Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

Democrats: Out of Touch with America on Abortion

Posted by   + Show Post

 Does America know how radical Obama really is on abortion?

-------------------

From Townhall Magazine's November feature, "Democrats: Out of Touch with America on Abortion" by Katie Pavlich:

Standing in downtown Charlotte, N.C., during the 2012 Democratic National Convention in September, Planned Parenthood volunteers yelled on street corners about how to protect women’s rights. Their hot pink t-shirts read “I’m Voting for Barack Obama” on the back and “2012” on the front—with a birth-control wheel in place of the zero.

Inside the forum, the DNC felt more like a giant pro-choice rally than a political convention. First, Democrats adopted a platform embracing both taxpayer-funded abortion and partial-birth abortion and completely set aside the idea that abortion should be rare. The platform language mentions no restrictions on abortion, thereby seeming to promote it anytime, in any place, for any reason:

“The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right. Abortion is an intensely personal decision between a woman, her family, her doctor, and her clergy; there is no place for politicians or government to get in the way,” the platform reads.

Next, speakers at the DNC, including NARAL Pro-Choice America President Nancy Keenan and Planned Parenthood Federation of America President Cecile Richards, made it clear where the DNC stood as they threw their weight, money and pro-abortion language behind President Obama’s re-election campaign.

“I am honored to be here to talk to you about what is at stake for women in 2012. I am proud to say that the Democratic Party believes that women have the right to choose a safe, legal abortion with dignity and with privacy,” Keenan said. “We are so proud to have a president who stands with women and who trusts women.”

Since when did having an abortion ever become an act of dignity?

Richards, meanwhile, delivered a similar message of support.

“The good news is, we already have a president who’s on our side. President Obama understands women. He trusts women. And on every issue that matters to us, he stands with women. President Obama ensured women’s preventive care—including birth control, too—will be covered by all health care plans, with no co-pay, no matter where we work,” Richards said.

Before the 2012 DNC started, Obama for America Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter went on the “TODAY Show” and claimed the convention would speak to all Americans, rather than issues only tailored to Obama’s far-Left base.

“I think you’re going to hear a lot of things that are different this week than you heard last week. First of all, this week will not be about personal attacks or gauzy platitudes or trying to rally our base. We’ll be speaking to all Americans,” Cutter said.

But when it comes to the issue of abortion, extreme pro-choice Democrats are not only out of touch with the rest of America, they’re controlling the direction of the party—and their radical views were on full display at the 2012 DNC. Despite Cutter’s claims the convention would be about speaking to America, the opposite happened.

Obama's Radical Abortion Record

One aspect of President Obama’s record that pro-life America, in particular pro-life Democrats, don’t seem familiar with is how radical his abortion agenda really is.

“One of the biggest scandals of the Obama presidency, and even Obama as a candidate before he became president, was his extreme support of abortion, even to the point of infanticide. We saw that in his record as a state senator, where he voted four times against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, which would protect children that survived abortion,” says Live Action President Lila Rose, whose pro-life activism group conducts undercover stings at abortion clinics. “His first promise as president to Planned Parenthood, he claimed the first thing he would do was to sign the Freedom of Choice Act in order to basically repeal any restrictions to abortion to make abortion completely accessible with no limitations and restrictions. People don’t realize how extreme his position is on abortion and how he supported it to the point of infanticide.”

“He doesn’t see a pre-born child as valuable,” she continued. “He doesn’t see abortion restrictions as valuable. He doesn’t see sexual abuse coverup of minors as really a problem—which is one of Planned Parenthood’s biggest scandals. Instead, his number one priority as president when it comes to human dignity and the abortion issue is to fund the biggest abortion provider and fight against any restrictions on abortion.”

During a 2001 debate in the Illinois state Senate about the Born Alive Infant Bill, known as SB 1663, Obama called a baby temporarily alive outside the womb a “fetus or child, as—as some might describe it.” Throughout his state Senate career, Obama repeatedly voted against or “present” on different incarnations of the legislation, which protects babies who survive abortions by requiring doctors give them adequate medical care.

There was this quote from another debate in 2002, where he again seemed unsure of how to describe an unborn child.

“If that fetus, or child, however you want to describe it, is now outside of the mother’s womb, and the doctor continues to think that it’s non-viable, but there’s, let’s say, movement or some indication that they’re not just coming out limp and dead, that in fact they would then have to call in a second physician to monitor and check off and make sure that this is not a live child that could be saved, is that correct?” Obama said in clarifying what the legislation would accomplish and require.

Obama also voiced opposition to banning sex-selective abortion. A White House statement on behalf of the president said, “The government should not intrude in medical decisions or private family matters in this way,” in response to questions about where Obama stood on legislation banning abortion based on gender.

“In the last couple of months, President Obama made it very clear he would veto a ban on sex-selective abortions and on late-child abortion where there is a restriction after the baby feels pain, which is about 20 weeks. That’s extreme, and even more extreme than that is a commitment to abortion even [when the abortion fails],” Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List, tells Townhall. “In terms of extremes, right now they have everything. They have abortion for all nine months, and they want to keep it that way. They will not cede any ground.

But for Obama, it pays to be extreme. He’s tied at the hip to Planned Parenthood, an enterprise worth $1 billion—don’t forget, it in part benefits from taxpayer dollars—and one that has essentially donated millions to Obama’s re-election campaign through ad buys and dedicated volunteers and resources to promoting his positions on women’s health. In fact, Richards played a heavy role in pushing Obama to require companies, including religious institutions morally opposed, to cover contraception through ObamaCare.

http:// townhall. com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/11/01/democrats_out_of_touch_with_america_on_abortion

by on Nov. 13, 2012 at 7:27 PM
Replies (41-50):
Debrowsky
by Gold Member on Nov. 14, 2012 at 12:50 PM
3 moms liked this


Quoting Friday:


Quoting rnchelle93:

No abortion, for any reason even rape, incest, or life of the mother. Rape is just another form of conception. Those two are from Ryan. Santorum said that birth control is evil and should be removed from public use. Akin believed 1950's science, that female bodies can prevent pregnancy if we are 'legitimately' raped. Murdoch from Indiana I believe justified his anti choice stance with his religion, that all pregnancies, even from rape, are his gods doing, which is means he believes his god wanted women to be raped. Without being raped, his intended pregnancy would have never happened. Several GOP members stated that all hormonal birth control is murder. Employers should have the right to decide what the insurance their employees pay for will cover. These are things that were acceptable in the 50's. Not today and anything based on religion (which 99.9% of all anti choice statements and laws are) should ever be passed in this country, because we have freedom of and from religion.

It does make one wonder, doesn't it? Jehovah's Witnesses are opposed to blood transfusions, should employers who follow that faith be allowed to deny coverage for them? Christian Scientists believe in prayer so I guess their employess should only be covered to go to one of their practitioners and pray. I'm sure there are more basic medical procedures that other religions don't approve of, those are just off the top of my head. I have a problem with employers trying to force their beliefs onto others who don't share them, thru medical ins.

Maybe taking employers out of the picture entirely and going single payer would solve these problems = )

I have a problem with any employer or GOVERNMENT that forces it's citizens to fund services that are morally, physically, biologically WRONG.    This dysfunctional administration seems hell bent on forcing companies and employees to fund methods and services that clearly violate the right to life of the most vulnerable and innocent -  BABIES.     

Surely the medical profession can remember their age old oath to preserve, protect and promote life.  What?    does it have to take the outcry of sensible concerned people to jog their memory?   What will it take besides the removal of the most pro-abortion President we've ever had?    How shameful and disturbing.   

so be it then.      If we have to come up fromt he grassroots level to correct this horrendous sacrifice of human babies from the altar of convenience sake.........that's what your gonna get.   


Friday
by Platinum Member on Nov. 14, 2012 at 12:56 PM
2 moms liked this


Quoting Debrowsky:


Quoting Friday:


Quoting rnchelle93:

No abortion, for any reason even rape, incest, or life of the mother. Rape is just another form of conception. Those two are from Ryan. Santorum said that birth control is evil and should be removed from public use. Akin believed 1950's science, that female bodies can prevent pregnancy if we are 'legitimately' raped. Murdoch from Indiana I believe justified his anti choice stance with his religion, that all pregnancies, even from rape, are his gods doing, which is means he believes his god wanted women to be raped. Without being raped, his intended pregnancy would have never happened. Several GOP members stated that all hormonal birth control is murder. Employers should have the right to decide what the insurance their employees pay for will cover. These are things that were acceptable in the 50's. Not today and anything based on religion (which 99.9% of all anti choice statements and laws are) should ever be passed in this country, because we have freedom of and from religion.

It does make one wonder, doesn't it? Jehovah's Witnesses are opposed to blood transfusions, should employers who follow that faith be allowed to deny coverage for them? Christian Scientists believe in prayer so I guess their employess should only be covered to go to one of their practitioners and pray. I'm sure there are more basic medical procedures that other religions don't approve of, those are just off the top of my head. I have a problem with employers trying to force their beliefs onto others who don't share them, thru medical ins.

Maybe taking employers out of the picture entirely and going single payer would solve these problems = )

I have a problem with any employer or GOVERNMENT that forces it's citizens to fund services that are morally, physically, biologically WRONG.    This dysfunctional administration seems hell bent on forcing companies and employees to fund methods and services that clearly violate the right to life of the most vulnerable and innocent -  BABIES.     

Surely the medical profession can remember their age old oath to preserve, protect and promote life.  What?    does it have to take the outcry of sensible concerned people to jog their memory?   What will it take besides the removal of the most pro-abortion President we've ever had?    How shameful and disturbing.   

so be it then.      If we have to come up fromt he grassroots level to correct this horrendous sacrifice of human babies from the altar of convenience sake.........that's what your gonna get.   


So I shouldn't be forced to help contribute to he wars that I find immoral? Or the drug war? Or corporate welfare? Or millions a day to Israel so they can oppress Palestianians while we are up to our eyeballs in debt. I find them all to be morally wrong. Except for corp welfare, people die because of these govt actions.

I prefer to go about reducing abortion in real ways that actually work at lowering abortion rates. Outlawing it, doesn't. Actually, most of the things that do reduce the numbers are opposed by most pro-lifers.



Church of The Invisible Pink Unicorn (blessed be her holy hooves)

SallyMJ
by Ruby Member on Nov. 14, 2012 at 1:14 PM
2 moms liked this

So how is Ryan an extremist, 1950s style?

I do know that in the 1950s, like the previous 100 years, the racial bigots were Democrats. The governor who opposed racial integration of schoolchildren, the police who turned firehoses on blacks, the people who enacted and enforced Jim Crow laws, those who imposed poll taxes and refused to register black voters, whose terrorist organization the KKK, killed white Civil Rights supporters, in addition to blacks - were all Democrats. Republicans are the ones who pushed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, not Democrats.

To my knowledge, Paul Ryan has not done or said anything remotely similiar to these Democrats. I recall that he dated a black woman in college - so obviously did not think race was an inherent difference between himself and anyone else.  

So again, what 1950s era repression, extremism  are you accusing Paul Ryan of? If your claims were true, I sincerely believe the state of Wisconsin would have learned this a long time ago, and not elected a Republican Congressman like Ryan 8 times from their very blue state.

Quoting rnchelle93:

I agree he is more extreme than most, but I agree with him on everything but the zero restrictions after viability. I don't remember exactly what it was, but in the born alive bill, there was another clause, and that is why he voted against it, if I had a computer I'd find it. And while we are on the topic of extremists, I can think of several republicans, including our potential VP, who takes extreme way back to a 1950's kind.


PeeperSqueak
by on Nov. 14, 2012 at 1:53 PM
3 moms liked this

Obviously you gulp that kook aide the mainstream media feeds you. Ryan clearly said himself during the VP debate.  The others most likely a spin on what they said.  I take all what they say with a grain of salt....if any. For the most part I agree with Ryan and Santorum. Abortion is murder

Quoting rnchelle93:

No abortion, for any reason even rape, incest, or life of the mother. Rape is just another form of conception. Those two are from Ryan. Santorum said that birth control is evil and should be removed from public use. Akin believed 1950's science, that female bodies can prevent pregnancy if we are 'legitimately' raped. Murdoch from Indiana I believe justified his anti choice stance with his religion, that all pregnancies, even from rape, are his gods doing, which is means he believes his god wanted women to be raped. Without being raped, his intended pregnancy would have never happened. Several GOP members stated that all hormonal birth control is murder. Employers should have the right to decide what the insurance their employees pay for will cover. These are things that were acceptable in the 50's. Not today and anything based on religion (which 99.9% of all anti choice statements and laws are) should ever be passed in this country, because we have freedom of and from religion.

Quoting PeeperSqueak:

How so ?

Quoting rnchelle93:

I agree he is more extreme than most, but I agree with him on everything but the zero restrictions after viability. I don't remember exactly what it was, but in the born alive bill, there was another clause, and that is why he voted against it, if I had a computer I'd find it. And while we are on the topic of extremists, I can think of several republicans, including our potential VP, who takes extreme way back to a 1950's kind.



Debrowsky
by Gold Member on Nov. 14, 2012 at 3:18 PM
2 moms liked this


Quoting Friday:


Quoting Debrowsky:


Quoting Friday:


Quoting rnchelle93:

No abortion, for any reason even rape, incest, or life of the mother. Rape is just another form of conception. Those two are from Ryan. Santorum said that birth control is evil and should be removed from public use. Akin believed 1950's science, that female bodies can prevent pregnancy if we are 'legitimately' raped. Murdoch from Indiana I believe justified his anti choice stance with his religion, that all pregnancies, even from rape, are his gods doing, which is means he believes his god wanted women to be raped. Without being raped, his intended pregnancy would have never happened. Several GOP members stated that all hormonal birth control is murder. Employers should have the right to decide what the insurance their employees pay for will cover. These are things that were acceptable in the 50's. Not today and anything based on religion (which 99.9% of all anti choice statements and laws are) should ever be passed in this country, because we have freedom of and from religion.

It does make one wonder, doesn't it? Jehovah's Witnesses are opposed to blood transfusions, should employers who follow that faith be allowed to deny coverage for them? Christian Scientists believe in prayer so I guess their employess should only be covered to go to one of their practitioners and pray. I'm sure there are more basic medical procedures that other religions don't approve of, those are just off the top of my head. I have a problem with employers trying to force their beliefs onto others who don't share them, thru medical ins.

Maybe taking employers out of the picture entirely and going single payer would solve these problems = )

I have a problem with any employer or GOVERNMENT that forces it's citizens to fund services that are morally, physically, biologically WRONG.    This dysfunctional administration seems hell bent on forcing companies and employees to fund methods and services that clearly violate the right to life of the most vulnerable and innocent -  BABIES.     

Surely the medical profession can remember their age old oath to preserve, protect and promote life.  What?    does it have to take the outcry of sensible concerned people to jog their memory?   What will it take besides the removal of the most pro-abortion President we've ever had?    How shameful and disturbing.   

so be it then.      If we have to come up fromt he grassroots level to correct this horrendous sacrifice of human babies from the altar of convenience sake.........that's what your gonna get.   


So I shouldn't be forced to help contribute to he wars that I find immoral? Or the drug war? Or corporate welfare? Or millions a day to Israel so they can oppress Palestianians while we are up to our eyeballs in debt. I find them all to be morally wrong. Except for corp welfare, people die because of these govt actions.

I prefer to go about reducing abortion in real ways that actually work at lowering abortion rates. Outlawing it, doesn't. Actually, most of the things that do reduce the numbers are opposed by most pro-lifers.


Babies are not aggressively oppressing, abusing, violating any human rights or dignity by means of drug pushers, terrorists, despots, misdirected/angry religious zealots, greed ridden individuals and so on.   They are completely innocent and voiceless.    None of your causes even compares to the systematic killing of babies.  
Real ways of stopping abortion-   speak, educate, and lead people away from abortion with the truth.  If people are still stiff necked and stubborn about this,   then go the next step of protecting babies  by defunding or outlawing it.

wake up !

Friday
by Platinum Member on Nov. 14, 2012 at 3:51 PM
1 mom liked this


Quoting Debrowsky:


Quoting Friday:


Quoting Debrowsky:


Quoting Friday:


Quoting rnchelle93:

No abortion, for any reason even rape, incest, or life of the mother. Rape is just another form of conception. Those two are from Ryan. Santorum said that birth control is evil and should be removed from public use. Akin believed 1950's science, that female bodies can prevent pregnancy if we are 'legitimately' raped. Murdoch from Indiana I believe justified his anti choice stance with his religion, that all pregnancies, even from rape, are his gods doing, which is means he believes his god wanted women to be raped. Without being raped, his intended pregnancy would have never happened. Several GOP members stated that all hormonal birth control is murder. Employers should have the right to decide what the insurance their employees pay for will cover. These are things that were acceptable in the 50's. Not today and anything based on religion (which 99.9% of all anti choice statements and laws are) should ever be passed in this country, because we have freedom of and from religion.

It does make one wonder, doesn't it? Jehovah's Witnesses are opposed to blood transfusions, should employers who follow that faith be allowed to deny coverage for them? Christian Scientists believe in prayer so I guess their employess should only be covered to go to one of their practitioners and pray. I'm sure there are more basic medical procedures that other religions don't approve of, those are just off the top of my head. I have a problem with employers trying to force their beliefs onto others who don't share them, thru medical ins.

Maybe taking employers out of the picture entirely and going single payer would solve these problems = )

I have a problem with any employer or GOVERNMENT that forces it's citizens to fund services that are morally, physically, biologically WRONG.    This dysfunctional administration seems hell bent on forcing companies and employees to fund methods and services that clearly violate the right to life of the most vulnerable and innocent -  BABIES.     

Surely the medical profession can remember their age old oath to preserve, protect and promote life.  What?    does it have to take the outcry of sensible concerned people to jog their memory?   What will it take besides the removal of the most pro-abortion President we've ever had?    How shameful and disturbing.   

so be it then.      If we have to come up fromt he grassroots level to correct this horrendous sacrifice of human babies from the altar of convenience sake.........that's what your gonna get.   


So I shouldn't be forced to help contribute to he wars that I find immoral? Or the drug war? Or corporate welfare? Or millions a day to Israel so they can oppress Palestianians while we are up to our eyeballs in debt. I find them all to be morally wrong. Except for corp welfare, people die because of these govt actions.

I prefer to go about reducing abortion in real ways that actually work at lowering abortion rates. Outlawing it, doesn't. Actually, most of the things that do reduce the numbers are opposed by most pro-lifers.


Babies are not aggressively oppressing, abusing, violating any human rights or dignity by means of drug pushers, terrorists, despots, misdirected/angry religious zealots, greed ridden individuals and so on.   They are completely innocent and voiceless.    None of your causes even compares to the systematic killing of babies.  
Real ways of stopping abortion-   speak, educate, and lead people away from abortion with the truth.  If people are still stiff necked and stubborn about this,   then go the next step of protecting babies  by defunding or outlawing it.

wake up !


They are govt actions that I think are immoral, and the drug war hurts more people than drugs do-kills innocents, that I am forced to help support. Why are your morals more important or right than mine.

Easy access to health care, education and birth control are what reduces abortion, period. Outlawing it doesn't work.

I'm wide awake, thanks.


Church of The Invisible Pink Unicorn (blessed be her holy hooves)

Debrowsky
by Gold Member on Nov. 14, 2012 at 4:49 PM
1 mom liked this


Quoting Friday:


Quoting Debrowsky:


Quoting Friday:


Quoting Debrowsky:


Quoting Friday:


Quoting rnchelle93:

No abortion, for any reason even rape, incest, or life of the mother. Rape is just another form of conception. Those two are from Ryan. Santorum said that birth control is evil and should be removed from public use. Akin believed 1950's science, that female bodies can prevent pregnancy if we are 'legitimately' raped. Murdoch from Indiana I believe justified his anti choice stance with his religion, that all pregnancies, even from rape, are his gods doing, which is means he believes his god wanted women to be raped. Without being raped, his intended pregnancy would have never happened. Several GOP members stated that all hormonal birth control is murder. Employers should have the right to decide what the insurance their employees pay for will cover. These are things that were acceptable in the 50's. Not today and anything based on religion (which 99.9% of all anti choice statements and laws are) should ever be passed in this country, because we have freedom of and from religion.

It does make one wonder, doesn't it? Jehovah's Witnesses are opposed to blood transfusions, should employers who follow that faith be allowed to deny coverage for them? Christian Scientists believe in prayer so I guess their employess should only be covered to go to one of their practitioners and pray. I'm sure there are more basic medical procedures that other religions don't approve of, those are just off the top of my head. I have a problem with employers trying to force their beliefs onto others who don't share them, thru medical ins.

Maybe taking employers out of the picture entirely and going single payer would solve these problems = )

I have a problem with any employer or GOVERNMENT that forces it's citizens to fund services that are morally, physically, biologically WRONG.    This dysfunctional administration seems hell bent on forcing companies and employees to fund methods and services that clearly violate the right to life of the most vulnerable and innocent -  BABIES.     

Surely the medical profession can remember their age old oath to preserve, protect and promote life.  What?    does it have to take the outcry of sensible concerned people to jog their memory?   What will it take besides the removal of the most pro-abortion President we've ever had?    How shameful and disturbing.   

so be it then.      If we have to come up fromt he grassroots level to correct this horrendous sacrifice of human babies from the altar of convenience sake.........that's what your gonna get.   


So I shouldn't be forced to help contribute to he wars that I find immoral? Or the drug war? Or corporate welfare? Or millions a day to Israel so they can oppress Palestianians while we are up to our eyeballs in debt. I find them all to be morally wrong. Except for corp welfare, people die because of these govt actions.

I prefer to go about reducing abortion in real ways that actually work at lowering abortion rates. Outlawing it, doesn't. Actually, most of the things that do reduce the numbers are opposed by most pro-lifers.


Babies are not aggressively oppressing, abusing, violating any human rights or dignity by means of drug pushers, terrorists, despots, misdirected/angry religious zealots, greed ridden individuals and so on.   They are completely innocent and voiceless.    None of your causes even compares to the systematic killing of babies.  
Real ways of stopping abortion-   speak, educate, and lead people away from abortion with the truth.  If people are still stiff necked and stubborn about this,   then go the next step of protecting babies  by defunding or outlawing it.

wake up !


They are govt actions that I think are immoral, and the drug war hurts more people than drugs do-kills innocents, that I am forced to help support. Why are your morals more important or right than mine.

Easy access to health care, education and birth control are what reduces abortion, period. Outlawing it doesn't work.

I'm wide awake, thanks.

Well, clearly you and I differ on the what constitutes immorality concerning the war on drug pushers, drug lords, terrorists, etc.- and birth control measures that  ABORT BABIES.   
If you think you are awake, then I would most definitely say you are confused and in denial. 

jaxTheMomm
by Gold Member on Nov. 14, 2012 at 4:51 PM
1 mom liked this

There are no birth control measures that abort babies.  There are birth control measures that prevent fertilized eggs from implanting on the uterine wall.

Now, I understand that some folks now consider that human life begins at fertilization, and I respect that.

I also disagree with it, and should not have my reproductive life determined by someone else's religious beliefs.

Quoting Debrowsky:

Well, clearly you and I differ on the what constitutes immorality concerning the war on drug pushers, drug lords, terrorists, etc.- and birth control measures that  ABORT BABIES.   
If you think you are awake, then I would most definitely say you are confused and in denial. 


Friday
by Platinum Member on Nov. 14, 2012 at 4:57 PM


Quoting Debrowsky:


Quoting Friday:


Quoting Debrowsky:


Quoting Friday:


Quoting Debrowsky:


Quoting Friday:


Quoting rnchelle93:

No abortion, for any reason even rape, incest, or life of the mother. Rape is just another form of conception. Those two are from Ryan. Santorum said that birth control is evil and should be removed from public use. Akin believed 1950's science, that female bodies can prevent pregnancy if we are 'legitimately' raped. Murdoch from Indiana I believe justified his anti choice stance with his religion, that all pregnancies, even from rape, are his gods doing, which is means he believes his god wanted women to be raped. Without being raped, his intended pregnancy would have never happened. Several GOP members stated that all hormonal birth control is murder. Employers should have the right to decide what the insurance their employees pay for will cover. These are things that were acceptable in the 50's. Not today and anything based on religion (which 99.9% of all anti choice statements and laws are) should ever be passed in this country, because we have freedom of and from religion.

It does make one wonder, doesn't it? Jehovah's Witnesses are opposed to blood transfusions, should employers who follow that faith be allowed to deny coverage for them? Christian Scientists believe in prayer so I guess their employess should only be covered to go to one of their practitioners and pray. I'm sure there are more basic medical procedures that other religions don't approve of, those are just off the top of my head. I have a problem with employers trying to force their beliefs onto others who don't share them, thru medical ins.

Maybe taking employers out of the picture entirely and going single payer would solve these problems = )

I have a problem with any employer or GOVERNMENT that forces it's citizens to fund services that are morally, physically, biologically WRONG.    This dysfunctional administration seems hell bent on forcing companies and employees to fund methods and services that clearly violate the right to life of the most vulnerable and innocent -  BABIES.     

Surely the medical profession can remember their age old oath to preserve, protect and promote life.  What?    does it have to take the outcry of sensible concerned people to jog their memory?   What will it take besides the removal of the most pro-abortion President we've ever had?    How shameful and disturbing.   

so be it then.      If we have to come up fromt he grassroots level to correct this horrendous sacrifice of human babies from the altar of convenience sake.........that's what your gonna get.   


So I shouldn't be forced to help contribute to he wars that I find immoral? Or the drug war? Or corporate welfare? Or millions a day to Israel so they can oppress Palestianians while we are up to our eyeballs in debt. I find them all to be morally wrong. Except for corp welfare, people die because of these govt actions.

I prefer to go about reducing abortion in real ways that actually work at lowering abortion rates. Outlawing it, doesn't. Actually, most of the things that do reduce the numbers are opposed by most pro-lifers.


Babies are not aggressively oppressing, abusing, violating any human rights or dignity by means of drug pushers, terrorists, despots, misdirected/angry religious zealots, greed ridden individuals and so on.   They are completely innocent and voiceless.    None of your causes even compares to the systematic killing of babies.  
Real ways of stopping abortion-   speak, educate, and lead people away from abortion with the truth.  If people are still stiff necked and stubborn about this,   then go the next step of protecting babies  by defunding or outlawing it.

wake up !


They are govt actions that I think are immoral, and the drug war hurts more people than drugs do-kills innocents, that I am forced to help support. Why are your morals more important or right than mine.

Easy access to health care, education and birth control are what reduces abortion, period. Outlawing it doesn't work.

I'm wide awake, thanks.

Well, clearly you and I differ on the what constitutes immorality concerning the war on drug pushers, drug lords, terrorists, etc.- and birth control measures that  ABORT BABIES.   
If you think you are awake, then I would most definitely say you are confused and in denial. 

No, I just have a different POV. I'm quite educated on womens reproductive health. I don't like abortion anymore than you do but in my research I've learned that outlawing it isn't the way to reduce it so prefer to focus on efforts that will actually lessen the number of abortions. Just makes more sense to me.

The war on drugs is against our own citizens, if there were no demand the suppliers would go away. Just like alcohol prohibition, not many bootleggers left anymore are there? It's failed policy, a waste of resources and not the govts place...but that's another debate.


Church of The Invisible Pink Unicorn (blessed be her holy hooves)

Debrowsky
by Gold Member on Nov. 14, 2012 at 5:05 PM
1 mom liked this

Wow, seriously!   no birth control measures that abort babies????   the pill, Norplant, the IUD, Depo-Provera, and emergency contraception.   All can abort the newly formed baby at conception.

this is where life begins and the argument falls apart.    very simple.  

Quoting jaxTheMomm:

There are no birth control measures that abort babies.  There are birth control measures that prevent fertilized eggs from implanting on the uterine wall.

Now, I understand that some folks now consider that human life begins at fertilization, and I respect that.

I also disagree with it, and should not have my reproductive life determined by someone else's religious beliefs.

Quoting Debrowsky:

Well, clearly you and I differ on the what constitutes immorality concerning the war on drug pushers, drug lords, terrorists, etc.- and birth control measures that  ABORT BABIES.   
If you think you are awake, then I would most definitely say you are confused and in denial. 



Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN