Recently I heard the news that there is a bill working its way through the government that would cut all federal funding for Planned Parenthood. Despite the fact that, in most cases, federal funds can't be used to perform abortions, apparently none of the services provided by Planned Parenthood are worth supporting, either.
Services like breast cancer checks, routine gynecological exams, birth control, counseling, the list continues . . . services that, last time I checked, no one really considers "offensive" or "controversial." So why should money no longer be given to this organization? If the concern is the misspending of tax money, perhaps we would do well to get rid of programs that don't accomplish their goals, like abstinence-only sex ed. Schools where such programs are taught tend to have HIGHER teen pregnancy rates than schools where a more comprehensive curriculum is taught, perhaps because ignorance about contraceptives does not override hormones and the fact that teens are likely to have sex. Telling them not to doesn't make them stop, it just makes them do it dumbly.
But I digress. Perhaps because of Planned Parenthood's usual association with the term "abortion clinic," people cannot imagine that they provide any service other than that. This is a case of emotion overcoming fact, and the desire to draw people into little boxes of "good" and "bad;" "with me" or "against me." As already stated, Planned Parenthood is NOT just an abortion provider, and the money they would be losing would mainly be funding for non-abortion services.
What kind of a message does this send? If money is cut to one of the most accessible sexual health providers in the nation, doesn't this just mean that the US doesn't care about healthy sexuality? Does this have something to do with the fact that the burden of reproduction falls to females, while men can in general get off scott-free from their sexual escapades? Say Planned Parenthood loses all its federal funding, and as a result, has to shut its doors. Where are people, especially those in lower-income situations, going to go if they need sexual help? For women, if Planned Parenthood is their way of obtaining birth control and ensuring they don't have children if they don't want, or can't provide for them, where are they going to go? Especially with no national health care system, no public daycare system, no governmental way of providing for the children that might result from no access to birth control, where is the logic? Is the motivation the idea that sex is a luxury, something that only those who are "rich enough" to pay for birth control can have it?
Perhaps it is because I am a woman that I feel so strongly about this. I believe in equality of the sexes. And I believe in the ownership of one's own body. Part of this ownership is the control over one's sexuality. The fact that women have the unequal burden and risk of getting pregnant and bearing children should not undermine their ability to express themselves sexually. There should be an easy way to "balance out" the sexes and allow both to express and experience without unequal risk. Planned Parenthood provides easy, accessible ways for both genders to "level the playing field" and live healthy sexual lives.
Therefore, I Stand Behind Planned Parenthood.
Click above to sign the petition to stop the bill that would cut off federal funds to Planned Parenthood.
No comments:
Post a Comment