality of their work firsthand, but from most articles I’ve read where the writer seems in favor of PP’s product and services they seem to do a top-notch job. That would lead me to think they would do very well standing on their own financial feet.
As for the video’s being edited, most of the videos in our life we watch are edited — for brevity or effect. Watch any newscast, and you’ll see edited “packages” one after another. Even stirring documentaries are edited. Think of times you were guilted into watching someone’s vacation, wedding or one-year old’s birthday party videos that were unedited. Watching those can make you wish your mother had been a Planned Parenthood customer. Humor aside, I do understand the point, but the “edited” comment is mostly a straw-man case of argumentum ad hominem meant to diminish the message in those videos. It’s as if opponents are saying, if they are not full-length videos shot from a secret camera worn by the late Mother Theresa then nothing in them is legitimate.
What needs to be part of the editing argument, is to ask yourself, why are they edited. Is it “for effect” or to get a result? Of course it is. But, does the editing create a truth from a from a lie? For some, the editing does not really matter. Having said that, some of the conversations in those videos (some were edited and some were left running long enough to grasp the tone and content of the conversation), even if created under false pretenses, are cringeworthy. More disturbing are the facial expressions and laughter during these conversations. The videos play more like we are watching interviews filmed during the original series, Dexter.
Back to my original point, some people are pro-abortion and some oppose it (and both sides tend to make it known to anyone who will listen). But, I think many people are mostly apathetic these days, as long as they don’t have to think about it. These middle-grounders don’t like being forced out of their perfunctory. They don’t want mental images of Planned Parenthood’s after-product, much less that this “product” can be sold or traded.
It’s the unsaid agreement, don’t make me think about, and I won’t be vocal with my opponent. These people in the middle prefer to begrudgingly accept abortion is a legal option, but they also prefer to think (when forced to think) that these little fetuses get a better “send off” than a brighty-lit medical lab, suspended in a fluid-filled jar next to a cage of white mice; all awaiting to fulfill their bigger purpose — to better mankind with their unsolicited medical sacrifice.