I’m a bit annoyed with Yvonne Abraham’s column in today’s Sunday Globe. Initially, she proclaims:
I know I should be living and breathing this special US Senate race.
I love politics. I’m an issues nerd. Debates over tax policy, gun control, abortion rights, the environment — these are usually major boat-floaters for me.
But as the column goes on, the actual truth comes out.
Neither Democrat is known for his electrifying personality.
…
Michael Sullivan is about as riveting as Markey and Lynch
…
I need more. Or maybe less. You got a truck?
It was the last line (which is the last of the column) that really got to me. Unless we have a circus atmosphere surrounding the campaign, with barn coats and trucks and accusations of false heritage and other things that have nothing to do with the job at hand, it is a snoozefest.
How about this: Actually dig into those issues: tax policy, gun control, abortion rights, the environment. Examine each candidate’s record and positions on those issues. Confront them with what you find. And then write about it.
Do we really need a truck driving candidate to get the media engaged? Sigh.
“I have a job to do, but I don’t feel like doing it.”
If Ms. Abraham doesn’t feel like making good use of the real estate given her, I can think of others who would take it off her hands.
Senators are supposed to entertain us. If they don’t, we change the channel.
The Yvonne Abraham piece, as bad as it is, isn’t the worst aspect of today’s Globe.
The bulk of the front page is filled with an annoying story advancing the offensive claim that non-invasive maternal blood tests for Down syndrome (along with several other trisomy disorders) are threatening because they might lead to — gasp — more abortions. A collection of providers whose livelihood depends on a supply of severely challenged patients offer self-serving arguments for why its a bad thing to cut off that supply.
Are you kidding? This is like objecting to Smallpox vaccinations because it will put Smallpox clinics out of business. These tests are an enormous step forward in sparing agonizing pain for families, especially young families. If they force some parents to confront the consequences of their religious beliefs about abortion, surely that’s a good thing. The tests aren’t the problem, the information they provide isn’t the problem — the suggestion that these tests and the information they provide should be suppressed or withheld for all of us in order to “protect” the religious beliefs of some of us is the problem.
These are very much like the similarly religious arguments against the HPV vaccine. Sadly, the eagerness of the media to spread such arguments — without bothering to report the truth about the vaccine — is leading to a decline in HPV vaccination rates.
Meanwhile, buried at the bottom of page A-8, is a far more significant story:
The money quote is buried at the end (after more self-serving arguments from fossil-fuel industry shills) (emphasis mine):
President Obama is finally pushing to do what we should have been doing for decades — addressing the devastating climate change impact of further increases in fossil fuel production.
The Boston Globe, the closest thing Boston has to a real newspaper (especially with the unfortunate demise of the Phoenix), continues to bury important news about crucial issues (climate change, wealth concentration, the state of our transportation infrastructure, and so on) while promoting meaningless fluff (or worse).
“Boring”, indeed.
Aborting a girl because a couple would prefer a boy. It seems to me that there are certain abortion situations that people who are generally prochoice nonetheless have discomfort with. Does it amount to eugenics? Not exactly, but maybe too close for comfort.
There will be a whole lot more choice in this area relatively soon.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/19/genetically-engineered-babies-designer-baby-ban_n_2712727.html
You’ll get to check off boxes. Male, blue eyes, blond hair, good eyesight, athletic ability, prefers the company of women. The future will be all kinds of weird.
Your answer will determine how I check off the boxes associated with some questions about you.
It doesn’t matter what think. There are people and cultures that value having a boy more than a girl. If abortion is an unrestricted choice, then people can use any reason to procure one even an unsavory reason.
Do you think there should be restrictions on sex selected abortions? Do you think there should be restrictions on downs syndrome abortions? Do your two answers differ and why?
to answer the question of sex-selection. I also think the question is very far off-topic, since you’ve said that being female is not related to Down’s Syndrome. If you want to discuss abortion for sex-selection, I suggest you start your own thread on that subject.
The media’s been pathetic so far treating abortion as a binary pro or con. I’d like to see each candidate questioned on the particular legislative agendas of NARAL, Planned Parenthood, MCFL, etc, especially if these are organizations that have endorsed one or another candidates.
Do you have an answer on Down’s Syndrome? On a scale of 0 to 10, is it a practice that you have 0 qualms about or up to and including 10 qualms?
I’ll go on record as saying that I’m an 8.
means we do not have other people voting on our personal decisions. Unless some woman asks for your advice, your opinion on what is unsavory only relates to your own personal choices.
Your slippery-slope argument is absolute rubbish, and (as observed below) reveals your apparent contempt for women. Worse, your argument exemplifies the kind of rubbish that is paralyzing and threatening to bring down our form of government.
We are talking, here, about non-invasive tests that identify a profound difficult (and expensive) disorder. Profoundly difficult for the children who are born and difficult for the parents and siblings of the families they are born into. A difficulty multiplied by the greatly increased risk of early death and the profound grief that accompanies that. And, of course, each Down baby is profoundly expensive.
I suggest that introducing eugenics into this discussion is tantamount to a Godwin’s Law violation. We are not talking about sex selection. The article you cite is about genetic engineering, not the testing we are discussing here.
There are those in America who have an absolute religion-based objection to administering any kind of medicine to their children, because they believe that Otitis and Strep are gifts from God. Thankfully, those people and their beliefs do not dominate our legal system.
I assume, by your handle, that you are male. I suggest that any opinion you have on this is, frankly, pure speculation — the body not being invaded will never be your own. If you absolutely positively without doubt believe that you will never countenance an abortion under any circumstances, the only 100% way for you to act on that belief is to not procreate. If you do inseminate a woman, the final decision on such matters is hers — not yours. Make your case to her — keep the rest of us out of it.
no?
I’ve watched this religious rubbish set back stem cell research by a decade. I’ve watched the Globe deteriorate from a first-rate paper of record in the 1970s to something barely superior to the Herald.
I have three daughters, ranging in age from 17 to 29. I’ve seen the pernicious impact of this sort of rubbish on the choices available to them and on the opportunities and challenges they face. I have a son in law whose father died in middle age because he believed God would cure him of his easily treatable illness. I’m sick to death of propaganda pieces like Juno being celebrated for their “sensitivity” with nobody talking about the reality of what motherhood (married or unmarried) actually means for most teenagers.
No, sorry. I don’t think this is a “bit heated”. I have, however, sworn off font changes at your suggestion.
he knows how to paint a colorful, insightful picture with words about each of these actually very interesting hollywood central casting characters running for the US Senate seat.
Maybe we (the BMG Community) should go ahead a start a thread on each candidate.
http://blog.davidsbernstein.com/