Religious Right Turns a Blind Eye to a Real "Life Issue"
Frank Cocozzelli printable version print page     Bookmark and Share
Sun Jan 04, 2009 at 04:04:13 PM EST
With the imminent inauguration of Barack Obama, the issue of embryonic cell research is again coming to the fore. The Religious Right, looking for any issue on which to stage their comeback, will certainly do their part to make the most of it in pursuit of their never-ending culture war.

While the Religious Right claims to have a corner on being "pro-life" -- there is nothing more pro-life and pro-family than fully funding this vital medical research. I should know, because I speak from experience.

As many readers know, a progressive neuromuscular condition has left me a virtual quadriplegic, LMG muscular dystrophy. And although I earn a decent income as a private attorney, an ever larger portion of it goes to home-aides and medical devices -- most of which are designed to keep me working. My disposable income, and even my income earning capacity, has become a hostage to my affliction. This really hit home when a doctor said I should think about divorcing my wife and give her all my assets so that I would be able to qualify for Medicare. I was flabbergasted.

But apparently this is a situation faced by many families as they have to consider spending down everything they have before they can qualify for state or federal assistance. But all this makes me think that if we were to identify the true destroyer of American families, it is not the red-herring thrown by the Religious Right, such as LGBT marriage equality. It is the lack of universal health care.

This is the side of disease that the unaffiliated rarely see. And it is certainly the side of disease that Religious Right opponents embryonic stem cell research and their neoconservative allies most definitely do not want to talk about. The Knights of Columbus spent millions is support of Proposition 8 so that LGBT couples would be denied marriage equality. Yet when it comes to defending my family from possible financial ruin -- they don't give a damn at all. In fact, they actually oppose this research that could help me.

Long-term disease and disability have devastating consequences for any family. Sons who should be playing catch with a father instead is forced to lift his hand to help him scratch a head itch; daughters who should driven to a friend's house must instead help him eat is dinner; a wife who works and takes care of her children has the added stress of rolling her husband over on his side simply because he cannot do so on his own.

But that is only part of the stressful scenario. Income that would ordinarily pay for the upkeep of a house or family vacations, instead pays for home-aids and drivers to take the afflicted family member to work -- that is if he is fortunate enough to have a job. Longtime friends cannot be visited simply because there is no way for a power wheelchair to get into a friend's house with a flight of steps by the front door. These and a thousand other circumstances affect my life and tens of thousands of people in circumstances like mine. Some of the circumstances are obvious, some are subtle and are the kinds of things people who are fully able bodied as I once was, take for granted.

Many lives are put on hold because of one with disability. Families without health insurance cannot afford the medical equipment -- ventilators, toilet lifts, leg braces -- that may actually improve a patient's quality of life. Isolation is an ever-present reality.

How ironic it is that many of the opponents of embryonic stem cell research also oppose universal healthcare! Neoconservative William Kristol is a perfect example. In 1993, when President Clinton attempted some form of national health insurance, Kristol circulated a memo to fellow Republicans in which he claimed: "There is no health care crisis."

In the coming weeks the Religious Right will take their culture war of aggression to the Obama administration. They will cite stem cell research, along with marriage equality and universal health care as the things that will break down the American family. No one should be fooled by the diversionary battles of the culture war couched in the language of religious orthodoxies. The real agenda for Kristol and his neoconservative pals is an irreligious economic libertarianism. It is the same ideology of economic buccaneerism advanced by the likes of Ludwig Von Mises, Fredrich Hayek and Milton Friedman -- and embraced by political leaders in both parties. And we have seen what their ideas have wrought in the current economic crisis.

May God help us if they once again prevail. If they do, they will certainly further weaken the very thing they claim they want to defend, the American family.




Display:
I know that the regular readers of this column know my situation ad nauseum. Clearly, I am far more fortunate than many others similarly situated. I have a job and, through my wife's union job, I have healthcare insurance.

Still, even for someone as fortunate as myself, a disease such as muscular dystrophy is still a costly affair. If anyone wants to be pro-life and preserve family values, let us not impede research that may help preserve the economic vitality of the family.

by Frank Cocozzelli on Sun Jan 04, 2009 at 04:10:00 PM EST

I think with the "orthodox" Catholics it is more a matter of observing the outward forms rather than the substance of "pro-life" issues. It is very shameful to us as a nation that we can find billions for new, state of the art weapons systems, and we can afford to bail out the Wall Street "geniuses" that helped to create the current financial meltdown, but we can't afford to invest in our citizens and investing in our own health.

You've mentioned your situation before, and I'm fortunate to be in relatively good health. Despite this, I have a preexisting condition that prevents me from being able to get private insurance coverage. I'm fortunate to be covered through a group plan, but I could not afford coverage on my own, nor could I get a non-group policy.

I agree that we should consider research that would preserve the economic vitality of the family.

by khughes1963 on Sun Jan 04, 2009 at 09:26:44 PM EST
Parent

Luckily, things will be changing in this country about twenty minutes after noon on January 20, 2009.

by Frank Cocozzelli on Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 07:09:28 PM EST
Parent
I'm looking forward to that day- and crossing my fingers until then!

by ArchaeoBob on Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 07:36:18 PM EST
Parent




Sharing a personal story is not always easy, but your point about health care is absolutely on target. This is the single most important economic issue to address in our economy today. In addition to health care as a financial issue, the war on drugs also needs to be redefined and begin to move into the medical arena and out of the political arena where it is seen as a "war on drugs" and fuels the prison/corrections industrial complex. This also has been perhaps the single most distructive outside attack on the family any society has faced. We are now well into the 2nd and 3rd generation of families broken in our war on drugs, and the problem just becomes greater. Then welfare reform is needed. This is where stimulus dollars will have a real impact. Two areas of this welfare reform need change -- first the basic level of distribution, helping people to have a better standard of living, then a major plan to help temporary and part time income benefit and motivate the families on welfare. Difficult to accomplish these changes, but well worth it. Finally, perhaps the republicans are worth listening to, in regards to some tax policies, particularly in the area of investment credits, to business which expand, upgrade, or retool, with the result of additional workers hired and placed back on the tax roles. For the homeowner, or worker, these investment tax credits could become available for green technology in our homes and transportation. Many of these programs are in place but could be expanded. This is a start toward pro-family policies.

by chaplain on Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 10:17:40 AM EST
Remove the part about "motivating" people on welfare and helping businesses, and I'd agree with you.

The truth is, most of the people on welfare don't need motivation.  They need chances- and not just at dead end, abusive, miserable jobs where they will go nowhere and remain in their unpleasant situation.  (There is plenty of ethnographic information that suggests low-wage paying businesses also generally treat their people poorly- especially inner-city minorities.  They behave just within the law, and want people to become profit-making robots.)

The idea that welfare people (or the poor, or the homeless) needs motivation is no better than telling them to "get a job".  I can't use the language I would to describe that nonsense.  I could also say the same thing about "work ethic" or "budgeting" or any other number of offensive terms I've heard applied on poor people.  The fact is, poor people are PEOPLE like everyone else.  Good and bad, lazy and hard working (in fact - research does suggest that the poor are generally harder working than others- they just get shafted more!)

I might also add that BUSINESSES ARE THE PROBLEM. &n