Translate

Sunday, February 28, 2010

A question for Texians

...and Republican Texians in particular.
Tomorrow is the primary election in Texas. The Republican Executive Committee has placed five propositions on the Republican primary ballot. These questions are designed to collect the opinions of active Republican voters on these issues.

I wonder what you might think of this one:
Ballot Proposition #5: Sonograms
The Texas Legislature should enact legislation requiring a sonogram to be performed and shown to each mother about to undergo a medically unnecessary, elective abortion.
YES or NO


Abortion murders should be illegal. Unfortunately they are not. The design of this legislation to require sonograms would be to cut down on the amount of legal abortions. But who is going to pay for this? The doctor, the woman getting the sonogram, or Texas taxpayers?

How will/would you vote on this?


[Note: feel free to comment whether or not you live in Texas or are a Republican. All that is required for you to comment is to have one (a comment).]

5 comments:

James E. Alderman said...

Not sure about this one Brother Robert, but I'll tell you how I feel. I feel as though this would be a good thing even if tax payers would have to fund it. We have a local agency that provides Biblical guidance for women who wish to abort their babies and I feel certain a sonogram would persuade them otherwise.

All too often we vote strictly on the issue, how will this effect my money?

May you enjoy everything our Father has for you today!
James

James E. Alderman said...

getting the follow up email-sorry.

R. L. Vaughn said...

Thanks for the thoughts. I hope others will chime in as well. I want to hear what others are thinking on this.

I don't see this as an issue of how will this effect my money. But I do see it as an issue that sort of brings in conflict one the one hand trying to do whatever we can to slow down or stop abortions and on the other hand supporting the constitutional ideal of limited government. I don't feel confident that there is any authorization for the government to inact such a tax. (I'm not sure this is what the opinion poll has in mind, but it would seem to require government funding if government mandated.)

Perhaps Christians could (at least partially) fill the gap here by voluntarily donating to local agencies such as you mention so that they could have the ability to use a sonogram to instruct expectant mothers on the life inside them.

Anonymous said...

Yes, I agree with you Robert. This seems to be another example of or an excuse for government interference.

If Christians would have banded together long ago, this would not even be an issue now. Where was the outcry in 1973 when abortion was legalized? After it was legalized, where was the talk about viable solutions to prevent them, such as this, from Christians around the country? It was much later before there became a full-fledged movement. It was very reminiscent of how prayer was taken out of schools. When it happened, there was little resistence from the Christian community. Sadly, it just seems to be a part the psychological makeup of Americans. We don't really get on the bandwagon for a cause, until it has gotten totally out of control. Terrorism and illegal immigration are two others which come to mind.

R. L. Vaughn said...

Ballot Prop #5: Sonograms according to tentative results passed with the following percentages:

YES 68.85%
NO 31.14%

Interestingly, the other four opinion propositions -- Photo ID, Controlling Government Growth, Cutting Federal Income Taxes, and Public Acknowledgement of God -- received support from 92% to 95%. Perhaps several factors go into this nearly 30% drop in aye votes -- a general misunderstanding of what this is for, a lack of explanation of how it will be enacted & funded, and maybe even visions of Rick Perry and the proposed mandate of the HPV vaccine for girls. Anyway, I don't think this reflects a substantial drop in support for the pro-life platform.