The debate in the public arena over where the line is between legitimate government protection and government intrusion into private lives has many gray areas. The recent tussle here in North Cackalacky concerning Governor Perdue’s recent veto of a bill that would have required abortion providers to provide expectant mothers with a sonogram image of their in- utero child is no different. The Greensboro News and Record did a write up on the actions and reactions here if anyone is interested, but I wrote my own (brief) commentary on this issue that I forwarded on to my state senator, Stan Bingham, because he voted ‘no’ on this bill, and he stands in a crucial position to block the 3/5 majority needed to overturn the governor’s veto. Here is my correspondence which I entitled “A Respectful Request”.
Dear Senator Bingham,
Before I offer my request and reasoning behind it, let me thank you, as a resident of Davidson County, for your public service. As a former public school teacher, I appreciate how you voted on the bill that helps remove restrictions on the number of charter schools in our state. As a fiscal conservative, I am grateful for your positive voting record on the balanced budget act of 2011. You are to be commended for these principled stances, one that empowers parents to choose the best educational option for their child(ren) and the other to help relieve present and future tax payers of the burdens being heaped upon them by the out-of-their-mind spending patterns of other state politicians. It is for things like these that I am grateful.
But now I come to my respectful request. You recently voted “No” on House Bill #854, ABORTION-WOMAN’S RIGHT TO KNOW ACT, and you have been quoted as saying, “I’m not inclined to change my mind on this.” My request is that you do change your mind and vote to overturn Governor Perdue’s veto on this bill. Here is my reasoning as to why. The Governor has stated that, “This bill is a dangerous intrusion into the confidential relationship that exists between women and their doctors,” and I have to agree to a certain extent. I also am opposed to obnoxious government intrusion into the lives of citizens, but I also believe that one of the government’s responsibilities is to protect the life and property of its citizens, even the pre-born ones. It seems an acceptable premise that the government has the right to intervene in the lives of private citizens who are intending harm toward future citizens who cannot speak for or defend themselves. Therefore, it seems that the state of North Carolina, through overturning the Governor’s veto, can help protect the pre-born citizens of this fine state from the “dangerous intrusion” of the abortion doctor into the life of pre-born children simply by empowering the mothers who are considering abortion with the pertinent information that is available to them.
Let me reiterate that I appreciate much of your hard work on behalf of all of North Carolina’s citizens. But please understand me when I say this, that this issue of protecting the children from the life-ending procedure of abortion is a hill worth dying on. Please demonstrate your zeal for protecting the lives of those without a voice by participating in the overturning of Governor Perdue’s veto of HB#854.
Kirk Blankenship, father of three
Senator Bingham’s office has yet to respond to my correspondence, but the week is young. I would encourage all those who read this and are residents of North Carolina (and believe my reasoning to be decent enough) to let Senator Bingham know through email (Stan.Bingham@ncleg.net) or some correspondence that those he represents will be most pleased if he were to join the principled stance to provide the best information to expectant mothers before they make a decision that will end the life of those who can’t defend themselves.