Today sitting here watching C-Span Rep. Lankford took to the floor of the house and made a speech supporting H. R.3 putting into law the ban of the use of federal funds for abortion or at least that is the stated purpose.
While not taking any specific position on abortion one part of this speech drew my attention. That part which seems to be repeated by the Republicans over and over again is that tax payers should not have their tax dollars used to support things that they find “MORALLY” repugnant. The reason this drew my attention is that my tax dollars have been used repeatedly to fund activities that I find not only “Morally” repugnant but I believe to be in violation of the Constitution. So the question that immediately came to My mind was exactly where does Representative Lankford draw the line as to which functions paid for by government does a minority of tax payers get to opt out of and which ones must be supported regardless of tax payers objections? To answer this question I went first to Representative Lankford’s official website https://lankford.house.gov/issues where one finds this statement “For more information concerning my work and views on important Issues, please contact my Washington, DC office.”. So I did just that and asked that specific question. Just exactly where does and how does Representative Lankford draw the line. The answer was not forthcoming and I got the typical Republican two step.
Lets be clear while I have My own opinions about abortion they have no place in this argument. What is important is this, First abortion is legal, Second abortion is a health care and economic issue, Third the “Morality” of abortion has no place in this discussion while I may find something to be “IMMORAL” another person presented with the same facts may find that very thing to be a viable alternative. Fourth tax payers do not under our Constitution have the option of allocating where their tax dollars go if we had that option we would not need congress but simply a place on each tax return stating an allocation of dollars to areas i.e. National Defense, Congressional Salaries, etc.
The use of the federal budget to promote religious view by either granting benefits to religious organizations or deigning benefits to classes of people in order to promote specific religious view is not only in violation of the Establishment Clause of the Constitution but is repugnant in and of it’s self. Further such policies promote permanent poverty and place the boot of privilege on the throat of the poor and their progeny. These types of policies insure a permanent under class in this country. While there will always be exceptions that prove the rule they are just that exception. What we have here is simply the “Religious Right” using the power of government to accomplish a goal that they can not accomplish on their own and making moral chooses not only for themselves but for others that may not share their moral views. This raises another question as to who’s moral views will prevail. The belief that theses “Morals” are common and shared by all is incorrect just as the view that their are “Universal Values” is a false assumption.
It is time for Representative Lankford and his cohorts to stop pandering and work for the welfare of this country as a whole and stop their unrelenting effort to establish a Christian Theocracy in this country in direct violation of the Constitution that they took an oath not only to support but to defend. Should Representative Lanford be unwilling or unable to abide by his oath then he should resign. Based on the representatives speech and the answers from his staff I question weather the representative or his staff could pass a simple civics exam or even a citizenship test.