What Rick Perry wants for women

A Blog by Mean Rachel refers to Perry as someone who is contradicting to what he believes in and what he wants. What would women be subjected to if Rick Perry were to be President? On the one hand, he wants women to be vaccinated from cervical cancer which indicates that females will be sexually active at a young age. These girls are not fully mature enough to know what this shot is actually for and why it is being given to them so early on in their child bearing years. On the other hand he wants us to pursue abstinence and wait to have sex until we get married, like he and his wife did. A possible punishment if we don’t wait might be that if we do encounter sex and become pregnant and aren’t able to keep the child, for whatever reason, we must go through a series of steps to be able to give up the baby. Aren’t we sending young teens the wrong message; “Don’t have sex until you are married, but if you do we already took measures to keep you from getting an STD”?  Rick Perry bases his decision making on personal experience rather than studies and surveys. Anyone knows that what’s best for one person doesn’t always work for the next.

Texas has the third highest teen pregnancy in this country. Does this mean we need to have the government step in and stop or prevent the rise in births all together? We also must learn how we are going to care for these children medically, since we are ranked first in the number for children without healthcare insurance. Rick Perry has little to say about how we are to care medically for his people, old and young. So far, he’s not my choice for a better country or women of this country.

what is poverty?

The argument addressed in the American statesman titled Bumper Sticker- No Way to Fight Poverty on September 26, 2011 is that we, Texas, need to find a better way to handle and contain our poverty levels. In the past three years we have seen these levels increase. This argument was previously brought up in the American Statesman by Juan Castillo, stating that Austin leads Texas in the amount of people living in poverty. This article gives both numbers and statistics about who actually is in poverty. These are not who you think they are, and are not always homeless or jobless.  Knowing that the person sitting next to you in class or a co-worker could be living in these conditions makes the reader more aware of what is happening in their very own surroundings. The numbers of people with jobs applying for help is growing. These people either make minimum wage or are being paid below average.

People who help these companies produce jobs within itself don’t solve money troubles. Poverty may never end. Policy makers need to be able to work better at helping to create these jobs, we also need to work on better educating our students so that later in life they will be able to fulfill these jobs which have been provided. We need a better variety of housing for all levels of income. These poverty numbers are a sign of a problem that needs to be addressed seriously and soon. To Texas it’s a family of four making under $22k a year, yet to live comfortably in Austin a family of four needs to make $56k. LBJ first brought up the decision to fight poverty roughly forty years ago and we are still fighting.  Austin, following Texas’ exceptionalism believes itself to be recession proof, which we are not. People every day are looking for ways to make it to the next paycheck, where his/her next meal is coming from, or even just where can I find a job. A little less than 20 percent of Travis County falls below the poverty line.

This article convinced me from the beginning that our government needs to find a solution on helping people in poverty. People who are above the poverty line struggle with the same things and just a little help from our government would go a long way. Sometimes help to get through the rough patch of extra bills and extra mouths to feed, and I think this is what everyone is looking for, a little help to make it up the hill, to make it to the next paycheck without starving.

The Abortion Sonogram law was passed at the beginning of June to make pregnant mothers who want an abortion undergo a series of steps to have this completed. These steps include a sonogram to hear a beating heart and listening to a description of the fetus by a doctor and then having to wait 24hrs before getting the procedure done. In the Texas Tribune, this article “CourtroomBattle Begins on Abortion Sonogram Law” demonstrates how vague this law was written and how it has no definite description of how this law is supposed to enforced. The law was accepted and passed by our governor Rick Perry. No more than a month later did Center for Reproductive Rights file an injunction. The law violates the Equal Protection Clause and the First Amendment causing doctors to act as puppets and tell patients something politically driven. I do have on question for this law. What is the definition of an abortion pertaining to this law? Is it a wanted abortion or one that cannot be avoided?