Current News
Support Rational Alchemy on Google Plus
Your Pod-Casts
Would you like to pod-cast on Rational Alchemy? Tell me the rules and how do I do it? Follow this link.
| Sen. Dave Schultheis (not an interview) |
|
|
| Podcasts - Interviews on Rational Alchemy | |||
| Written by Nigel Aves | |||
| Monday, 02 March 2009 14:02 | |||
This is NOT a Rational Alchemy Interview!
These are the stunning words of an Elected Senator of Colorado on why he will not vote for HIV testing of pregnant women. The entire Bill is for the protection of an unborn. medical science is now at a place where if the mother is diagnosed with HIV there's a good chance that with the right medical help the baby could be born HIV free.
Listen very carefully to his words. Know the fact that he is representing an area (Colorado Springs) that is basically the heart and soul of the Religious Right. I think he was coerced into voting this way. But that's just an opion. make up your own minds.
The Bill SB 179, passed 32-1 and moves on to the House.
Here is a transcript of Sen. Dave Schultheis words.
Thank you, Madam President. You know, this was a difficult bill for me. I voted yes in committee on it because of discussions surrounding the fact that — well, let me just basically say this, it basically modifies the communicable disease laws and it requires the health care providers to test pregnant women for HIV unless they opt out. And that’s basically, that’s the main part of this bill. I voted yes on it. I was a little bit troubled with my vote and was just wondering what was bothering me. I woke up the next morning — Thursday morning — at 5 a.m. and I wrestled with this bill for another hour from 5 to 6 and finally came to the conclusion I’m going to be a no vote on this. I’m trying to think through what the role of government is here. And I am not convinced that part of the role of government should be to protect individuals from the negative consequences of their actions. Sexual promiscuity, we know, causes a lot of problems in our state, one of which, obviously, is the contraction of HIV. And we have other programs that deal with the negative consequences — we put up part of our high schools where we allow students maybe 13 years old who put their child in a small daycare center there. We do things continually to remove the negative consequences that take place from poor behavior and unacceptable behavior, quite frankly, and I don’t think that’s the role of this body. As a result of that I finally came to the conclusion I would have to be a no vote on this because this stems from sexual promiscuity for the most part, and I just can’t vote on this bill and I wanted to explain to this body why I was going to be a no vote on this.
and in a follow up speach to this after Wednesdays vote ...
State Sen. Dave Schultheis restated his opposition to a bill requiring HIV tests for pregnant women by claiming that infected babies would cause families to “see the negative consequences of that promiscuity.”
The Colorado Springs Republican with a penchant for foot-in-mouth moments tells The Rocky Mountain News in a follow-up story to Wednesday’s Senate floor controversy:
Yes, Schultheis really said he is “hoping” people “have AIDS, have it seriously as a baby …”
|
Northern CO Skeptics
Drink Skeptically in Fort Collins
Skeptics Meetups
Drop us a line at feedback (at) rational-alchemy (dot) com and we will add your link.
Or just drop us a line and let us know how badly we are screwing up!





