"Grub Hub" Type Delivery Can Keep Abortion Meds Available



The anti-abortion industry thinks it can continue to collect money from the gullible public forever by promising to end all abortion. They are claiming that if the Trump Administration says it will enforce a decades old law the government will be start opening mail to see if it contains abortion meds and women will not be able to get the products. The Trump Administration has not agreed to do this, but crazy things can happen. 

If the Post Office were to start opening mail there would be a national outrage. Abortion rights might flood the mails with suspicious but empty mailings to use up Post Office time. It would also open the door, it seems to me, to delivering abortion meds through non postal channels. Every reader knows of these which include the giant Amazon and taxi-type rides to food delivery. These do not include new ideas that could come along out of the innovative abortion rights itself.

We have to remember why the anti-abortion industry is pushing the unrealistic proposal to open private mail. It is on the ropes. Thousands of people have made a career in this industry, living off the donations of the gullible. Now, it is obvious to everyone they have nothing to show for the money people have given them. The industry's reaction is, "There is still this one sliver of hope, opening mail, finding abortion pills and calling the press."    

A year or so ago I read about a group of women in Texas who cross the border into Mexico, buy abortion pills and drive them to addresses in Texas to be used by pregnant women. The nation is already wired from coast to coast collecting money for travel and scheduling medical abortions for women in states that ban abortions. Using this network to import, move and distribute abortion meds does not seem like a stretch.  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ancient God, Bel (Baal), the Main Character in an Ancient Play

Image
In a British museum is a preserved stone tablet from Babylon. It dates to about 2,000 BCE. Someone labored patiently to inscribe an entire passion play featuring the god Bel. I reiterate this is a stone tablet, not a recopied papyrus. The play begins with the god Bel arrested by soldiers and taken off the stage. He reappears at a trial in the Hall of Judgement. Bel is innocent but is sentenced to death. In the next scene Bel is accosted by a mob. He is despised and rejected. The actor playing Bel is then taken by guard to a hilltop in a sacred grove. Two criminals are taken with him. One of these is released. The the audience then leaves the theater and follows the actor Bel and his guards to the top of a hill where the death scene is enacted by hanging from a tree. The audience returns to the theater for the dramatic final scenes. The dead Bel is stripped and prepared for burial. On a theatrical hill to the side of the stage is a tomb where the body is placed. A stone is rolle...
Read more

Will We Ever Know How Accurate Current Bibles Are

Image
When I discuss the many times the Bible was copied and recopied by scribes over a couple of thousand years, the reply is often, "I have a book by this (or that) expert who says the Bible is 99% accurate to its original writers." The 99% claim appears in various places defending the Bible. There is one thing we know absolutely: There is no surviving original copy of the Bible. Even the oldest surviving material is a generation or two after the time some of the Bible was written. This means no one can claim he has, or ever will, compare the current Bible to the original Bible and find the two are 99% the same. We cannot claim either that it is not 99% accurate. For the sake of discussion, however, assume the current Bible is 99% accurate. That would mean the one word out of every 100 was inaccurate. It could still mean an important misreading of the original text. An example is the passage referring to punishment for a man who kills a fetus. In the oldest know materia...
Read more

What Was the "Argument" in the Election

Image
I hate to add my blog to the piles of blogs and pundits analyzing and pondering the meaning of the just passed election. But that's what I feel like doing today. I've always like Senator Ted Cruz's summary of politics. He once said, "First, win the argument. Then, win the election." I think there is a way of applying that to anti abortion Catholics and Protestants. The link talks of Catholics who now feel they have no political home because Republicans let them down with Trump but they remain against abortion rights. Taking Cruz's win-the-argument thesis, I'd call the past election about an argument between two groups. One group's argument was, "Trump's a jerk." The other's argument was, "Abortion is wrong." The group, "Trump's a jerk," won the argument and then the election.  While one can argue the election, or any election, it about more complex issues, I believe in the end elections hinge on very simple ar...
Read more