“Culture of Life” Indeed

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

I missed this when it popped up last week, but it deserves, even in retrospect, a resounding “What the f—?”

Today [June 9th], 11 anti-choice Republican members of the House Appropriations subcommittee that oversees spending for health, labor and education programs voted against a proposal offered by Rep. David Obey (D-WI) aimed at making it economically easier for low-income and vulnerable women to choose to carry pregnancies to term.

I never thought the obvious needed to be stated, but apparently so. Rep. Obey’s measure would have, in all certainty, reduced the number of abortions in America by making it easier for women to carry their pregnancies to term. No matter what delusions Republicans seem to be laboring under, many women abort not because they’re frivolous people or don’t respect the “culture of life,” but because they respect it all too well, and understand that it’s cruel to bring a child into the world that can’t be provided for properly. That’s not a difficult concept to grasp. Or it shouldn’t be. But really, what’s the use arguing here? These House Republicans don’t care. The point of pregnancy and birth, for them, isn’t about creating life or raising children or sustaining a healthy society. The point seems to be nothing more than making sure that women, as pseudo-Adrienne put it, “fulfill their biological duties.” Charming, all of them.

On a related note, I can’t imagine there are many people who haven’t read this post yet, but if not, it deserves a read.

UPDATE: Hm, after doing a little searching around, it seems that many of the health and education cuts Obey was railing against were made necessary by the need to free up some $900 million, in order to help pay for George Bush’s 2003 Medicare bill. Which, as we know, extended that all-important helping-hand to those pharmaceutical companies that were trampled on, oppressed, and otherwise down on their luck. Life is hard, you know.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend