Rick Santorum on prenatal testing. This guy is a dangerous loon.

[SoonerPride]

Talk about practicing a "wrong theology."

I can understand his opposition to abortion. There's a wide range of opinions on that and no one is surprised to see a Republican candidate opposed to abortion. Fine.

But his quote about how President Obama thinks he knows more than you and wants to control your life is utter farce and complete irony in light of his new attack on prenatal testing. No prenatal testing. No contraception. He sure as hell wants to control women.

Finding out the health of the mother and the fetus is wrong?

Santorum is a frothy mix of religious zealot and idiot.

[Curly Bill]

Too bad he's not a community organizer as well. He'd be a shoe-in!

[badger]

He sure as hell wants to control women.

Don't a lot of men want to control women?

[Curly Bill]

Don't a lot of men want to control women?

If I find a Genie in a lamp that's wish #1!!

[SoonerPride]

Don't a lot of men want to control women?

They do. But not many of them run for president.

At least not in this century.

[KantoSooner]

It was a weird and telling comment from our boy Santorum. Essentially:

I'm against prenatal testing because, if the results show birth defects, some percentage of parents will use that knowledge and abort the fetus.

He ignores, of course, discovery of disease which might be treated, resulting in a healthy birth and life in favor of clamping down parental action.

This goes well beyond simple paternalism as has been the case in places like Japan where cancer patients were routinely not told their diagnoses lest they get discouraged. They were just treated by the God-doctors who were so much more intelligent than they. Nope. In Ricky's world, we are not merely preventing the parents from having knowledge lest they do something we don't agree with. We are preventing everyone from having knowledge. And that's the rub of it, folks.

Santorum: "Knowlege is evil. Ignorance is good."

And the words drip off his tongue.

The man is as dangerous as anyone I can recall since Josef Goebbels.

[badger]

I'm against prenatal testing because, if the results show birth defects, some percentage of parents will use that knowledge and abort the fetus.

There is a prenatal test that has a high false-positive (and at the same time, a high false-negative) rate that he might be referring to.

However, if a parent is determined to get this test done, it'll get done regardless of legislation. I mean, look at China. They get ultrasounds to determine baby gender en masse, because a majority still believe "boys are better." And who can argue? They're better at staying single, they're better at being outshined by their many, many male peers, they're better at requiring families to save up big arse doweries so that a matchmaker can screw them...

[badger]

I'm against prenatal testing because, if the results show birth defects, some percentage of parents will use that knowledge and abort the fetus.

There is a prenatal test that has a high false-positive (and at the same time, a high false-negative) rate that he might be referring to.

However, if a parent is determined to get this test done, it'll get done regardless of legislation. I mean, look at China. They get ultrasounds to determine baby gender en masse, because a majority still believe "boys are better." And who can argue? They're better at staying single, they're better at being outshined by their many, many male peers, they're better at requiring families to save up big arse doweries so that a matchmaker can screw them...

[SanJoaquinSooner]

If the pubs make this race about abortion, birth control, same sex marriage, and other social issues, they'll lose 30 states, including most of the big ones.

A focus on the economic opportunity is their best shot.

[KantoSooner]

Badger, I would expect people to have a grasp of the technology they are using to make a decision. If you get a 'positive', I would expect you'd talk with your doctor and for that doctor to say, 'Don't panic, this thing is only right slightly more often than it's wrong' and for the parents to then make an informed decision. (more testing, wait a few weeks and retest, change tests, look at other indicators, etc). Or simply ignore the test if it's that unreliable. Life is a crap shoot.
I prefer to give the parents the right to choose rather than walling them off from information that they may use badly.

(p.s. you might be able, this fall, to meet my 20 year old....who gave us an autism scare in utero...and will be going to college this fall. Yes, a bit late, but that's due to an acting gig on a very crappy daytime soap in Japan, not autism.)

[C&CDean]

They do. But not many of them run for president.

At least not in this century.

Do you think before you type? Sheez dude. Let's see, we've got a handful of the biggest rich megalomaniacs on the planet running for prez. But none of them wish to control women. Are you high?

[diverdog]

The mainstream establishment Republicans are crapping bricks right now. Santorium could destroy their party. I think the convention could really interesting and it would not surprise me in the least if they do not get Christie to run.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

Over the past generation, women have gone from being second-class citizens to being full and equal partners in American life. The ability of women to make their own reproductive decisions—on both birth control and abortion—has been a central part of this revolution. Defending and expanding on these gains should not be a side-issue for liberals: It is a core component of our political philosophy. If conservatives are going to pursue a rollback of women’s rights, then there must be no doubt that liberals are prepared to make a strong and unambiguous stand.


The Editors of The New Republic

[SicEmBaylor]

Over the past generation, women have gone from being second-class citizens to being full and equal partners in American life. The ability of women to make their own reproductive decisions—on both birth control and abortion—has been a central part of this revolution. Defending and expanding on these gains should not be a side-issue for liberals: It is a core component of our political philosophy. If conservatives are going to pursue a rollback of women’s rights, then there must be no doubt that liberals are prepared to make a strong and unambiguous stand.


The Editors of The New Republic

I hate characterizing these sorts of issues as "womens' rights" because it somewhat implies that these rights are special rights given to one group or another because of their race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. Everything from abortion to gay marriage to freedom of religion shouldn't be characterized as a right belonging to one group or another -- it should be characterized under the general umbrella of personal liberty and/or civil rights (though I hate that term).

If people focus on expanding individual liberty then the rest of these issues take care of themselves. If we reject the notion that the government has the power to dictate what we can or cannot do (so long as we are not harming others) then the rest just takes care of itself.

[SCOUT]

The man is as dangerous as anyone I can recall since Josef Goebbels.

Try not to be so understated.

[TUSooner]

Do you think before you type? Sheez dude. Let's see, we've got a handful of the biggest rich megalomaniacs on the planet running for prez. But none of them wish to control women. Are you high?

yabbut... they like to control them one at a time (3 at the most).

[SicEmBaylor]

Try not to be so understated.

It's not that big of a stretch.

[SCOUT]

It's not that big of a stretch.

Yes it is. I am not a Santorum supporter, by the way. But, hyperbole is what it is.

[hawaii 5-0]

"A woman voting for a Republican is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders" --------Graffiti in Atlanta.


5-0

[sappstuf]

I find it humorous that the same people that supported Obamacare are scared to death of a possible Santorumcare. What, did you think a Dem would be president forever?

I'm still hoping the SCOTUS throws it all out.