In these times of high unemployment and dangerous deficits one issue has become so awful and dangerous to America that CBS news anchor Katie Couric has called for millions and millions of dollars to be spent on solving it. What is it? Preventing poor women from having babies, of course.
Newsbusters has Couric’s transcript:
This month marks the 50th anniversary of the birth control pill, a tiny tablet that revolutionized women’s health.
But before we break out the cake and streamers, we should remember the pill is still off limits to millions of American women.
According to the Guttmacher Institute, roughly 17.4 million low-income women need publicly-funded contraception but only 9.4 million are receiving it. As many as 8 million lack adequate care.
Couric is siding with those wonderful people at Planned Parenthood to rid the world of poor babies. You see, rich people can afford contraceptive abortifacients but poor people’s babies are still slipping through. Darn poor babies! This has really got to kill Planned Parenthood as nearly the entire purpose behind their founding was to prevent poor and minorities from reproducing.
I can’t help but see Couric as a modern day Cruella De Vil who just simply hates those Dalmations because there’s just too many of them and she’ll do whatever it takes to stop them.
You also have to wonder at how Planned Parenthood is trying to change the definition of contraception to “preventative medicine” as if pregnancy were a disease. Sheesh, everyone knows that babies aren’t a disease. They’re a punishment, just like our President says they are.
Update: Check out the Deacon’s Bench for his personal story about Katie Couric and Margaret Sanger.
May 15, 2010 at 1:08 pm
Wasn't there a Southern politician who discouraged government programs on the grounds that they encourage poor people to "breed"?
Ah, yes, here we go.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/23/bauer-stray/
The point that I'm trying to prove is that liberals are not alone in supposedly vilifying the poor.
May 15, 2010 at 3:47 pm
I find it hard to believe that there are people who buy into the kind of thinking in this article. Just because something supports your world view doesn't male it factual or even news-worthy.
And would some of you posters please refrain from telling/hoping/insinuating what is going to happen to others when they die? Judgement is not your job, and you are making yourself an idol by assuming that you know or have an influence on another individuals judgement. You don't like pro-choice people, fine. Leave thier souls out of it and just worry about your own.
May 16, 2010 at 11:56 pm
Who cares what gurgles out of it's face? – no one watches CBS News anymore anyways.
May 17, 2010 at 5:01 am
CBS seems to have had a concerted effort to praise Margaret Sanger and the pill on Mother's Day. Here's another video from CBS's Sunday morning show:
http://amyproctor.squarespace.com/blog/2010/5/10/cbs-notes-mothers-day-by-celebrating-anniversary-of-the-pill.html
May 19, 2010 at 1:10 pm
Amy,
I agree, but if you've seen other news channels, web sites, magazines, etc. you've see that the 50th anniversary of the "the pill" is being celebrated there, too. Time mag. had a cover story about the pill, which got me really fired up around the dinner table because the article sppeared to address the "Catholic issues" related to contraception by basically explaining how the pill used to be controversial, but isn't really anymore. Ugh.
To everyone engaging in this tiff about seemingly mismatched political and religious view: fiscally conservative government does not mean lack of social charity in my book. Rather, my family gives what we can to the charities that support the appropriate kinds of social charity (so our money goes to Catholic Charities not Planned Parenthood). Of course when we brag about our good works, that's our only reward, but having a candid, polite dicussion of ways we help does give those who might not understand the view that government doesn't have to do it all some solice: we're not against helping people in need; we're against having the government control our money because they often help causes with which we cannot morally support.
May 19, 2010 at 1:14 pm
Oh! Sorry about the messiness of my post…I'm trying to multi-task here. What I meant to say at the end there was this:
we're not against helping those in need; we're against having the government control our money because they often help causes *which* we cannot morally support.
Also, a little addition: has anyone read Pope Benedict's encyclial "Charity in Truth"? A rather solid read, but worth it. : )
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html