Bush's first ultra-right appointee

[sizlinseagulsoup]

I got this in my email so naturally I assumed this was BS, snopes reports it is true and all the facts and quotations are indeed true. Scary stuff!

President Bush has announced his plan to select Dr. W.
David Hager to head up the Food and Drug
Administration's (FDA) Reproductive Health Drugs
Advisory Committee. The committee has not met for more
than two years, during which time its charter lapsed.
As a result, the Bush Administration is tasked with
filling all eleven positions with new members. This
position does not require Congressional approval.

The FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee
makes crucial decisions on matters relating to drugs
used in the practice of gynecology and related
specialties, including hormone therapy, contraception,
treatment for infertility, and medical alternatives to
surgical procedures for sterilization and pregnancy
termination.

Dr. Hager is the author of "As Jesus Cared for
Women:Restoring Women Then and Now." The book blends
biblical accounts of Christ healing Women with case
st udies from Hager's practice. His views of
reproductive health care are far outside the
mainstream for reproductive technology. Dr. Hager is a
practicing\ OB/GYN who describes himself as "pro-life"
and refuses to prescribe to unmarried women.


In the book Dr. Hager wrote with his wife, entitled
"Stress and the Woman's Body," he suggests that women
who suffer from premenstrual syndrome should seek help
from reading the bible and praying. As an editor and
contributing author of "The Reproduction Revolution: A
Christian Appraisal of Sexuality Reproductive
Technologies and the Family," Dr. Hager appears to
have endorsed the medically inaccurate assertion that
the common birth control pill is an abortifacient.


We are concerned that Dr. Hager's strong religious
beliefs may color his assessment of technologies that
are necessary to protect women's lives or to preserve
and promote women's health. Hager's track record of
using religious beliefs to guide his medical
decision-making makes him a dangerous and
inappropriate candidate to serve as chair of this
committee. Critical drug public policy and research
must not be influenced by antiabortion politics.
Members of this important panel should be appointed on
the basis of science and medicine, rather than
politics and religion. American women deserve no less.

There is something you can do. Below is a statement to
be sent to the White House, opposing the placement of
Hager.

[Slider]

You misunderstand. This is the start of the unifying effort the President has promised. Don't you see? The far, far right, and the almost as far right will be united. Plus, we can now kill off all those slutty liberal women through poor health care, and the left will become less extreme, too.

We'll be one big happy, family!

Slider

[T Grimble]

I got this email also. I have not seen it in the news though. Has anybody fact checked this? The internet is full of so much garbage I never know what to believe.

-Tom

[Slider]

I thought it sounded familiar - it is old news, but accurate. From Snopes:

"The appointment is a done deal, and Dr. Hager is now part of this committee (although, perhaps as a result of the controversy raised by this message, he was not appointed to chair the committee). Moreover, in June 2004, he was reappointed to the committee for a further year. Whether he can be objective remains to be seen. "

So it's not related to the recent election, but I would bet more, similarly inane appointments will follow. That is what Bush meant by "political capital" in his recent speech. Capital to do as he wishes, regardless of whether it will benefit the country. Unifying my ass. Though this isn't the smoling gun, it is representative of the guy's approach.

Slider

What is the purpose of this post?
Since May and your perversion of the "Bush fell off his MTB" thread into a political pissing match we have debated which way this country should go. I can understand the desire to sway where possible the opinion of the undecided prior to the election. I disagree that this is the place but the post view count proves my opinion is in the minority.
What exactly are you trying to achieve now Kevin?

[Slider]

I'd have thought it was obvious: To show that Bush is a dangerous demagogue that will do as he pleases despite his claims that unity is his goal.

You seem to disapprove of this discussion, Justbill. Care to explain why?

Slider

[Mr_Cheeze]

I'm with these guys on this one. Hader is a dangerous appointee to a position that should be reserved for someone who actually believes in science. Funny how they snuck him in there under the radar while everyone was focusing on the election.

I'd have thought it was obvious: To show that Bush is a dangerous demagogue that will do as he pleases despite his claims that unity is his goal.

You seem to disapprove of this discussion, Justbill. Care to explain why?

Slider


My displeasure with the political fighting posts and my opinion on their appropriateness on this forum are documented elsewhere. I can face facts. People like to see this crap. As i said above, the view count proves it. So my disaproval of the discussion is not relevant as it is not in the majority.

Thank you for your candor Slider, however i was asking Kevin. To the effect that you wish " to show that Bush is a dangerous demagogue that will do as he pleases despite his claims " . Agian I ask.. For What?

[Slider]

To the effect that you wish " to show that Bush is a dangerous demagogue that will do as he pleases despite his claims " . Agian I ask.. For What?

Again, I'd have thought it was obvious. Do we really have to rehash the value of discussion? I mean, this is a forum, right?

Anyway, here's the value I see, as far as this topic goes. Unquestioning acceptance of the decisions of those in authority invites abuse of that authority. Our best defense against corruption, tyranny, and erosion of our rights is open discussion. Complacency is evil.

NEMBA is an advocacy group, for Pete's sake. Isn't fighting for representation what we do?

Slider

[MissJean]

As a woman, and as a mother of 2 daughters, this is an issue that is very important to me.
The idea that a medical professional in the 21st century could seriously hold such beliefs and even worse, actually be appointed to a government post is mind numbing. Men have walked on the moon, we can see real time pictures of the moons of Saturn on the internet, we can transplant organs into sick people to make them well, we can instantaneously communicate with someone on the other side of the world, and the USA has a man as president who has appointed someone who suggests bible study for a recognized medical condition.

I can see it now, the next head of the FDA will be advocating the use of an eye of newt and bloodletting.

[sizlinseagulsoup]

What is the purpose of this post?


Ah! The answer to that one is simple. I personally believe that politics is not something that happens for a few months every 4 years. Enough said?


What exactly are you trying to achieve now Kevin?
To further discredit the adminstration (although all the pictures of the mutilated Marines will probably do that over the next few days), raise awareness, and to have a discussion.

[Mr_Cheeze]

To the effect that you wish " to show that Bush is a dangerous demagogue that will do as he pleases despite his claims " . Agian I ask.. For What?

Again, I'd have thought it was obvious. Do we really have to rehash the value of discussion? I mean, this is a forum, right?

Anyway, here's the value I see, as far as this topic goes. Unquestioning acceptance of the decisions of those in authority invites abuse of that authority. Our best defense against corruption, tyranny, and erosion of our rights is open discussion. Complacency is evil.

NEMBA is an advocacy group, for Pete's sake. Isn't fighting for representation what we do?

Slider


Well said, Slider. We don't usually agree on many issues, but on this much we are perfectly aligned. Unfortunately, some people are hyper-sensitive to discussions and/or opinions where religion is questioned. You and I know that debate is healthy, but there is a prevailing thought amongst the religious that faith and god should never enter that fray. Yet, they feel it's okay when religion enters politics as Kevin has just demonstrated.

Contrarily, one big problem with many secularists on the left is that they often feel the need to denegrate the religious. Bill Maher is quite guilty of this unnecessary behavior. This is just as much a sin as those on the right trying to force the issue of religion into legislation where it certainly does not belong.

I love religious debate even mnore than politics. Unfortunately, it's like walking on eggshells most of the time.

Thank you Kevin.