abortion funding + school vouchers
Jan. 26th, 2011 05:20 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
martasficThat's an unlikely pair of issues, I know, but my mind put them together. I'm weird that way.
I was reading Newsweek over a late lunch and I happened across an article about how several states are trying school vouchers again. Here's the connection in my mind: one of the states mentioned in the article is Florida, and a friend mentioned another law being considered in Florida. Basically, insurance companies offering their plans under the insurance exchange that comes into effect in 2014 cannot cover abortions.
The biggest reason I am against school vouchers is separation of church and state issues. I went to a parochial school in grades 6-8 and benefited from that experience. I would want poor kids to have that same privilege, and for their parents to be able to make the choice. I don't personally think vouchers will cover it (because state funding does not come close to covering parochial school tuition, let alone prep school), so I would still probably be anti-vouchers for that reason.
But the connection in my mind to abortions has clarified some things. I believe in choice. I'm not a libertarian I believe that "levelling the playing field" should try to give the most choices to the most people. Personally I don't believe that abortion is murder but I do believe there are moral considerations, especially at the later stages, and so I think it's not something to be done lightly. But I definitely don't think my belief on this view gives me the right to control someone else's view. Once we've decided the government should provide health care for even some people (which predates Obama - think VA hospitals, military medical care, and Medicare/Medicaid) - individuals cannot decide what care other individuals should have access to. My belief that a certain abortion may be immoral, does not equal my right to keep you from making that decision.
Given that, I really have no right to be against vouchers on church/state grounds. I have paid my taxes in part because I believe universal education is important. If those schools aren't educating properly, I have a complaint there. But if my only concern is they're tied to some religion or other, well, I can't fairly hold to that claim.
But this cuts both ways. If someone thinks vouchers are a good idea even if they go to religious schools, you are requiring that I the taxpayer give my money over to a school where I don't agree with some of their actions (chapel, religious education, etc.) but where they are getting the job done I think needs to be done - if you believe all that, you have to believe the same thing when it comes to abortion funding. That means you're free to think abortion is wrong. You're not free to say your taxes shouldn't go toward paying that. Because, again, it is the would-be parent's choice.
Even if you think it's the wrong one.
I was reading Newsweek over a late lunch and I happened across an article about how several states are trying school vouchers again. Here's the connection in my mind: one of the states mentioned in the article is Florida, and a friend mentioned another law being considered in Florida. Basically, insurance companies offering their plans under the insurance exchange that comes into effect in 2014 cannot cover abortions.
The biggest reason I am against school vouchers is separation of church and state issues. I went to a parochial school in grades 6-8 and benefited from that experience. I would want poor kids to have that same privilege, and for their parents to be able to make the choice. I don't personally think vouchers will cover it (because state funding does not come close to covering parochial school tuition, let alone prep school), so I would still probably be anti-vouchers for that reason.
But the connection in my mind to abortions has clarified some things. I believe in choice. I'm not a libertarian I believe that "levelling the playing field" should try to give the most choices to the most people. Personally I don't believe that abortion is murder but I do believe there are moral considerations, especially at the later stages, and so I think it's not something to be done lightly. But I definitely don't think my belief on this view gives me the right to control someone else's view. Once we've decided the government should provide health care for even some people (which predates Obama - think VA hospitals, military medical care, and Medicare/Medicaid) - individuals cannot decide what care other individuals should have access to. My belief that a certain abortion may be immoral, does not equal my right to keep you from making that decision.
Given that, I really have no right to be against vouchers on church/state grounds. I have paid my taxes in part because I believe universal education is important. If those schools aren't educating properly, I have a complaint there. But if my only concern is they're tied to some religion or other, well, I can't fairly hold to that claim.
But this cuts both ways. If someone thinks vouchers are a good idea even if they go to religious schools, you are requiring that I the taxpayer give my money over to a school where I don't agree with some of their actions (chapel, religious education, etc.) but where they are getting the job done I think needs to be done - if you believe all that, you have to believe the same thing when it comes to abortion funding. That means you're free to think abortion is wrong. You're not free to say your taxes shouldn't go toward paying that. Because, again, it is the would-be parent's choice.
Even if you think it's the wrong one.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-01-26 10:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-27 12:03 am (UTC)This is really a very different issue from all that. I was saying that in the abortion funding debate a lot of people got all upset that their tax money would support something they didn't support - but they seem to have no problem requiring my tax money to go for something I don't support. That's hypocritical.
Of course, you can have other reasons for being against school vouchers. You say you don't want your money going to religious schools. In my opinion that in itself isn't a sufficient reason for opposing vouchers. But there are other perfectly good ones. For instance, you might think a school that teaches ID or a slanted view of history or philosophy or whatever isn't really educating. Or you might say that, personal preferences aside, there's a legal problem with church/state crossover. So respect for the law requires we stay away from that. Those are all good reasons to be against vouchers, that don't dip into hypocrisy.
one-size "solution"s
Date: 2011-01-27 08:33 pm (UTC)The lack of simple solutions, the need for case-by-case, shows (to my mind) that abortion should be a matter for enforced medical standards. (The horrid Philidelphia example shows what happens when abortion care gets marginalized and shoved away from meaningful oversight.) After a fetus is grown enough to be possibly viable, it's past the time the woman can do a chemical abortion on her own -- so she'd have to have the willing cooperation of medical staff. So there's room for reasonable medical standards, as long as there isn't pushy micro-managing from politicians & other intruding strangers.