Thursday, June 29, 2006

Frontlines of the Culture Wars

Battles for the greater good, but for whom is all this 'goodness' good for? It is not goodness at all, it is bigotry, continuing and advancing 'their' agenda of eugenics. Two articles highlight the public threat of ultra righteousness nosing into governmental and public health affairs, which effects all and every one.

Ideology won't prevent cancer

A vaccine that would reduce the risk of cervical cancer faces a challenge from the religious right.
By Julie F. Kay, JULIE F. KAY is a staff attorney at Legal Momentum, a national legal advocacy organization seeking to expand the rights and opportunities of women and girls.
June 29, 2006

A VACCINE proved to dramatically reduce cervical cancer, the second most common form of cancer among women, would be expected to sail through federal approval processes. Yet getting such a vaccine to the people who would benefit the most from it is no sure thing, thanks to those promoting an ideology that any sex outside (heterosexual) marriage is wrong. A far-right political agenda should not be allowed, again, to threaten women's health.

Today, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices will determine whether Gardasil — which has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration as a guard against the cancer-causing human papilloma virus, or HPV, for girls and women ages 9 to 26 — should be widely used. The panel's decision would establish whether private insurers and the government would cover the cost of such vaccinations. By recommending that Gardasil be universally administered to girls ages 11-12, the committee can facilitate widespread vaccination and enable all girls and women to protect themselves from a sexually transmitted infection that the CDC says 80% of American women will have by age 50.
Opponents of the vaccine argue that abstinence is a "foolproof" alternative that negates the need for mandatory vaccination. These groups believe that vaccination will act to lower young women's sexual inhibitions and promote risky sexual behavior, despite scientific evidence to the contrary.

Lunatic fringe, you say? Not anymore. Such beliefs are held by some Bush administration appointees. One of them — Reginald Finger, a medical doctor and a member of the CDC committee — is a believer in "just say no" as the preferred protection against HPV. Until last fall, Finger was a medical issues analyst for Focus on the Family, an ultraconservative group that advocates "abstinence until marriage and faithfulness after marriage as the best and primary practice in preventing HPV" and other sexually transmitted infections.
Read the rest of article Los Angeles Times

The other subject, Prosecuting State-Authorized Medicinal Cannabis Patients, one has some reservations on what side to take, but when weighing facts and knowing your talking about terminal illnesses why fight them and it is clear what a waste it is to fight someone dying wanting some or any relief.

Congress Votes To Continue Prosecuting State-Authorized Medicinal Cannabis Patients

Washington, DC: State-authorized patients and their caregivers who use or possess medical cannabis will continue to be subject to federal arrest and prosecution, after the House of Representatives rejected a proposed amendment today that sought to bar the US Department of Justice (DOJ) from prosecuting patients who use cannabis medicinally in accordance with the laws of their states.

The House voted 259 to 163 against the bi-partisan measure, sponsored by Reps. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) and Maurice Hinchey (D-NY). The 163 House votes in favor of the patient-protection provision was the highest total ever recorded in a Congressional floor vote to liberalize marijuana laws. Of those who voted in support of the Hinchey/Rohrabacher medical marijuana amendment, 18 were Republicans (a gain of three votes from 2005) and 144 were Democrats (a loss of one vote from last year). The House's only Independent Congressman, Vermont Representative Bernard Sanders, also voted in favor of the amendment.

"For the fourth year in a row, Congress had an opportunity to stop wasting taxpayers' dollars arresting seriously ill patients who possess and use medical cannabis in compliance with state law," NORML Executive Director St. Pierre said. "Instead, 259 members of Congress chose today to prosecute patients."

Speaking on the House floor in favor of the amendment, co-sponsor Maurice Hinchey said, "This amendment has to do with two simple things: being compassionate for people who are suffering and dying ... and the right of states to govern medical practice, not this Congress."

Representative Dana Rohrabacher added that it is a "travesty" for the federal government to intervene in states that have voted in favor of the medicinal use of cannabis.

Also speaking in favor of the provision were co-sponsor Reps. Sam Farr (D-CA), Barney Frank (D-MA), Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Barbara Lee (D-CA), David Obey (D-WI), and Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) Congressmen John Boozeman (R-AR), Steve King (R-IA), Tom Latham (R-IA), John Mica (R-FL), John Peterson (R-PA), and Frank Wolf (R-VA) spoke in opposition to the amendment.

For more information, please contact Allen St. Pierre, NORML Executive Director, at (202) 483-5500.

NORML and the NORML Foundation: 1600 K Street NW, Suite 501, Washington DC, 20006-2832
Tel: (202) 483-5500 • Fax: (202) 483-0057 • Email:

"The stories of corruption in the drug industry could fill the Manhattan phone book."~ Dean Baker


Labels: , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sometimes it is good to be wrong, I just wonder why boys will not get the vaccine for HPV. A multi-trillion dollar industry cancer is, lets not lead them out of business for goodness sake.

Fri Jun 30, 10:29:00 AM EDT  

Post a Comment

Comments are moderated so be good, speller, I'm not

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home