Freedom strikes again in Oklahoma

[Empty Hands]

The Oklahoma Senate approved several bills Monday that opponents say would make it more difficult or uncomfortable for women to get abortions, including one that would require women seeking the procedures early in their pregnancies to undergo an invasive form of ultrasound.

LINK

I'm curious how a political movement that uses defining rhetoric of freedom and lack of interference from government can justify these sorts of laws?

 

[dancingalone]

Because the Republican party has been taken over to some extent by social conservatives and the religious right. People who really care about small government and individual freedoms have been forced to use avenues like Tea Parties to express their views.

I wish the GOP would shed itself of the social agenda and go back to being the party of limited government and fiscal conservatism.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

That would be the Libertarian Party now.

 

[dancingalone]

Maybe, Bob. The Libertarians have their dark side too with the anti-government radicals and the legalize marijuana at all costs crowd.

There's a lot of people who feel unrepresented by any party.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

People say the GOP needs to get back to their roots.....well, they were founded by a highly paid corporate lawyer who became President before launching a war over tax collection. They were the party of corporate subsidies who did stupid things like pay railroads to lay hundreds of miles of zigzaging tracks. A pure original GOP would have been bailing out every Fortune 1000 company within reach.

The DNC is so far from the principles of it's founders that they wouldn't recognize the party today.

The Libs are self-destructing fast and despite being the largest 3rd part have yet to crack the Federal level in over 30 years.

The Tea Party movement reminds me a bit of Ross Perots momentum his first run, but lacks a leader who can pull the group solidly together. Add a Forbes-type to fund it and a charismatic front runner to lead it, and it could be a solid threat. Then again, Perot was a solid threat. Holding that cohesion together for the long haul....that's the challenge.

 

[dancingalone]

I don't know much about the Modern Whig Party, but reading over their basic platform sounds interesting.

http://www.modernwhig.org/

FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY — The Modern Whig philosophy is to empower the states with the resources to handle their unique affairs.

ENERGY INDEPENDENCE — Reduce dependence on foreign oil by developing practical sources of alternative energy. This will have the simultaneous effect of changing the national security dynamic.

EDUCATION/SCIENTIFIC ADVANCEMENT — Increased public and private emphasis on fields such as space, oceanic, medical and nanotechnology. Also, providing common-sense solutions to enhance our educational system from pre-school to university-level studies.

STATES RIGHTS — Each state can generally determine its course of action based on local values and unique needs.

SOCIAL PROGRESSION — Government should refrain from legislating morality.

VETERANS AFFAIRS — Vigilant advocacy relating to the medical, financial, and overall well-being of our military families and veterans.

 

[CoryKS]

LINK

I'm curious how a political movement that uses defining rhetoric of freedom and lack of interference from government can justify these sorts of laws?

Which political movement are we talking about? The Republicans IMO are just as willing to interfere with people's lives as the Democrats, it's just a question of the manner in which. The libertarians would be less likely to support these measures and the Tea Party isn't relevant because they are a mixed bag united for a single purpose, which ain't abortion.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

From Page 2 of the article:

The other abortion measures would require women to complete a lengthy questionnaire before receiving an abortion, mandate certain signs be posted in an abortion clinics and prevent so-called "wrongful-life" lawsuits in cases where a parent might argue that a child with birth defects or other problems would have been better off aborted. Another bill would prohibit state insurance exchanges, created under the new federal health care law, from covering abortions.

Wait, wait a second...wrongful life lawsuits? The Oklahoma legislature has decided that a made-up type of lawsuit warrants abortion mandates? In all the discussion, argument, and debate around abortion, this is the first time I've ever heard of a "wrongful-life lawsuit". Nevermind that such a claim would never survive summary judgment, let's pretend it's an actual concern long enough to run these abortion mandates through!

The rest of the bill is disturbing enough, of course. I mean, for gods' sakes, vaginal probes? I just found this particular portion illustrative of the heroic lack of shame on the part of the state congressman who back this bill.

 

[Empty Hands]

The Republicans IMO are just as willing to interfere with people's lives as the Democrats, it's just a question of the manner in which.

I agree with you. However, the fundamental rhetoric coming from the conservatives generally and the Republicans is based on freedom. In a stronghold of conservatism and Republicanism, these measures were put through, which are fundamentally unfree. Similar measures, such as the South Dakota ban, have occurred in other strongholds of conservatism.

So...exactly what freedom do we get here? Only "morally approved" freedoms?

 

[CoryKS]

I agree with you. However, the fundamental rhetoric coming from the conservatives generally and the Republicans is based on freedom. In a stronghold of conservatism and Republicanism, these measures were put through, which are fundamentally unfree. Similar measures, such as the South Dakota ban, have occurred in other strongholds of conservatism.

So...exactly what freedom do we get here? Only "morally approved" freedoms?

In a word, yes. Both sides can - and do - say they are based on the concept of freedom. Doesn't mean it's true. Democrats as well use "liberal" rhetoric while adopting policies that are not very liberal at all. It's just that Republicans generally use it in a financial context while the Democrats use it on social policies.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

In a word, yes. Both sides can - and do - say they are based on the concept of freedom. Doesn't mean it's true. Democrats as well use "liberal" rhetoric while adopting policies that are not very liberal at all. It's just that Republicans generally use it in a financial context while the Democrats use it on social policies.

Pretty much agreed, but isn't abortion control more of a social policy than financial?

 

[Archangel M]

"Conservative" abortion policy is based in the belief that you are killing human life.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

"Conservative" abortion policy is based in the belief that you are killing human life.

Right, which sounds like a social, rather than financial, concern.