Here is what rep. Cox wrote in a letter to the Oklahoman:
All of the new Oklahoma laws aimed at limiting abortion and contraception are great for the Republican family that lives in a gingerbread house with a two-car garage, two planned kids and a dog. In the real world, they are less than perfect.
As a practicing physician (who never has or will perform an abortion), I deal with the real world. In the real world, 15- and 16-year-olds get pregnant (sadly, 12-, 13- and 14-year-olds do also). In the real world, 62 percent of women ages 20 to 24 who give birth are unmarried. And in the world I work and live in, an unplanned pregnancy can throw up a real roadblock on a woman's path to escaping the shackles of poverty.
Yet I cannot convince my Republican colleagues that one of the best ways to eliminate abortions is to ensure access to contraception. A recent attempt by my fellow lawmakers to prevent Medicaid dollars from covering the “morning after” pill is a case in point. Denying access to this important contraceptive is a sure way to increase legal and back-alley abortions. Moreover, such a law would discriminate against low-income women who depend on Medicaid for their health care.
But wait, some lawmakers want to go even further and limit everyone's access to birth control by allowing pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions for contraception.
What happened to the Republican Party that I joined? The party where conservative presidential candidate Barry Goldwater felt women should have the right to control their own destiny? The party where President Ronald Reagan said a poor person showing up in the emergency room deserved needed treatment regardless of ability to pay? What happened to the Republican Party that felt government should not overregulate people until (as we say in Oklahoma) “you have walked a mile in their moccasins”?
Is my thinking too clouded by my experiences in the real world? Experiences like having a preacher, in the privacy of an exam room say, “Doc, you have heard me preach against abortion but now my 15-year-old daughter is pregnant, where can I send her?” Or maybe it was that 17-year-old foreign exchange student who said, “I really made a mistake last night. Can you prescribe a morning-after pill for me? If I return to my home country pregnant, life as I know it will be over.”
What happened to the Republican Party that felt that the government has no business being in an exam room, standing between me and my patient? Where did the party go that felt some decisions in a woman's life should be made not by legislators and government, but rather by the women, her conscience, her doctor and her God?
By the way Rep. Cox is also doctor who has delivered more than 800 babies. So he kind of knows what he's talking about.
Is this guy SURE he's in the right party?
On one hand, yeah, I guess it's a nice letter.
ReplyDeleteBut every time I see a Repub say something like this ("What happened to the GOP?" or "I didn't leave the party, the party left me"), all I can think is: If what you are saying is true, what took you so long to notice?
And why are you still a registered Republican?
DeleteI understand the concept of trying to change from within, but the GOP of today has repeatedly proven itself unwilling to even consider the most insignificant and minor changes.
DeleteThey have become a party of ideologues who care nothing for the citizens they supposedly represent or the job they were elected to perform. They will continue to oppose the very ideas they themselves proposed during the previous administration, obstruct every piece of worthwhile legislation, and maintain the grinding halt they have brought this country to by their obsessive need to hurt this President and anyone who supports him. They will continue to propose the same unsuccessful legislation over and over again and refuse to discuss ways to solve this country's real problems.
Furthermore, they have permitted the certifiable radicals of the far right to assume more and more control over our government.
I sincerely believe that the Republican Party has gone so far over the edge that nothing short of mass overhaul will restore them to sanity.
I am a woman. I will never vote for a Republican. This letter only convinces me that this doctor is too brainless see what has been perfectly clear for decades. Republicans are a threat to women.
ReplyDeleteRepublicans are increasingly a threat to anyone who isn't a wealthy, white, middle-aged, heterosexual, Christian male.
DeleteHow long before his fellow GOPpers start to trash this man?
ReplyDeleteTo answer his question, the old GOP got scared and lost their way. they were taken over by corporate financed, fake grassroots groups that gelled into the Teabaggers we see today.
This man is too sane and too grounded to be a GOPper, he needs to wise up and follow his brain, change parties and don't look back.
He's in the right party; at least the old school definition of what a republican was. The other nuts who call themselves republicans just haven't got the guts to change their new party's name to what they are now--fascists.
ReplyDeleteHow very sensible. It seems there's ONE Republican who actually cares about his fellow human beings.
ReplyDeleteAnd for that very reason will be ostracized.
DeleteSomething I never thought I would see: a Republican with common sense. Maybe he can make a difference.
ReplyDeleteThese are the Republicans I remember from my childhood. While I've never voted Republican, I have always respected the care and concern these conservatives of yore showed for our liberty. Their ability to compromise and work across the aisle often put Democrats' efforts to shame back in the day.
ReplyDeleteBut alas, guys like this, and Olympia Snowe, Alan Simpson, and so on, are an endangered species. The Tea Party's culture of willful idiocy has taken over the GOP. It's a real shame, because even if I don't always agree with those on the right, I know we need their sensible voices now more than ever.
This is what is needed by our politicians...common sense has left the GOP long, long ago. Electing a black man that is the definition of a true family man, is super educated, incredibly graceful, full of empathy, patriotic as hell, loves women,children & all races...and is basically a true human being of the world, nah....they can't stand it.
ReplyDeletePreacher:in the privacy of an exam room say, “Doc, you have heard me preach against abortion but now my 15-year-old daughter is pregnant, where can I send her?”
ReplyDeleteLegislator and DOCTOR: I could help her, but I won't. Maybe you should have gotten her BC.
Sorry, but I do not see so much there to hold him up for praise.
Send her to a relative, then after the baby is born adopt it. Or give it up for adoption.
DeleteSauce for the gander. You made your bed. Practice what you preach.
WTF? Did you just say that the Doctor should deny recommendation for an abortion provider to the preacher's daughter because her parent didn't get her birth control? Good Grief, you're worse than any GOPer...what to you recommend next? Any child of a republican be denied abortions because their parents' political party doesn't support abortion rights? Or would you be recommending denying abortions to anyone who naively believed in the rhythm method as the only appropriate birth control?
DeleteI really don't think that's your intent and, yes, it's frustrating the hypocrisy of a preacher who wishes to deny the choice to all until it becomes personal. But, statements like yours are just as hypocritical - deny them their health care because they didn't support your view. Creepy, veiled as progressive.
7:46? That is EXACTLY RIGHT! I couldn't possibly agree with you more.
DeleteI can say something about the above-related story.
First, MAYBE, just MAYBE (as unlikely as it might seem!) the preacher night actually see a glimmer of what a poor, or teenaged, pregnant woman goes through. That would make it a better world we live in. At least, it would be a start.
Second, if it isn't right to force ONE woman into slavery by pregnancy, it is WRONG to force ANY woman into slavery!
Slavery? Yes, slavery. That girl is/was in Oklahoma. The majority of the population - while not necessarily OPENLY doing so - would relegate this girl to sluthood and THAT would drastically reduce her chances at having a life with any meaning because no "DECENT" God fearing man would have her. (It's for DAMNED sure the parents of the FATHER wouldn't allow a marriage!) Think that wouldn't happen?
I lived through a part of the period when that was EXACTLY what happened to a girl who got pregnant. Damn blaming the BOY! He was just sowing wild oats, right?
Yeah. Right!
For those of you who might consider it just deserts, try to remember this: even ONE voice in the wilderness is one more than there was.
And the preacher will continue to rail against the very services he sought for his daughter.
DeleteHow many 'upstanding' members of the GOP have experienced personal events or relationships in their own lives that directly contradict what they legislate for everyone else.
It's okay for THEIR daughters to have abortions or THEIR children or siblings to marry same-sex partners, but no one else should have that same privilege.
How DO they sleep at night???
They preacher didn't ask for the contact information for an abortionist. He said "You've heard me preach against abortion, my daughter is pregnant, WHERE SHALL I SEND HER?"
DeleteThe reply I wrote is exactly what the preacher would say to a parishioner who came to him for the exact same advice.
Until that hypocrite says "give me the name and number of someone that can provide my daughter with an abortion" then my reply stands.
Let the hypocrite say it. Say it out loud. In plain and clear English.
And you better believe before I provided that info I would tell the preacher that abortion is now no longer a topic for the pulpit. If you get my drift.
It's all about slut shaming with the GOP. See, if you single girls didn't have sex you wouldn't need to worry about abortion and all that. See, it's your own fault. That's what these fools in the GOP think. It's just one of the reasons why young people are abandoning the GOP.
ReplyDeleteAnd yet there is no stud shaming because, well, boys will be boys. It's their elitist right to sow their wild oats before they settle down (and cheat on their wives).
DeleteRight, good ol' boys?
Your motto at the top of your page (by Gloria Steinem) is emblematic of the woes of our society today..."Morality is not determined by the church you attend nor the faith you embrace. It is determined by the quality of your character and the positive impact you have on those you meet along your journey."
ReplyDeleteSounds profound and touchy-feely, yet it's inherently wrong (if you believe in right and wrong). Character does not determine morality. Character can waiver, change, evolve or devolve.
The opposite is true. Morality determines character. Morality..."Conformity to the rules of right conduct" should be the basis of character. But since universal right and wrong are no longer en vogue, and have been replaced by relativistic beliefs, where each individual's concept of right is accepted, nobody is ever wrong, and everything can be justified. e.g., in my situation it's okay to kill a baby. I can justify it in my mind, based on my situation, therefore it is okay, right and moral.
Such a wavering and relative morality threatens the essence of morality since there is no longer a universal truth...like killing a baby is wrong.
Is stealing universally wrong, or can I deem it okay based on my relative situation? It seems relativism can’t work without evolving into anarchy because there is no longer such a thing as "wrong".
Our culture has shifted and now allows situational ethics to determine our sense of morality. The idea that it takes a village to raise a child is a chilling concept when everyone in the village has their own concept of right and wrong. I certainly don’t want that screwed up village raising my child.
I think you are missing the point or a lot of points. No one wants to "kill" babies. The fact is that women, all through history, and for all sorts of reasons have sometimes resorted to abortion. It is an issue between the woman and her conscience and should not be determined by others. Neither you nor I have any idea of what turmoil a woman might go through before making such a decision.
DeleteThe fact that this country lags far behind other industrialized countries in infant mortality is a disgrace and immoral in my opinion. The fact that the people of the United States are too brainwashed to recognize the need for universal health care is disturbing and immoral in my opinion. Whenever I am confronted by an anti-abortion person, I ask what that person's position is on universal health care. How I respond depends on the answer. If someone is adamant about saving a fetus but would do nothing to provide adequate and affordable health care for the child or its family, then I think the anti-abortion argument fails totally.
Your life is different from mine; your experiences are different from mine. In that sense there are no absolutes. None of our lives are exactly the same; none of our experiences are exactly the same. With regard to your example of stealing, I don't believe in stealing but I cannot imagining punishing a starving person for stealing a piece of bread.
When I was a child and would make fun of or whine about someone, my mother would remind me that "there but for the grace of God go I." Her point was, of course, that we do not know what other people go through in their lives, what pain they have, what obstacles they face. It is not good for any of us to be sanctimonious and judgmental.
Beaglemom
So you don't believe in public schools, hospitals, libraries,or public roads? Because those are part of the village that raise your child. BTW a fetus isn't a baby and your radical thinking kills women that need abortions, you are the type that overlook Karen Santorums abortion, but don't want them for other women. You are the type that wants every fetus to b YOU are the problem. You want every fetus delivered, but won't support social programs to feed them after birth. Your religion doesn't belong in this countries politics, go to Iran if you want to live under a theocracy, because this country will never be one. Right or wrong is not based on religion in this country.
Deletesigned Little Rabbit
You need to read about Hamurabi's Code. Yes, theft is not right. But even 4000 years ago it was recognized that there are times to be lenient and times to behead. Theft for the sake of enriching one's self (i.e., jewel theft) was punishable. Stealing bread or food to feed one's family was not - at least, not to the full extent of the law.
DeleteI also feel you need to rethink your premise that character doesn't set morality.
There ARE certain things that are RIGHT and there are certain things that are WRONG.
And those are generally agreed upon by the vast majority of peoples around the world. Murder is wrong. Period. (And I am not going to discuss abortion here!) Has been since prehistory. But that is a SOCIAL guideline, not religious. One didn't murder because it reduced the group's survival chances by reducing the number of workers. One doesn't need a religion or religious teaching to understand or accept that.
"Conformity to the rules of right conduct". The RULES of right conduct are what varies. And if you look at who SETS those rules, that varies even more!
Hell, even the Mayans had laws that said the first three rows of "corn" along the road were useable by the traveler! It was still basically theft because the grower got little compensation - if any. But it was legal and worked. And the farmer was able to use that law for himself when HE traveled.
Just as my personal example, I l have five words by which I live: Love, understanding, compassion, forgiveness and tolerance. While they may sound religious, no religion is needed for them to be followed and used as a basis of my character.
And as Little Rabbit has stated, A BABY is NOT a fetus!
I never mentioned religion. And thank you both for making my point about relativism.
DeleteSo much for the proclaimed "tolerance" of other's opinions and beliefs. You can't have it both ways...demanding tolerance but not practicing it (see hypocrisy). And your responses sure sound a bit judgmental. I bet you're against being judgmental as well. Everything we've discussed is based on our personal beliefs. Remember...our beliefs make us who we are; but they don't make us right. "The earth is flat, and the sun revolves around the earth", said the enlightened ones of their day. It is possible to be wrong.
"Just a Thought" at 11:19 am. You want tolerance for your point of view but you clearly are not willing to be tolerant of other points of view.
DeleteBeaglemom
You're incorrect. I totally support the right for anyone to believe anything they'd like. If you believe a woman's choice outweighs the life of an innocent life, I respect your right to believe that. If you believe homosexuality is normal, I respect the right to believe that as well. I'm very tolerant of others' points of views, beliefs and opinions.
DeleteHowever, if your definition of tolerance requires me to support or tolerate deviant or "wrong" BEHAVIOR, then no human is capable of tolerance. Would you tolerate your 5-year old continually slapping you in the face for an hour? Would you tolerate your neighbor having sex with your 12 year old daughter? Of course not...those are behaviors you consider wrong. So are you an intolerant person? Probably not...but you probably put moral limits on BEHAVIOR because you believe it's wrong.
That was my point in this conversation/thread. Many on the far left claim conservatives are intolerant and judgmental. I made that point in my last comment and stated it's hypocritical because when they call conservatives intolerant and judgmental, they themselves are being judgmental and intolerant. And you responded by calling me intolerant. Thank you again for making my point:)
I hope you're tolerant of this opinion.
@Just a thought. Maybe you can clarify how Beaglemom and Leland have been intolerant or judgmental because I don't see it. They're disagree with your point of view and present their cases clearly and succinctly. The definition of "judgemental" is "Involving the exercise of judgement; inclined to make moral judgements." Please explain to me specifically how they're being judgmental. bls
DeleteWant to know where it went?
ReplyDeleteWell, for a start, you can ask Pat Robertson, Grover Norquist and Karl Rove.
Get back to us if they have any answers (that a lucid).
My .02 is pin the tail on these two.
DeleteLewis F. Powell (manifesto "Attack on the American Free Enterprise System.") Nixon 2 time nominated Supreme Court justice.
Richard Viguerie
Bravo to Rep. Cox. Ever since this over-the-top anti-woman campaign by the GOP began a couple of years ago I have been mystified and then angered that the medical community did not come out in force to oppose the crazy measures promoted in state legislatures and in Congress by misogynistic Republicans.
ReplyDeleteBeaglemom
No Gryphen,
ReplyDeletehe thought he was in the right party. More and more of my republican friends, or should I say former republican friends don't recognize the GOP anymore. It has been taken over by religious extremists. Don't worry, those intelligent and sane republicans have been welcomed with open arms into the Democratic party.
Agreed. I met a retired couple from Pittsburgh last week. Reg'd Repubs from the first time they voted. They love Obama and voted for him twice, as have many of their Repub friends. They don't change their registration because they like to vote in the Repub primaries (for the person they believe is less likely to win against a Democrat!).
DeleteLet's keep an eye on Rep. Cox. If he's opposed in a primary by someone on the right, we should send whatever support we can to keep him in Congress.
ReplyDeleteBetter to have at least one sane GOP member from scarlet Oklahoma to talk with his fellow Reps. and show them the error of their ways in cool, calm, professional tones.
I can't agree with you on supporting him for any reason. He has the training, he has the experience, but his hipocritic (sic) oath states:
DeleteFirst, do no harm (to my unfounded, unscriptured religious objections) to anything I don't like.
If you must support someone in the backwards states, support a progressive. if he gets primaried and beaten by someone further right, it is just another step on the R's road to obscurity.
The B.
I'm afraid he just sounded his political death knell. The tea party will be after his ass big time now - and his fellow repubes will be right there with them!
ReplyDeleteHouse Republicans broken into fighting factions
ReplyDeletehttp://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-republicans-have-broken-into-fighting-factions/2013/06/03/7533e606-b8ff-11e2-92f3-f291801936b8_story.html?hpid=z1
Behind all the GOP noise and hoopla about Beltway scandal-palooza is a stark reality that can’t be obscured. House Republicans are confronting two major challenges
ReplyDeletehttp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/06/04/the-morning-plum-behind-jubilation-about-scandals-gop-is-rudderless-and-adrift/
It’s increasingly clear that the president has steered the country back from the brink—and, in the process, exposed (yet again) the central lie of conservative economics.
ReplyDeleteObama’s Economic Triumph
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/04/obama-s-economic-triumph.html
Republican Hearings Backfire As IRS Testifies That More Groups Need To Be Investigated
ReplyDeletehttp://www.politicususa.com/bad-news-republicans-irs-audit-determined.html
"As a practicing physician (who never has or will perform an abortion), I deal with the real world."
ReplyDeleteWell Fuck Him! Never perform an abortion even if the life of his patient was in peril. Just let her die? Doesn't sound like any doctor I would ever want attending me. I'm sure in his mind a DnC isn't really an abortion.
Real World my ass!