Bloomberg, Breast-feeding & Political Hypocrisy

After New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg broke ranks with mayors in Boston and Chicago, who have tried to (unconstitutionally) ban Chick-fil-A restaurants from locating in those cities, I thought for a moment I had been wrong about Bloomberg’s complete lack of common sense. After trying to turn NYC — perhaps my favorite city in America — into a complete nanny-state with laws regulating everything from smoking to how large a soda you can buy, it was refreshing to see the mayor — a strong supporter of gay marriage — actually support Chick-fil-A’s right to do business in the city. Of course, Bloomberg — like most liberal elites — had never heard of the famous chicken joint until the recent kerfuffle started.

However, it didn’t take long for Bloomberg to bring me back to my senses. Restoring my faith that politicians like Michael Bloomberg — who obviously has more money than sense — the Nanny-in-Chief has now turned his sites on the breasts of the new moms of NYC. In a weird (but yet somehow normal for him) move, Mayor Bloomberg has decreed that baby formula in New York City hospitals shall be under lock-and-key beginning on September 3. In what has to be the most pro-breast-feeding restrictive policy affecting a woman’s body that the mayor and other nanny-state liberals would ever endorse:

Under Latch On NYC, new mothers who want formula won’t be denied it, but hospitals will keep infant formula in out-of-the-way secure storerooms or in locked boxes like those used to dispense and track medications. With each bottle a mother requests and receives, she’ll also get a talking-to. Staffers will explain why she should offer the breast instead. (full article here)

Don’t you just love how liberals are all about indoctrinating moms about the benefits of breast-feeding, particularly those moms who make the “wrong” choice and initially decide to use formula? I would love to hear the “talking-to” that these moms will get, courtesy of local hospital staff who are doing the mayor’s bidding. One of the more ironic (and sad) parts of the story that has been reported is a comment made by Beth Walsh of Beth Israel Medical Center:

“It’s the patient’s choice. . . . But it’s our job to educate them on the best option.”

When it comes to Bloomberg, Walsh, and others in NYC, apparently “choice” for a woman’s body only extends until after the baby is born. Before that, a woman is free to choose to abort her unborn baby and Mayor Bloomberg, President Obama and other “pro-choice” politicians would support a “woman’s right to choose.” However, after the baby is born, apparently women in NYC don’t really enjoy those choices anymore. Can anyone say “hypocrisy.”

Now, before my readers who are on the more liberal side get all bent out of shape at what seems like my own hypocrisy on the matter of “choice,” — I am pro-life, both before and after the baby is born — I’ll make a deal with you. If women can be forced to listen to a doctor or nurse “educate them on the best option” after the baby is born, how about letting doctors and nurses at abortion clinics be required to educate pregnant women on the best option before the baby is born? I’m quite certain that, for most women (unless their life is in danger) —  and for 100% of the unborn babies — that the best option is life!

Leave a Reply