This week President Obama will be outlining a multi-year plan to cut the deficit by $1.1 trillion over the next 10 years by raising taxes on the wealthy and limiting government health benefits for the poor and elderly.

There are still fierce debates to come on the budget that will fund pet projects for senators and representatives alike. One of the posturing issues that really disturbed me concerned the idea that many Republicans like Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) will refuse to vote for the budget on account of the missing proposal to cut spending for Planned Parenthood.

Pence said, “What was clear here is that this administration and liberals in Congress were willing to shut the government down to continue to fund abortion providers in this country.”

I have purposely stayed away from the whole abortion debate over the last couple of weeks, because I feel that, after almost 40 years since Roe v. Wade, I have little to add to the argument. However, now I must dispel a couple of myths that those who are so pro-life seem to be stuck on.

Myth #1: Planned Parenthood is not legally allowed to use taxpayer dollars to fund abortions. Once again, no amount of money given to Planned Parenthood by the US Government is used on abortion.

According to Planned Parenthood’s budget and website “90 percent is preventive, primary care, which helps prevent unintended pregnancies through contraception, reduce the spread of sexually transmitted infections through testing and treatment, and screen for cervical and other cancers.”

In addition to those facts, Donors provide 90 percent of the national organizations revenue and 20 percent of affiliate revenue.

Now I know what you’re thinking: “But Cliff, this is contrary to what UTSA organizations like Right to Life and Republican Congressmen and women have been saying.”

Right you are reader, and that is why when the budget is voted down or changed, you should call that reason bull-poppycock.

Myth #2: According to the pro-lifers there are oodles of people who are itching to adopt. This may be the case to an extent, but here are the facts as published by the US Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families in their August 2008 study. According to the study, “Adoption has been and remains rare. Between 1973 and 2002, the percentage of married women 18–44 years of age who had adopted a child fluctuated between 1.3 and 2.2 percent.”

Part of this has been a little bit of supply and demand. According to the CDC study, people would rather adopt internationally because they want only infant babies, a baby with similar ethnic and racial background as the family, the confidentiality of the adoption, and shorter waiting times.

In the U.S. the mean age of foster children is 8.5 years old, and they’ve stayed in foster care for an average of 3.6 years.

Related Stories

More from Paisano1

Editorial Board

At the University of Missouri, real change happened — but only when loss of university revenue was threatened. Missouri student…

More In Opinion

Maha Qadri Magazine Editor

Too many times, I’ve found myself in this situation: My friend is showing me a picture of their latest hook…