73 Comments for this article

Tags: , , , , , , ,

WILMINGTON, NC (WWAY) — Just days after New Hanover County Commissioners voted against state funding for contraceptives, the response has been incredible.

A few hundred people came to Riverfront Park in downtown Wilmington Thursday in protest of the vote. The board’s vote Monday has since made national headlines, even getting a response from the ACLU of North Carolina. Though commissioners will re-examine the funding at their April meeting, they are still catching backlash from their initial decision.

“It’s just a shame that they are having to waste the time that was such a no-brainer in the first place,” protestor Page Rutledge said.

“I couldn’t really believe we were talking about 2012,” protestor Carol Chappell said. “We’re talking about something I stood up for 40 years ago.”

Commissioners Jonathan Barfield and Jason Thompson showed up to listen and take questions, but Thompson found the gathering unproductive.

“Mostly it was people name calling and pushing me and spitting at me,” Thompson said. “There are just some really nasty people down here.”

The commission will take another look at the family planning funding at its April 2 meeting. Commissioners and the Health Department plan to be fully prepared for the second time around.

“Based on the information I had on Monday, I made the correct vote,” Thompson said. “We’re going to hear it again in April, and of course the Board of Health has already given new information. Some commissioners are getting new information.”

However, some wonder if a change of vote will mean a change of heart.

“I think if they vote it through, it’s to appease the people. I don’t think it changes anything in reality,” protestor Melissa Robon said.

“I can tell you that I will put my money where my mouth is and make sure more women get elected,” Rutledge said.

Comment on this Story

Leave a Reply

73 Comments on "Protest held in response to commissioners turning down family planning funds"

2015 years 10 months ago

Anybody remember the McDonald’s lawsuit when the woman spilled her coffee on herself? She sued McDonald’s and won. That was the beginning of the United States of it isn’t my fault America. Politicians aren’t held accountable for their crimes, why should I?

2015 years 10 months ago

I would love a United States where ALL people were devout, practicing Christians who were abstinent until their marriage nights and that there was no divorce. I would love a world where teenagers didn’t have the lovely example on MTV of 16 and Pregnant and too dumb to find a clinic or adoptive family rather than shame their families on national television.

We are going to pay one way or the other. The Pill is 97% reliable in preventing pregnancy when used correctly. This means you take the PILL EVERY DAY AT THE SAME HOUR NO MATTER WHAT and still, 3 women out of every 100 will have an unwanted pregnancy. Think about the teens you know (who shouldn’t be having sex anyway) and their responsible behavior. So if the New Hanover County school district has 1000 young female students having sex, and every single one of them was careful and used the PILL, 30 would still become pregnant. Condom numbers are worse. 84% out of every 100 won’t get pregnant when used correctly which means 16 out of every 100 girls/women WILL get pregnant. Take those hypothetical boys and men having regular sex with those same hypothetical 1000 girls using a condom every single time CORRECTLY, and 160 will become fathers in one year. That’s some lousy chances, folks.

A lot of religious and/or conservative middle and upper class people suddenly aren’t so religious when they encourage their daughters and sons to abort the result of those lousy odds rather than mess up and derail their lives with an unwanted child interrupting her education and him forced to pay child support before he’s even finished college. 54% of women and girls seeking abortions claim to be evangelical. What does this tell us? We’re doing a lousy job in our homes and churches and yet we expect the poor and ignorant and uneducated to make better choices? Those of us who haven’t had to deal with this have been lucky.

The IUD IS VERY EXPENSIVE but more effective over a FIVE YEAR PERIOD. That is FIVE YEARS the taxpayer is FREE from having that one woman who cannot take the Pill for medical reasons (high blood pressure or heart irregularities) or an “irresponsible in taking the Pill daily” woman or teen creating more wards of the state. That $1000 prorated over five years is cheap versus our hospital having to provide “indigent” prenatal, birth, and pediatric care for that youngster and later our school system having yet another poorly parented child disrupting our classrooms.

We tried sterilizing and that was considered morally repugnant. We tried funding the Pill and condoms and we see how well that’s worked out. We stopped public funding of abortions. These resulting babies do NOT get put up for adoption. Many are born addicted to drugs. Many are premature with later educational problems. Grandmothers end up raising many of them after the state intervenes or they end up in the foster care system shuttled from one home to another. They end up with emotional and behavioral problems…less likely to be able to read and function in civilized society and more likely to end up in the correctional system.

That’s the end result whatever your political, moral, and spiritual persuasion. Please think on that, Sirs.

2015 years 10 months ago

The grant is for $9,000. Simple math. The Pill(1 mo generic prescription) $10.00. 900 women could benefit for 1 month. 75 women could benefit for 1 year. That does not include the cost of doctor visits figure that visit will put you back–lets say $200. Less than 30 women could benefit and that is only if they visit the doctor once in a year. Really people. The grant is not worth the overall price.

Stand up Commissioners. Say “No” a second time.

2015 years 10 months ago

Sorry, I had to stop reading at: “I would love a United States where ALL people were devout, practicing Christians who were abstinent until their marriage nights and that there was no divorce.”

2015 years 10 months ago

You should go back and re-examine (or perhaps examine for the first time) the details of that case. Your comment doesn’t make any sense.


Related News