When I was growing up, most cars didn't have seat belts. I can remember driving down the street in our tank -- uh, car -- a '64 Chevy Impala, with my parents. No one had seat belts in those days. It's almost a little surreal to think about that today. Now, there are penalties for not having everyone in your car belted in. If an accident occurs and a child dies as a result of not being belted in, charges can be filed against the person responsible. As a mom, I was obsessive about infant car seats being belted in and painstakingly reading the instructions (and you know I hate reading instructions!)on how to install toddler seats. My children developed the habit of putting on seat belts as soon as they got into a vehicle. Most parents today are obsessive about making sure their children are safe in the car. So, we spend a lifetime doing that daily ritual, but when our kids get onto a school bus, there are no seat belts. Why are we okay with that? Is the cost factor worth the lives of children?
In our school district, as in many, parents are required to pay a transportation fee for their children to ride the bus to school. Between this fee and taxes, it would seem that seat belts should be in the budget. Perhaps some of Mr. Obama's health care bill costs could be cut if we had fewer injuries of children in school bus crashes.
After many fatal bus accidents,some people have begun to take notice. A research grant was awarded to the University Transportation Center for Alabama. I find this ironic. $300,000.00 was provided for a three-year pilot program. I'm not sure why we need a pilot program and dedicated research to tell us that children loose in a bus are not safe. We've all read the news reports of kids on buses getting up and causing problems, bullies, and other reasons school bus drivers have been distracted. Doesn't it make sense to provide safety belts for all children on buses for their safety and the safety of others? Wouldn't this allow the driver to pay more attention to the road and the actual driving of the bus, rather than having his or her eyes on the rearview mirror all the time the bus is moving? It makes perfect sense to me that rule number one on every school bus should be to buckle in. If a child is caught out of the seat belt, the bus doesn't move until they are back in. It wouldn't take long to train a bus full of children to stay in their seatbelts. Peer pressure is great in this respect. If a child is warned a few times, then they are no longer allowed to ride the bus for a period of time and a parent must find some other way to get them transported to school. This would keep everyone safer, and there wouldn't be kids getting up in a moving bus. There would be far less problems with bullying or injuries caused by quick stops or fender benders on the buses and our children would have a fighting chance if a bus were to have a rollover accident.
This seems like a no-brainer to me, but the experts have to do a study and report back a few years from now. They want to make sure their data is accurate. While they "get it right", I wonder if that time table will affect the lives (or shorten them) of some children around the country before seat belts become the norm. Why not cut to the chase and enact laws now that bus drivers must follow, just as parents do in cars every day? Is it fair to hold parents to a higher standard than a school bus driver? Is it reasonable or ethical to counter the due diligence of parents in their everyday routine with haphazard and downright dangerous conditions on the buses that transport their children to school each day? In my opinion, we should demand seat belts on our school buses and not take no for an answer. What is more important than the safety of our children? We can cut financial corners some other place. School buses should not even be manufactured without safety harnesses/seat belts.
For those of you with babies or small children, this is going to become a very important issue for you before you know it. Make your communities and local school districts aware of it now and your children will be safe later. It's hard enough to let them go off to school alone with they are little. They need to get there and get home safely.
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Monday, June 8, 2009
The Irony of Life and Death
I'm finding some irony in the story of the abortion doctor, Dr. George Tiller. He was shot to death during a church service in which he was an usher. I don't know as much about the Lutheran church as I do about my own faith, but I do know that it's odd that someone who believes in God and the Bible and goes to church could go to work the next day and take the lives of innocent babies. Dr. Tiller was much-hated and equally well-respected in his community. Some felt he was providing a service. Others felt he was simply a murderer. He opted, unlike most pro-choice doctors, to do abortions in the final trimester of a pregnancy. What this means is that the babies he aborted would actually have been viable had they been allowed to be born. Even some who are in favor of the choice to have an abortion felt that was wrong.
Back in 1992, peaceful protests were conducted outside of his clinic for 45 days. 2,700 people were arrested. That didn't have much impact on his resolution to continue what he was doing. In 1993, Dr. Tiller was shot in both arms by someone who was trying to stop the carnage. Apparently, that did not cause the doctor to stop doing what he so obviously believed in. I saw an interview in which he stated that he did it as a service to women and that the abortions were "medically necessary". The actual percentage of medically necessary abortions is very small, by some estimates less than 1 percent, while millions of abortions take place every year. His argument was that it was more risky to go through a pregnancy. We are all entitled to our opinions, but this didn't seem like a rational argument to me.
In his controversial appearance at Notre Dame University commencement this year, our President, Barack Obama, stated that adoption should be more available and there should be fewer abortions. I will confess that I was impressed with his speech and how he addressed the issue. I was pleasantly surprised that he was able to come out and say what he did so diplomatically. I hope people were listening. While I am not naive enough to think that abortion could or would be banned entirely, I think with education about options and the dangers of abortion, as well as prevention of unwanted pregnancies, we could reduce the need for abortions in our country, just as we have reduced the spread of AIDS.
I find it ironic, as well, that abortion providers will quote statistics about death in childbirth, but won't talk about death related to abortion. You also won't hear about the aftermath. I saw a bumper sticker once which said it all; Abortion - One dead, one wounded. No one talks about how a woman feels after she has had her baby forcefully removed from her body. In doing both post-abortion counseling and neo-natal bereavement counseling, I found that in either case women felt the same, whether their child had died as a result of a planned abortion or as the result of a spontaneous abortion (miscarriage). They felt violated. They felt empty. They felt guilt. They felt regret. In one counseling session years after an abortion, a woman told me "I look at my kids and I think 'That baby was one of them too'." She told me she would never be able to forgive herself. I'm not sure that is what she had in mind when she sought to end her pregnancy. She was confused about options. She was alone. She was told it was "pregnancy tissue". She stated, "They told me it would all be over very quickly, but it will never be over."
I understand that there will always be cases when an argument can be made for abortion; rape, incest, age, mental incapacity, etc. However, abortion should not be able to be used as a birth control option and a woman shouldn't be railroaded by someone who has a vested interest in the outcome (or income) of her pregnancy. Abortion providers make billions (with a B) per year on aborting unplanned babies. Money talks. If a woman who wanted an abortion was able to see her baby on ultrasound prior to the procedure, my guess is that there would be many fewer procedures. When the child is discussed as "the products of conception" or "pregnancy tissue", it becomes easy to disassociate. When you see fingers and toes, arms and legs, a beating heart -- it becomes much more difficult to view your child as "pregnancy tissue". The gift of life is supreme. There is no greater gift. A woman doesn't have to parent to give the gift of life. It's no longer shameful to be pregnant out of wedlock or to carry a baby to term as a single woman. What greater gift could be given to that child or to the couples or singles who strive to have a family, but are unable?
Our President has nominated Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. Kudos to him for nominating a minority woman to the bench. It's about time. However, we don't yet know her stance on abortion. Pay attention. Let your congressmen and women know how you feel about her confirmation as she reveals her thoughts. There are five Catholics on the bench of the Supreme Court of our land. Two are Jewish. The rest are Christians of Protestant denominations. There's another irony. This would seem to indicate a value for life, a respect for the Bible, and a call to obey our ten commandments; one of which says "Thou shalt not kill". I have always felt that if we all obey the "golden rule", "Do unto others what you would have them do unto you", the rest of the commandments would fall into that category and would be easy to follow. I don't think any of us would choose to have been aborted. Look around you and ask yourself "What if...that person had been aborted?". What would we have lost?
An unplanned pregnancy is inconvenient, difficult, and sometimes embarrassing. To compound it by taking the life of a child who was never given a choice isn't the answer. As women, we need to stand up and be heard. Women's rights have come full circle. Now we have too many. This year, 70% of the college graduates were women. Women are a powerful lobby. Somehow, we have to stick together as women and take care of our own, and nurture the lives of our babies. I do not condemn women who have chosen abortion. It's a difficult position to find yourself in and we have all made mistakes that are regrettable -- mistakes that can't be taken back. I do condemn those who make a profit by taking a life. If someone assassinates a president, he is sent to death row. What if one of those aborted babies was destined to be our president? Or perhaps a gifted musician who touched many lives, or a doctor who saved them? What if Mother Theresa, Martin Luther King, Ronald Reagan, Rosa Parks, Caesar Chavez, or our Pope had their lives taken early? Or what if they had never lived? I don't think, as mere humans, we have the ability or the right to make such "choices".
If a woman is in a car accident and is 8 months pregnant and her baby is killed, someone gets charged with manslaughter. If that same woman walks into Dr. Tiller's office for an abortion at 8 months gestation, we are told it's her choice and her "right" to terminate that life. Why is there a distinction in the same life? What's wrong with this picture? And what happened to the Hippocratic Oath,in which a physician makes a promise to "do no harm"? As a nation, we need to reassess our values and place some restrictions on the ability for anyone to make a hasty decision to take a life. Roe v. Wade, which defines our law of the land concerning abortion, is now opposed by the woman whose case brought it into being. Another irony. If we don't respect life, we can't expect our lives to be respected. What is the value of a life?
Back in 1992, peaceful protests were conducted outside of his clinic for 45 days. 2,700 people were arrested. That didn't have much impact on his resolution to continue what he was doing. In 1993, Dr. Tiller was shot in both arms by someone who was trying to stop the carnage. Apparently, that did not cause the doctor to stop doing what he so obviously believed in. I saw an interview in which he stated that he did it as a service to women and that the abortions were "medically necessary". The actual percentage of medically necessary abortions is very small, by some estimates less than 1 percent, while millions of abortions take place every year. His argument was that it was more risky to go through a pregnancy. We are all entitled to our opinions, but this didn't seem like a rational argument to me.
In his controversial appearance at Notre Dame University commencement this year, our President, Barack Obama, stated that adoption should be more available and there should be fewer abortions. I will confess that I was impressed with his speech and how he addressed the issue. I was pleasantly surprised that he was able to come out and say what he did so diplomatically. I hope people were listening. While I am not naive enough to think that abortion could or would be banned entirely, I think with education about options and the dangers of abortion, as well as prevention of unwanted pregnancies, we could reduce the need for abortions in our country, just as we have reduced the spread of AIDS.
I find it ironic, as well, that abortion providers will quote statistics about death in childbirth, but won't talk about death related to abortion. You also won't hear about the aftermath. I saw a bumper sticker once which said it all; Abortion - One dead, one wounded. No one talks about how a woman feels after she has had her baby forcefully removed from her body. In doing both post-abortion counseling and neo-natal bereavement counseling, I found that in either case women felt the same, whether their child had died as a result of a planned abortion or as the result of a spontaneous abortion (miscarriage). They felt violated. They felt empty. They felt guilt. They felt regret. In one counseling session years after an abortion, a woman told me "I look at my kids and I think 'That baby was one of them too'." She told me she would never be able to forgive herself. I'm not sure that is what she had in mind when she sought to end her pregnancy. She was confused about options. She was alone. She was told it was "pregnancy tissue". She stated, "They told me it would all be over very quickly, but it will never be over."
I understand that there will always be cases when an argument can be made for abortion; rape, incest, age, mental incapacity, etc. However, abortion should not be able to be used as a birth control option and a woman shouldn't be railroaded by someone who has a vested interest in the outcome (or income) of her pregnancy. Abortion providers make billions (with a B) per year on aborting unplanned babies. Money talks. If a woman who wanted an abortion was able to see her baby on ultrasound prior to the procedure, my guess is that there would be many fewer procedures. When the child is discussed as "the products of conception" or "pregnancy tissue", it becomes easy to disassociate. When you see fingers and toes, arms and legs, a beating heart -- it becomes much more difficult to view your child as "pregnancy tissue". The gift of life is supreme. There is no greater gift. A woman doesn't have to parent to give the gift of life. It's no longer shameful to be pregnant out of wedlock or to carry a baby to term as a single woman. What greater gift could be given to that child or to the couples or singles who strive to have a family, but are unable?
Our President has nominated Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. Kudos to him for nominating a minority woman to the bench. It's about time. However, we don't yet know her stance on abortion. Pay attention. Let your congressmen and women know how you feel about her confirmation as she reveals her thoughts. There are five Catholics on the bench of the Supreme Court of our land. Two are Jewish. The rest are Christians of Protestant denominations. There's another irony. This would seem to indicate a value for life, a respect for the Bible, and a call to obey our ten commandments; one of which says "Thou shalt not kill". I have always felt that if we all obey the "golden rule", "Do unto others what you would have them do unto you", the rest of the commandments would fall into that category and would be easy to follow. I don't think any of us would choose to have been aborted. Look around you and ask yourself "What if...that person had been aborted?". What would we have lost?
An unplanned pregnancy is inconvenient, difficult, and sometimes embarrassing. To compound it by taking the life of a child who was never given a choice isn't the answer. As women, we need to stand up and be heard. Women's rights have come full circle. Now we have too many. This year, 70% of the college graduates were women. Women are a powerful lobby. Somehow, we have to stick together as women and take care of our own, and nurture the lives of our babies. I do not condemn women who have chosen abortion. It's a difficult position to find yourself in and we have all made mistakes that are regrettable -- mistakes that can't be taken back. I do condemn those who make a profit by taking a life. If someone assassinates a president, he is sent to death row. What if one of those aborted babies was destined to be our president? Or perhaps a gifted musician who touched many lives, or a doctor who saved them? What if Mother Theresa, Martin Luther King, Ronald Reagan, Rosa Parks, Caesar Chavez, or our Pope had their lives taken early? Or what if they had never lived? I don't think, as mere humans, we have the ability or the right to make such "choices".
If a woman is in a car accident and is 8 months pregnant and her baby is killed, someone gets charged with manslaughter. If that same woman walks into Dr. Tiller's office for an abortion at 8 months gestation, we are told it's her choice and her "right" to terminate that life. Why is there a distinction in the same life? What's wrong with this picture? And what happened to the Hippocratic Oath,in which a physician makes a promise to "do no harm"? As a nation, we need to reassess our values and place some restrictions on the ability for anyone to make a hasty decision to take a life. Roe v. Wade, which defines our law of the land concerning abortion, is now opposed by the woman whose case brought it into being. Another irony. If we don't respect life, we can't expect our lives to be respected. What is the value of a life?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)