Saturday, February 13, 2010

Is Dora Olivo Anti-Establishment?

That’s a term that dates me somewhat. The term Anti-Establishment was used in the 1960’s and 1970’s as a way to describe a point of view that opposed conventional social, political or economic opinions.

That is definitely not a word that we can use to describe Texas State Rep Dora Olivo (D-Missouri City). But it is part of a phrase.

Dora Olivo is Anti-Establishment Clause.

The Establishment Clause is a clause within the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution that forbids Congress from establishing a state religion. Here it is:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”

You know, it strikes me that this is the first clause to be written in the Bill of Rights. The first. The Framers must have had some strong feelings about this to have written this clause even before “freedom of speech” or “freedom of the press.”

But Dora Olivo appears to be against the Establishment Clause. This appears to be the case and I have it on video as rock solid proof that appearances don’t deceive. It’s a short clip from a larger exchange between Olivo and Ron Reynolds that took place last Wednesday.



Did you hear that? If you didn’t get it I have it transcribed below.

“You know there’s people here that…in…in Fort Bend County…there’s a lot of church people here in Fort Bend County that believe . . .eh … don’t believe in embryonic stem cell research their whole life, you know. And I'm pro-life, you know. And this has been my position all this time.”

Dora Olivo bases her opposition to embryonic stem cell research, not on her own religious beliefs, oh no, not at all. She bases her opposition to embryonic stem cell research because she has religious people in her district and THEIR religious beliefs lead them to conclude that embryonic stem cell research is a moral sin and should be outlawed.

In short she is letting someone else’s religious doctrine guide her governmental decision-making processes.

That she hasn’t actually taken a public vote in her district to see how many of them actually oppose embryonic stem cell research, and how many do not, is absolutely beside the point. In her own self-incriminating words, Dora Olivo admits to bending to the pressure of people whose sole reason in opposing embryonic stem cell research is their religious doctrine.

That’s not only unconstitutional; it’s just plain bad manners.

It’s also, as Ron Reynolds sought to point out, not very Democratic.

I quote from the Texas Democratic Party Platform that can be found here:

"Stem cell research should not be held hostage to politics that limits the potential for conquering many debilitating and deadly illnesses. Texas has world-class research facilities that cannot attract world-class talent and funding until we take stem cell research out of politics and put it into the labs where research could lead to life-saving therapies. Texas Democrats strongly and unconditionally support research into stem cell therapies and state funding for research into stem cell therapies at state public universities. Curing disease is the right thing to do, and stem cell lines should be expanded without increasing or encouraging any high risk procedures."

This is the platform of the political party of which Dora Olivo professes to be a member.

True Democratic voters in HD 27 would want a real Democrat to represent them in the Texas state house. Ron Reynolds may have had some past issues with the Texas State Bar Association, issues that have been resolved and everyone has moved on, but I see Ron Reynolds as someone who will more fully and fairly represent HD 27 voters, voters who want a true Democrat in that office rather than someone who cherry picks the platform.

HD 27 voters wouldn't want someone who puts the religious beliefs of some of her constituents before a cure for cancer or any of the other manmade miracles that stem cell research promises.

One would think.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yeah -- we can't have those religious people having any influence on public policy. After all, look at the mess that black minister from Atlanta made in the 1950s and 1960s!

Hal said...

Yeah, Anon.

That's exactly where Dr. King mounted his anti-segregationist movement from: Atlanta.

Old White Guys like you need to attend to your history books. Shame, shame on you.

Dr. King never preached from an Atlanta pulpit you moron. His wife, Coretta, had family in Atlanta but Dr. King worked out of Montgomery, you twit.

Teabaggers who want to lurk in sheep's clothing are so easy to spot.

Hey, Chris: Ron Paul...Ron Paul...

Pfffft.

Kold_Kadavr_flatliner, VitSee said...

Actually, girl, I think BOTH of 'em are in error, both Republicans and Democrats for fighting, never stopping their verbal abuse and slandre. God doesn't have political parties and quite fruitless to believe God sides withe Democrats for abortion/homosexuality and Republicans for war/greed. Join me, will ya, girl, Upstairs where I can kiss your adorable feets in my love? Meet me in the Great Beyond. Promise? God bless you. Love you.

Kold_Kadavr_flatliner, sub/dude said...

Look, 'men-who-sit-on-the-potty-feeding-Satan-with-your-blasphemous-#2'. If you wanna follow the cheep-o, whorizontal psycho/sis, that's your problem. Why did our Mother say recently only 1/4 of humanity would enter Heaven? Is she wrong? Not. Have you ever heard of her ...or do you think the stanky, puppet BOs godlike? Better wiseabove, brudda, and follow Jesus, because believe-you-me, abortion-advocates, you SHALL croak. And withat on your indelible soul, you-going-down, brudda. DOES NOT matter if you don't believe - totally irrelevant to God and the Liar. You're mortal. Hate to break it to ya. Your soul is up for grabs and it doesn't look like you'll be coming along when Jesus gits through with you. Pro'bly are homosexuals. Again, bad news. Decide: is 88ish years worth the loss of the length and breadth of eternity? God blessa youse -Fr. Sarducci, ol SNL