Thinking is a weedy business

In April, I went with my family to meet with Rep. Glenn Thompson to talk about abortion access. Being aware of his voting record, we were not trying to change his mind, but rather to understand his thinking.

In short, I was underwhelmed. When asked why people seek abortions, he replied generally that there were “lots of reasons” and mentioned other cultures whose values weren’t necessarily in line with “ours.” Other questions about the reality of abortion (women who seek it, professionals who provide it, resources, information, etc.) were met with similar confusion.

Most alarming was, when questioned about legal ambiguities we found in legislation he had supported, he replied, “I’m not going to go into the weeds.” He seemed to suggest that to ask questions about the thought behind his votes was disingenuous and sneaky. Instead, he said he relied entirely on his firm “faith” and a persistent unwillingness to discuss the real effects of legal language we have been paying him to write.

Many people in the 5th District have faith, but only one person has the power to make federal laws. To make laws based solely on that faith, and not on the “weedy” details of how the law affects the diverse people he serves, is disturbing.

I resent Rep. Thompson’s faith guiding him in law as much as I would any other religious figure acting in a legal context. Thinking, like making laws, is a weedy business.

This story was originally published June 14, 2017 at 7:22 PM with the headline "Thinking is a weedy business."