- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -

« News Home

Why is abortion part of the health-care debate?

Published: Sun, December 6, 2009 @ 12:00 a.m.

Why is abortion part of the health-care debate?


Being a man, I’ll never have to decide on having an abortion. The last thing I would ever do is try to make that decision for a woman. I also don’t want to see some senator or congressman make that choice. It seems that the same people who are trying to kill health-care reform because it would put the government between you and your doctor, have no trouble putting themselves between you and your doctor. Also between you and your conscience.

Remember that any law is a two edged sword. It cuts both ways. If you give the government the power to make the decision to ban abortion, it then has the power to ask for abortion. As it is now that power rests with the person.

I think what they really want to do is put themselves between you an health care. Put themselves in the good grace of the insurance industry, from which they collect millions to run campaigns to get re-elected by people they don’t represent once elected. Elected by people more impressed by the PR at election time than what that person does after taking office. People who are only informed by 30 second commercials and who has the most lawn signs. People who have no idea of what it means to live free and what it costs to remain free.

What it costs is taking the time to stay informed and not just following the next talking point by the group you like. What it costs is being willing to let the other guy have his freedom so that you can have yours. What it also costs is being willing to help out the other person when he needs it, because you may need his help next. Right now the other person needs health care. While Christ didn’t say a thing about abortion, he did say that we are to help those in need.


New Springfield

Adoption is a double blessing


Unfortunately, I missed The Vindicator’s story and pictures about children who have been adopted. Fortunately, I read Mary Lou Jurina’s letter on Thanksgiving Day. In her letter she talked about the special qualities she believes adoptive parents have.

I appreciate her kind words. You see, I adopted a little boy last year from Vietnam. I do not however, think of myself as being extraordinary in any way. I always wanted to adopt a child, and at the age of forty eight, had the opportunity to become a parent for the first time.

Many people tell Christian how lucky he is; I believe the opposite to be true. I have learned much about humanity and life from him. That is quite a daunting task for a nine year old boy. I can only hope that as we take this journey together, I can teach him how to become the man I know he is meant to be. I feel truly blessed to have him in my life.



Let’s call them ‘people’


All week we heard about “30,000 “troops.” What exactly is a “troop” anyway? My dictionary defines it as “a group of persons, or a body of soldiers such as a company of infantry.”

One person is not a troop. When I was a Boy Scout, the troop to which I belonged was made up of about 30 scouts. By this measure, President Obama would be proposing to send 900,000 soldiers to Afghanistan.

Why don’t the military, the government, and the media start saying what is really meant? We’re not sending 30,000 troops into danger. We’re sending 30,000 people into danger. This deliberate misuse of language misleads the public by dehumanizing the people who have to fight and suffer in the conflict.



I’m dreaming of ...


In the spirit of the season, I would like to respectfully request publicly that the radio stations playing Christmas music cease and desist playing a number of songs I and others have found increasingly overplayed and annoying. While I realize there are other problems in the Mahoning Valley that are worth writing about, stale and fusty chestnuts that are being played every hour only add icing to the abysmal cake that is 2009 thus far.

The following songs are the worst offenders. If these songs could be limited to a twice a day rotation, it would be a tremendous improvement for those who have to listen to the seasonal fare on a daily basis:

Santa Claus is Coming to Town by Bruce Springsteen.

Happy Christmas (War is Over) by John Lennon and Yoko Ono

A Wonderful Christmas Time by Paul McCartney

Do They Know It’s Christmastime, Band Aid

Last Christmas by Wham!

Christmas in Sarajevo by TSO

That 90 percent of the Christmas music that is aired daily is from artists who are either dead or are on the Branson, Missouri, circuit does little to improve the dispositions of people who already have enough problems.

Christmas brings enough troubles without having to be like Haley Joel Osment from The 6th Sense every time I turn on the radio. Only in this case, it is “I hear dead people”.

Have a Merry Christmas,



Stop the madness


A vote for “Affordable Healthcare for America Act” is a vote for a power takeover of one sixth of our economy by the Obama administration, the loss of constitutional freedoms, the sending of our economy into a depression, the expanding of unemployment to about 20 percent, the reduction of Medicaid by $500 billion, the forcing of our youth to take insurance they don’t want or go to jail, the forcing of our doctors to quit their profession and the crushing of our small businesses with a big dose of taxes at critical recessionary time.

Stop the takeover madness before the great USA becomes a fourth rate country.




1Toulouse(6 comments)posted 5 years, 7 months ago

Paul Shanabarger, thank you! You said that perfectly!

Suggest removal:

2Nonsocialist(710 comments)posted 5 years, 6 months ago

I think what Paul Shanabarger is missing is that some folks do not want to pay for the extermination of human beings.

Personally, I feel that EFE (elective fetal extermination), otherwise known by the misnomer "abortion", should remain legal, but I sure want the "freedom" to not have my earnings stolen in an effort to fund this procedure.

I find Mr. Shanagarger's statement, "What it costs is being willing to let the other guy have his freedom so that you can have yours.", interesting. If you believe that your rights end when they begin to affect another, than you must be against EFE. EFE is the slaying of a human by another human. If you feel that EFE is justified because the human is not viable, than do you similarly favor the slaying of ill humans temporarily on life support? If you feel that EFE is justified because the human is inside and dependent upon another human, than is it ok to harm a physician or surgeon when they are doing internal exams?

The pro-EFE argument that "it's my body" is uncomprehendable. No, actually it's another body temporarily inside yours, invited into your body through your actions.

Additionally, the funding of EFE would divert funds from other causes, such as saving (rather than killing) lives by screening women for breast cancer in their 40's.

Suggest removal:

3Stan(9923 comments)posted 5 years, 6 months ago

"Christ didn’t say a thing about abortion, he did say that we are to help those in need."

You are so very right Paul . Jesus did say that we are to help those in need . Abortion wasn't mentioned because we weren't that barbaric back then . Right now the unborn need our help . Thousands are being ripped out of the womb every day . What a horrific way to die . They are condemned to death yet guilty of no crime .

Suggest removal:

4andersonathan(682 comments)posted 5 years, 6 months ago

Democrats want to prove once more they are they party of death.

Suggest removal:


HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2015 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes