In a recent “op-ed,” Yvette Herrell say she dislikes New Mexico’s law permitting abortion, and favors re-criminalizing most abortions, and that her opponents misrepresent her views.
She doesn’t say if she’d extend criminal liability to folks driving someone to get an abortion, as do draconian laws passed by her political allies in Texas and elsewhere. As we read of harrowing situations of women escaping to New Mexico merely to protect their health, or unable to escape, Herrell mocks our state’s compassion and tolerance as “creating a late-term abortion tourism industry.” The phrase, “Abortion tourism” insults those women. Electing a majority of Herrell allies to the legislature could be life-threatening for girls and women.
Herrell describes pro-choice voters as “liberal special interest groups smearing me and misleading New Mexico voters about my positions.”
However, for many, Herrell’s own words are the problem. She’s “pro-life. As a Christian, I believe every human life is a sacred gift from God.”
I’m truly pro-life. I believe every life [not merely human] is a marvelous gift, not mine to destroy, although I surely take out many mosquitoes and the few roaches I see. (Scorpions I carry outside. Rattlers, further away.) Herrell has no more right to impose her Christian views on us than would a strict Buddhist seeking to outlaw killing mosquitoes. (Buddhists would be far less likely to try.)
She adds, “I also greatly empathize with the many women who find themselves with an unintended pregnancy.” but her “empathy” would still advocate jailing their doctors unless the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest or clearly endangered the mother’s life – an exception she previously opposed. She says “it is important that we extend every option available to women to help them make the right decision for their personal situation,” so long as that decision doesn’t go beyond her narrow confines.
Herrell does “fully support increased access to birth control,” unlike Republicans who are banning that in Louisiana. (Oddly, in 2022 when Congress voted on a bill to protect contraception access, she voted “No!”) She also says “we must do a better job of supporting mothers — and fathers — through pregnancy, birth, and beyond.” Let’s remind her of that the next time Congress is considering SNAP benefits and other ways governments can help out poor families in need. She also promises she would not support a national ban that would overrule New Mexico’s laws on the subject, although she certainly supported such bans in the past, starting with fertilization. Those bans she sponsored made no exceptions.
Those are her words, which she wants us to understand her by, ignoring her actions. She says she’d respect New Mexico’s right to decide the issue, unlike the way she voted when a congresswoman. (One might ask why, believing her God requires her to save even a fertilized egg from murder, she’s abandoning that sacred cause. I wonder how He views that.)
I thoroughly agree with her on one point: “We can disagree civilly on difficult issues like abortion, while working together” on other issues and needs of our country and New Mexicans. I spend a lot of time encouraging dialogue among folks with various points of view. I hope Ms. Herrell will join us on radio when we try to talk with her and her opponent, Congressman Gabe Vasquez. A genuine dialogue can only help in having elections decided by the most knowledgeable voters we can become.
– 30 --
[The above column appeared Sunday, 2June, 2024, in the Las Cruces Sun-News and (soon) on the newspaper’s website and on KRWG’s website, under Local Viewpoints. A shortened and sharpened radio commentary version will air during the week on KRWG (90.1 FM) and on KTAL-LP (101.5 FM, streaming at www.lccommunityradio.org/). ]
[Turnout is low. That makes your vote, for whomever, count more. Or, more likely to count. We voted Saturday at Corbett Center. It was fun. Nice people there. No one else voting. They actually had food to give away, so I grabbed some. On the voting machine, inserting my ballot moved it from 222 to 223. I asked if that was today’s total. The guy said “That’s for the whole time.” Weeks of early voting. Assuming six days a week for five weeks, 30 days. Seven or eight people per day. There was at least one other machine, so cal it 14-16 per day. And we’re second in the state in voter total this season.]
[I voted for Angelica Rubio to continue working for us District 35 residents. Having written a couple of weeks ago about that race, I noticed when we got a misleading and somewhat nasty flier attacking Rubio and never mentioning her opponent. (If they needn’t, I needn’t. He’s a nice enough guy, likely being used.
Anyway, the mailer was “Paid for by New Mexico Turn Around.” I wondered who that was. Found a phone number and called it. Message immediately said, “No message left on this line will be answered. If you want to ask about real estate or anything else, call” a second number. I called. Second number was answered, “Jalapeño Corporation.” I asked to speak to Harvey Yates, a Republican oil zillionaire. “Jr. or the Third?” “Jr.,” I said. (He’s 82.) She told me he wasn’t in today. Apparently “New Mexico Turn Around” has been around for a while, donating mostly to Republican political candidates. Republicans and other backers of the challenger are sufficiently nervous about his complete lack of Democratic (or other significant civil, civic, or charitable) credentials that a new flier shows eight respected people who also back him, including conservative Democrat Mary Kay Papen (to whom Democrats owe respect for her years representing Las Crucens, but who voted against protecting women’s rights to abortions). I respect and like Mary Kay, but, sorry, I still see no good reason to replace a good legislator with a beginner who just joined the party. ]
[In such a low-turnout primary, could the money invested against Rubio bear fruit? Hope not.]
No comments:
Post a Comment