CVIndependent

Tue11192019

Last updateTue, 18 Sep 2018 1pm

On this week's environmentally friendly weekly Independent comics page: This Modern World listens in as two Republicans discuss abortion laws; Jen Sorensen shares her hopes regarding Joe Biden; (Th)ink looks at a Re-Public-an transit map; Red Meat gets excited about a hot date; and Apoca Clips asks Li'l Trumpy what he thinks about the first Republican congressman to call for impeachment.

Published in Comics

I keep running into the same issue with my best friend of five years. (She’s also my maid of honor at my upcoming wedding.) We’re both empaths—most of my friends are—and we’re both in therapy working on how to cope with that. I have severe anxiety that impacts my physical health, so one of the empath-related issues I’m working on is not following through with plans when I need to take time alone. My friend claims she understands this, but my actions severely impact her mood. Example: We’ll make tentative plans to get together; I’ll feel too sick to follow through, and then she’s in a negative emotional spiral for days. The final straw came when she called me late this past Friday night—just once, with no subsequent voice mail, text message or follow-up call. On Monday morning, I sent her a text message asking how her weekend was and got an icy reply. Evidently, something happened to her on Friday; she called me for support; and my failure to return her call left her feeling very upset. I apologized for the accidental trigger and tried to lay down some protocols for reaching out in an emergency situation (leave me a voice mail, and send a follow-up text) so I know it’s urgent. She hasn’t replied.

I’m really frustrated. She has a lot of baggage around being shamed for being emotional, so I try to be careful not to invalidate her feelings, but I don’t know if that’s even making a difference. We’ve had several conflicts over the last year, always triggered by something I did or said, almost always accidentally, that caused her to “take a step back.” She insists she understands I’m doing my best to be a good friend while also working through my own emotional shit. But that’s not the sense I’m getting. I’m feeling increasingly like it’s impossible to be a human being AND her friend. Until recently, I had zero emotional boundaries and made myself available to her at a moment’s notice to help shoulder her emotional burden. But now that I’m trying to be more conservative with my abundance and take better care of myself, it seems like all I do is hurt her.

What the fuck do I do? I’ve tried to be open-minded and patient with her dramatic mood swings, but she seems unable to give me the benefit of the doubt, which I always try to give her. This rocky ground between us is adding more stress to the whole wedding situation. (You’re supposed to be able to rely on your maid of honor, right?) This thing we have is not sustainable as it is, although I love her deeply. Help me figure this out?

Emotions Making Personal Affection Too Hard

Being so attuned to other people’s emotional states that you feel their pain—being an empath—sounds exhausting. But Lori Gottlieb, a psychotherapist in private practice, isn’t convinced your empath superpowers are the problem here.

“EMPATH’s moods seem overly dependent on what the other person does,” said Gottlieb. “That’s not being ‘an empath.’ Most people are empathetic, which isn’t the same as what these two are doing. They’re drowning in each other’s feelings. This is what pop culture might call codependency, and what in therapy we’d call an attachment issue.”

From your letter, EMPATH, it sounds like you might be ready to detach from your friend—you mentioned a final straw and described the relationship as not sustainable—and detaching would resolve this attachment issue.

“This feels less like a friendship and more like a psychodrama where they’re each playing out their respective issues,” said Gottlieb. “A friendship isn’t about solving another person’s emotional issues or being the container for them. It isn’t about being devastated by another person’s feelings or boundaries. It should be a mutually fulfilling relationship, not being co-therapists to each other. In a strong friendship, each person can handle her own emotions rather than relying on the friend to regulate them for her.”

Gottlieb started writing an advice column because, unlike psychotherapists, advice columnists are supposed to tell people what to do. I’m guessing your therapist mostly asks questions and gently nudges, EMPATH, but since Gottlieb has her advice-columnist hat on today and not her psychotherapist hat, I asked her to tell you what to do.

“She should act more like a friend than a therapist/caretaker,” said Gottlieb. “She shouldn’t treat her friend or herself as if they’re too fragile to handle basic communication or boundaries. And they should both be working out their issues with their respective therapists, not with each other.”

If you decide to keep this woman in your life (and your wedding party), EMPATH, you’ll both have to work on—sigh—your communication skills.

“Right now, they don’t seem to know how to communicate directly with each other,” said Gottlieb. “It’s either an icy text or complaining to outside parties about each other. But when it comes to how they interact with each other, they’re so careful, as if one or both might break if they simply said, ‘Hey, I really care about you, and I know sometimes you want to talk about stuff, but sometimes it feels like too much and maybe something you can talk to your therapist about.’”

Lori Gottlieb’s new book, Maybe You Should Talk to Someone, is a New York Times best seller. Follow her on Twitter @LoriGottlieb1.


I will be driving to New Orleans from Toronto. It’s almost impossible to drive from Ontario to Louisiana without stopping for fuel/food/hotel in Ohio, Georgia or Alabama. But I want to boycott Handmaid states during my trip. Even then, I feel I have to check the news every day to see what state is next.

Do you have any practical advice for me? Or should I just stay home until your democratic systems and your courts are fixed, and your Electoral College is abolished?

Canadian Avoids Nearing Terrible Georgia, Ohio …

Why head south, CANTGO? Even if you’ve lived in Canada all your life, you couldn’t possibly have explored every corner of your beautiful country. But if you absolutely, positively must board the Titanic—excuse me, if you must visit the United States—take a hard right after you cross the border and head west instead. Enjoy Michigan’s Upper Peninsula; check out some of those lakes they’re always talking about in Minnesota; speed through the Dakotas, Montana and the skinniest part of Idaho; and pretty soon, you’ll be in Washington state, where a woman’s right to choose is enshrined in the state Constitution. The summers are lovely; we’ve got hiking trails that will take you to mountain lakes; and Democrats control both houses of the state Legislature and the governor’s mansion, so you won’t have to check the news every day when you’re in Seattle.


CONFIDENTIAL TO EVERYONE

Anti-choice, anti-woman, anti-sex bills have been rammed through Republican-controlled state legislatures in Ohio, Georgia, Kentucky, Missouri, Arkansas, Utah, Mississippi and Alabama. “The new wave of anti-abortion laws suggests that a post-Roe America won’t look like the country did before 1973, when the court case was decided,” Michelle Goldberg wrote in The New York Times. “It will probably be worse.”

If these bills are declared constitutional—a real possibility now—doctors will be jailed; women who have miscarriages will be prosecuted; and many forms of birth control will be banned. If you’re as pissed off as I am—and anyone who isn’t can piss right off—please make sure you and all your friends are registered to vote so you can vote out anti-choice state legislators and governors in 2020.

To be clear: Right now, abortion remains legal in all 50 states. So you don’t have to wait until next November to send a “fuck you” to red-state Republicans pushing these laws. Make a donation to an organization that helps women obtain abortions in red states—like The Yellowhammer Fund in Alabama (yellowhammerfund.org), Gateway Women’s Access Fund in Missouri (gwaf.org), and Women Have Options in Ohio (womenhaveoptions.org).

On the Lovecast, Dan chats with actor Maddie Corman: savagelovecast.com.

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; @fakedansavage on Twitter; ITMFA.org.

Published in Savage Love

On this week's held-in-contempt weekly Independent comics page: Apoca Clips says goodbye to that big TV show with the help of a Trump-aided fashion show; Red Meat enjoys some arts and crafts; Jen Sorensen ponders the gradual erosion of Roe v. Wade; The K Chronicles deals with package-tampering; and This Modern World shares the latest adventures of The Unbelievable Trump.

Published in Comics

On this week's illegal-payoff-free weekly Independent comics page: The K Chronicles throws out the "few bad apples" argument; This Modern World talks abortion prevention; Jen Sorenson ponders climate-change dystopia; Apoca Clips chats with Kevin Spacey about his new film's actual, real opening-day haul; and Red Meat goes to pick up the kid from camp.

Published in Comics

On this week's treason-fearing weekly Independent comics page: The K Chronicles offers a tip o' the hat to the protesters in London; This Modern World previews the path to the Supreme Court; Jen Sorenson ponders the pros and cons of the likely new Supreme Court; Red Meat judges a posedown; and Apoca Clips listens in as Trumpy and Putin get ready to play.

Published in Comics

With a small brown paper bag in her hand, Julie walked out of a Planned Parenthood clinic in Roseville with a new supply of birth control. It didn’t matter that she didn’t have health insurance.

“It’s awesome to have Planned Parenthood,” said Julie, who did not wish to give her last name. “To go to a regular health clinic like this would have cost $100, which would make you think twice about having to go.”

It’s the kind of clinic that President Donald Trump and conservative Republicans in Congress hope to cut off from receiving any federal funds. The federal government already prohibits any federal dollars from paying for abortions, except in cases of rape, incest or to save the mother’s life. But this effort seeks to block federal funds from paying for any other kind of health care by providers who also perform abortions.

If the effort succeeds, the impact would be particularly strong in California—a state where legislators over the years have interpreted federal laws and rules in ways that have allowed more federal dollars to flow to Planned Parenthood clinics. Roughly half of the federal funding that Planned Parenthood receives nationwide currently goes, mostly via Medicaid reimbursements, to cover health care and family planning services for Californians, mostly in the lower-income brackets.

Ironically, Planned Parenthood officials say if they were to lose all their federal funding, their California abortion clinics would remain open; those already are funded by private sources and by state reimbursements for poorer patients. Instead, what would be at risk are all the nonsurgical sites that provide other medical and contraception services.

The state’s progressive state policies, put in place 30 years ago under Republican Gov. Pete Wilson, created a friendly environment for Planned Parenthood to expand and offer family-planning services to low-income men and women above the federal poverty level. That’s in stark contrast to states such as Texas and Mississippi, which unsuccessfully sought to ban their state Medicaid healthcare programs for the poor from channeling any money to health care providers that perform abortions.

As a result, Planned Parenthood today is one of California’s major health care providers, operating 115 clinics that serve 850,000 mostly low-income patients a year who rely on Medicaid (in California, Medi-Cal) for health care. That’s nearly a third of the 2.5 million patients who visit Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide for basic health-care and family-planning services.

“Planned Parenthood is a major safety-net provider at a time of increased health care demand,” said Sara Rosenbaum, a professor of health law and policy at George Washington University. “In a state like California, with more Planned Parenthoods, the reliance would be that much greater.”

The Republican-controlled Congress, bolstered by President Trump’s election, is eyeing several strategies to stop the flow of federal funding to Planned Parenthood. That money—roughly $500 million a year nationwide, through Medicaid reimbursements, Title X family planning money and grants—pays for services such as cancer screenings, breast exams, birth control, prenatal care and the treatment of sexually transmitted diseases.

Although Trump has frequently acknowledged that Planned Parenthood helps millions of women, he also has said he would support congressional efforts to ban funding.

“I would defund it because of the abortion factor,” he said at a February 2016 GOP presidential debate. “I would defund it, because I’m pro-life.”

A draft House GOP bill obtained by Politico would eliminate all federal funding to Planned Parenthood as part of a repeal of the Affordable Care Act. While that provision is likely to clear the House, its fate is uncertain in the Senate, where several moderate Republicans could side with pro-choice Democrats.

If the effort were to prevail, California Planned Parenthood would lose $260 million a year in federal funds—approximately 80 percent of its operating budget. Unless it found a way to replenish that money, the organization warns that it could have to close its 82 California sites that furnish basic health care and family-planning services to mostly low-income patients.

Meanwhile, its remaining 33 surgical abortion sites—which don’t get federal funding—would remain open, said Kathy Kneer, president and CEO of California Planned Parenthood.

“The irony here is that they are going to put in place more barriers for women to gain contraception, and that will lead to more abortions—and by the way, all the abortion sites will stay open,” Kneer said.

The House recently voted to reverse an Obama administration regulation that requires states and local governments to distribute family-planning funds to health centers, even if they perform abortions. President Barack Obama issued the rule in his final days in office after more than a dozen conservative states directed those funds only to community health-care centers.

Such an 11th-hour move by an outgoing president, Republicans argued during the floor debate, was an affront to states’ rights.

“I know that vulnerable women seeking true comprehensive care deserve better than abortion-centric facilities like Planned Parenthood,” said Rep. Diane Black, R-Tenn.

The resolution is now awaiting a vote in the Senate, where California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein is working to defeat it. It would have no effect on California, given that it is not among the states that have tried to limit those Title X dollars. Nonetheless, she noted that Planned Parenthood provides the only Title X family planning services in 13 California counties, and that any effort to strip federal funding would take a toll in other states and leave “huge numbers of women across the country (with) no place to go for essential health services.”

Trump on the campaign trail vowed to defund Planned Parenthood, and then he appointed Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, a former Republican congressman from Georgia who has supported cutting off taxpayer money to Planned Parenthood. Both men have suggested the federal government could reallocate taxpayer dollars to community health centers. But many experts and health care advocates say those health centers cannot absorb the significant number of patients who now rely on Planned Parenthood.

That concern was echoed in January when the Democratic-controlled California Legislature approved resolutions opposing any congressional efforts to defund Planned Parenthood. They did so after Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards met with Democratic senators at their annual policy retreat in Sacramento.

Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, D-Lakewood, proclaimed: “California stands with Planned Parenthood, because Planned Parenthood stands with California.”

But his sentiment was not unanimous. Several Republicans spoke out against the resolutions, with state Sen. Mike Morrell, R-Rancho Cucamonga, saying he could not support an organization that provides abortions. 

“I have no war against women,” he said. “But I also do not have a war against babies created in the image of God.”

With a Democrat-controlled state Legislature, California Planned Parenthood is hopeful it could ask lawmakers to backfill any federal shortfall. However, Medicaid funding is already strapped in the state, where a record one in three Californians are receiving Medi-Cal benefits. Given the potential for other federal cuts in health funding, it’s unclear whether the state would be able to make up the difference.

Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood is drafting contingency plans.

“We are looking at scenario planning. These are all very difficult decisions,” Kneer said. “Closing any location is the last thing we want to do.”

One option is to more aggressively raise funds, but Kneer said private donations can’t possibly make up what they would lose. She also raised the question of whether private funds should be required to pay for a government reimbursement that other organizations receive.

Even if President Trump receives and signs legislation to strip Planned Parenthood of all its federal funding, Planned Parenthood could still challenge in court whether such a restriction is constitutional.

In the last few years, federal courts across the country have denied other states’ efforts to block Planned Parenthood as an eligible provider of taxpayer-funded health, ruling that such moves violated the First Amendment right of free speech and free association to choose a medical provider, and the right of a clinic to provide abortion services under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, said Julie Cantor, an adjunct professor at UCLA who teaches a law class on reproductive medical ethics.

“The government’s behavior has to comport with the Constitution,” Cantor said.

Samantha Young is a contributor to CALmatters.org, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and politics.

Published in National/International

On this week's short-fingered Independent comics page: Red Meat considers asking for a raise; Jen Sorenson watches as the U.S. Supreme Court ponders abortion restrictions; The K Chronicles experiences segregation; and This Modern World goes through the craziness of Trump mania.

Published in Comics

It’s difficult to find the right word to describe coming together to mark the anniversary of Roe v. Wade becoming the law of the land.

Celebrate? That doesn’t feel right, because even pro-choice individuals don’t think abortion should be “celebrated.” Commemorate? Yes, we do remember and memorialize the decision that affirmed women have a right to privacy regarding when and whether to bear a child. But perhaps there’s an even better word.

Solemnize? To dignify with events or ceremonies?

That works for me.

Recently, a group of local women and men gathered to solemnize the 43rd year since the Supreme Court validated women’s sovereignty regarding their own bodies, on Jan. 22, 1973. How’s the legal decision working these many years later?

The total number of abortions performed legally in the United States has steadily been declining, particularly among teenagers, largely as a result of the use of birth control, sex education and fear of disease. That’s the good news.

The bad news is a record number of restrictive anti-abortion laws and regulations passed in recent years by state legislatures, justified by the U.S. Supreme Court’s statement in Roe that although the Constitution protects a woman’s right to abortion during the first trimester, the states also have an “important and legitimate interest in protecting the potentiality of human life” (however that is variously interpreted).

According to the Guttmacher Institute, the leading compiler of accurate abortion information, in about 87 percent of U.S. counties, there is no provider; 35 percent of women age 15-44 live in those counties. Some state laws require waiting periods, ultrasounds with forced viewing of results, and “counseling”—often with misleading or outright false information, designed to discourage the decision to abort.

With such limited access to providers, some women must be able to travel more than 100 miles, take time off from work, arrange child care and find a way to stay or return again to satisfy waiting periods. It’s estimated that more than 30 percent of all women will have an abortion by the age of 45, and based on Roe, it should at least be safe, legal and accessible.

In Texas, where very restrictive laws passed last year, more than 100,000 Texas women between 18 and 49 have either tried to end a pregnancy themselves, or have sought help in Mexico. (The Supreme Court has accepted a case this term to decide whether Texas created an “undue burden” on women.)

The local event, co-sponsored by Planned Parenthood, Democrats of the Desert (DOD) and Democratic Women of the Desert (DWD), featured the film Vessel, a documentary chronicling the work of Women on Waves (WoW). The Dutch organization, a pro-choice nonprofit created in 1999 by physician Rebecca Gomperts, estimates that almost 50,000 women a year worldwide die from self-induced abortions.

“Reproductive freedom should be seen as a fundamental human right, not as a benefit or privilege only available to some, but not all, women around the world,” said DWD President Amalia Deaztlan, a resident of Bermuda Dunes.

WoW took advantage of the fact that when a ship is in international waters, at least 12 miles offshore, the laws of the nation under which that ship is licensed prevail. Dutch law allows unrestricted medication abortions up to the 6 1/2th week of pregnancy. In 2002, to assist women in countries where abortion is not legally allowed, WoW raised money to charter a ship and set up a complete portable clinic. The organization got permission from the Dutch health minister, staffed the ship with medical professionals and volunteers, and set out to provide services to women in countries with restrictive abortion laws. The intention was to land, let women know the nonsurgical procedure could be provided, take appointments to bring women on board, and sail into international waters, where Dutch law would prevail.  

The first stop was Ireland, followed over the course of several years by Spain, Portugal, Morocco and Poland. In some locations, they were not even allowed to dock the ship: Loud groups of protesters, mostly men, often threatened them, but the protests and resulting publicity led to hotlines being established and, ultimately, to changes in some laws. At the very least, women became aware that there were nonsurgical means they could obtain and safely take on their own, regardless of the legality of abortion or the willingness of doctors.

According to Guttmacher, in 2008, medication abortion accounted for more than 25 percent of all U.S. abortions performed prior to nine weeks of gestation. Says the World Health Organization (WHO): “In countries where induced abortion is legally highly restricted and/or unavailable, safe abortion has frequently become the privilege of the rich, while poor women have little choice but to resort to unsafe providers, causing deaths … that become the social and financial responsibility of the public health system. Laws and policies on abortion should protect women’s health and their human rights. Regulatory, policy and programmatic barriers that hinder access to and timely provision of safe abortion care should be removed.” WHO has placed the drugs used in medical abortions on its List of Essential Medicines since 2005.

Since ships cannot reach all of the countries where women need access to safe abortions, WoW launched safe-abortion hotlines in Ecuador, Chile, Peru, Venezuela, Argentina, Pakistan, Indonesia, Kenya, Thailand, Poland and Morocco. WoW trains volunteers who can staff local hotlines to give women information about how to obtain and use the drugs. They have even resorted to graffiti-tagging “Safe Abortion” with a local phone number on streets and walls so women can get the information they seek.

Seeing Vessel was a moving and inspiring experience, especially for those who often forget that what we may freely access in California is heavily restricted in places like North Dakota, and totally unavailable in places like Tanzania.

La Quinta resident Marlene Levine had a visceral reaction to some of the scenes in the film.

“I see big groups of angry men yelling at women who are trying to help each other,” she said about the film. “I keep wondering who in those gangs of protesters has ever sat up all night with their own sick child, or picked up a bottle to feed his baby, or changed even one dirty diaper. Do they even really care about a real baby? Or are they just out to show those women who is boss and let them know that their women must do as they say?”

We came together to solemnize the 43rd anniversary of Roe v. Wade, dignifying it by remembering that women all over the world deserve the human right to make decisions in their own best interest, acknowledging their sovereignty over their own bodies.

Some things should never be taken for granted.

Anita Rufus is also known as “The Lovable Liberal,” and her radio show airs Sundays from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. on KNews Radio 94.3 FM. Email her at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Know Your Neighbors appears every other Wednesday.

Published in Know Your Neighbors

My first husband died after we had been divorced for many years, and his involvement with our two children had been sporadic, at best. Yet they were there with him when, on a trip to Minnesota, he ended up in the hospital after a heart attack.

After his death, they called and wondered what they should do with his body. One lived in Portland, Ore.; the other lived in Dallas. Their dad’s family was in Hemet—with no apparent interest in being involved.

“Tell the hospital you want to donate his body for anything that might contribute to research,” I suggested, “and go home. You’ve done all you can.”

They took my advice, and both remarked afterward that they felt good that perhaps his death served some greater purpose.

I thought about that when I started hearing the reports about Planned Parenthood “harvesting and selling” fetal tissue for research. The reports were the result of undercover videos, taken over an extended period of time, and obviously edited, by a group calling itself the Center for Medical Progress. The “center” started in 2013 and includes people claiming to be “citizen journalists” focusing on medical ethics and preservation of life. The center is linked to Operation Rescue, whose mission is “taking direct action to restore legal personhood to the pre-born and stop abortion in obedience to biblical mandates.”

Both organizations’ ultimate goal is to once again criminalize abortion, regardless of circumstances, and to overturn existing constitutional protections for women to make their own decisions about when and whether to continue a pregnancy.

With the media covering the videos, including characterizations of “illicit baby parts sales,” the calls to defund all federal support for Planned Parenthood’s numerous clinics throughout the country began anew. These clinics, two of which are located in the Coachella Valley, primarily provide women’s health services like pap smears, breast-cancer exams, contraception, testing for sexually transmitted illnesses, family-planning education and pre-natal care. In Riverside County, Planned Parenthood clinics provide health services to more than 40,000 patients—19,000 in our eastern portion of the county alone. Approximately 20 percent of all American women report that they have gone to Planned Parenthood at some time, and abortion accounts for only about 3 percent of all provided services—without any use of taxpayer funds for those procedures.

The aforementioned videos depict representatives of a fake biomedical research company wanting to obtain fetal tissue for research; Planned Parenthood is characterized as “price haggling over baby parts.” According to FactCheck.org, the unedited video shows that the Planned Parenthood executive repeatedly said its clinics wanted to cover “only the costs (and) not make money when donating fetal tissue from abortions for scientific research.” Of course, that part was omitted from the released videos.

The description of how abortions are done—and how specific fetal tissue is identified, segregated and preserved—sounds gruesome, even if you’re pro-choice. On the other hand, a detailed description of almost any medical procedure is also gruesome; we just don’t often talk about such things too graphically. For example, my daughter had a serious accident, with third-degree burns on her hand and arm. If I were to describe in detail the laborious procedures that were done to her over almost a year’s time, it would made you very uncomfortable. I still can’t erase the sight of the charred skin and exposed bone and skin-grafting. Ugh.

The donation of fetal tissue for medical research began in the mid-20th century. As abortion became legal and more available, fetal-tissue donation became more common. Before that, hospitals treating women for miscarriages or compromised pregnancies were the primary sources of such tissue—which is highly valuable for research, because it grows more rapidly and is less likely to be rejected by immune systems. It can be transplanted into diseased organs, such as the brain or pancreas; tests have shown positive results with Parkinson’s, diabetes, Alzheimer’s and other illnesses.

In 1974, one year after Roe v. Wade, President Reagan’s administration imposed a temporary moratorium on using federal funds for fetal-tissue transplantation. That moratorium was extended indefinitely in 1989, partly on the argument that it might encourage women to have abortions.

In 1993, President Clinton ended the moratorium, and Congress passed a bill permitting the tissue from any type of abortion, spontaneous or elective, to be used for research. There are specific consent and documentation requirements, and the sale or purchase of fetal tissue, or the designation of any specific individual to receive such tissue, is considered criminal. The same stipulations apply to organ donation, another strictly voluntary act that can save lives. (Have you indicated on your driver’s license that you consent?) Direct costs for the transfer of such tissue, which requires special handling, are reimbursable. Those are the costs the Planned Parenthood representatives were discussing with the phony researchers on the video tapes.

Planned Parenthood’s procedure requires that a woman is presented with a consent form to donate fetal tissue only after she has made the decision to terminate her pregnancy. Abortion decisions are seldom made easily, and it may be some consolation to know that her decision could facilitate a stranger’s ability to receive a benefit.

If fetal-tissue research has been shown to be valuable and is already yielding results in treating everything from ebola to polio to rubella to spinal cord injury, what’s all the shouting about? Why did the Center for Medical Progress go after Planned Parenthood instead of our local hospitals, which may also provide fetal tissue for research?

Therein lies the politics of abortion: The goal of the center is to shut down Planned Parenthood and deny it any federal funding, even for services unrelated to abortion—in other words, to put them out of business. Federal funds are already prohibited from paying for abortion, but by characterizing Planned Parenthood as tearing apart babies and selling their body parts, the center hopes to disgust people enough that they’ll support defunding and closing the clinics, where 83 percent of patients receive health services unrelated to abortion—women who may have no other access to medical care.

According to U.S. News and World Report, human fetal cells “are used as incubators to replicate viruses for the production of vaccines against chickenpox, rubella, shingles, rabies, and hepatitis A.” Anti-abortion groups maintain that nobody should profit in any way from what they see as the killing of a baby—yet the members of these groups don’t seem to mind receiving the vaccinations or treatment that fetal tissue research has enabled.

As a community, we all benefit from discoveries that come from fetal-tissue research. Our neighbors work in Planned Parenthood clinics. Our neighbors access their health services. Instead of being politically manipulated by hyperbolic descriptions of a legitimate surgical procedure, people need to recognize there are women making a difficult choice that might save a life instead of merely ending the potential of a life. Let’s not let politics replace facts.

Anita Rufus is also known as “The Lovable Liberal,” and her radio show airs Sundays from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. on KNews Radio 94.3 FM. Email her at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Know Your Neighbors appears every other Wednesday.

Published in Know Your Neighbors

On this week's captivating Independent comics page: This Modern World looks back at the peace-loving days of the George W. Bush administration; Jen Sorenson exposes the evils of the Helms Act of 1973; The K Chronicles introduces the world to the concept of the shitless baby; and Red Meat deals the best it can with declining sales numbers.

Published in Comics

Page 1 of 2