It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Congress Bill to Defund Taxpayer Money for Abortion

page: 1
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 12:33 AM
link   
The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill to prohibit all taxpayer money to fund abortions.

H.R.7 -- No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2015 (Referred in Senate - RFS)

Lots of details, but they do not prevent purchasing "separate coverage".

How does this affect subsidized insurance?



CHAPTER 4--PROHIBITING TAXPAYER FUNDED ABORTIONS

`301. Prohibition on funding for abortions.

`302. Prohibition on funding for health benefits plans that cover abortion.

`303. Limitation on Federal facilities and employees.

`304. Construction relating to separate coverage.

`305. Construction relating to the use of non-Federal funds for health coverage.

`306. Non-preemption of other Federal laws.

`307. Construction relating to complications arising from abortion.

`308. Treatment of abortions related to rape, incest, or preserving the life of the mother.

`309. Application to District of Columbia.



Sec. 304. Construction relating to separate coverage

`Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as prohibiting any individual, entity, or State or locality from purchasing separate abortion coverage or health benefits coverage that includes abortion so long as such coverage is paid for entirely using only funds not authorized or appropriated by Federal law and such coverage shall not be purchased using matching funds required for a federally subsidized program, including a State's or locality's contribution of Medicaid matching funds.


H.R.7 -- No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2015 (Referred in Senate - RFS)




posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 12:52 AM
link   
Are we talking about a second world country here? Oh no, the USA...well, soon to be a second world country.

Abortions should be viewed like an investment from right wing thinkers.

-Liberals breed more liberals, let them kill each other, you don't like them anyway!
-Many people decide abortion because of financial reason. You want MORE of your haaard earned money to go to MORE scoundrels that don't work living off social benefits that will breed more of the same type of sub-humans? Plan ahead!

People in congress will surely all go to heaven after thinking of such wise ideas, Jesus will applaud them!

`308. Treatment of abortions related to rape, incest, or preserving the life of the mother.

Oh, that one is so so full of freedom, go America!

Whatever makes right-wing thinkers take on an "holier than thou" role when it as to come to abortions escapes me. All the rest of time, they talk about freedom and stay "off my yard" but when it comes to abortion, well they can step on your yard all they want. After the baby is born, well we can't count of them for help. Self-righteous primitive BS.
edit on 28-1-2015 by theMediator because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 01:08 AM
link   

a reply to: theMediator

-Liberals breed more liberals, let them kill each other, you don't like them anyway!




Since Obama will (probably) veto this, maybe that's the plan.

Then Obama gets "credit" for the efforts !!!




posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 01:15 AM
link   
a reply to: theMediator

Nice spin job. The simplicity of this is your "freedom" doesn't demand my paying for it.

To quote the 'right wing', "Freedom isn't FREE".

Pay for it yourself and quit whining....just saying.



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 01:19 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Good...I am not religious but killing a human is murder.

An embryo is a human, it is simple biology.

Calling it a " lump of cells" is like the Nazis dehumanizing the Jews and other " undesirables".

It is still killing an innocent.... It is murder.

Many unfertile females would love to carry the child to term.

How many einsteins have Americans alone killed if in the last 20 years?


Go ahead and hate...I will meet your bs with a strong dose of truth.

Don't have unprotected sex no problem.... Give it up for adoption....drop it off at any police fire or welfare office.

It is a life, it was snuffed out......

At least be honest.



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 01:47 AM
link   
a reply to: theMediator

How about taxpayers vote with their tax dollars.

How many dollars do you cede for public transportation?

How many dollars do you cede for healthcare?

How many dollars do you cede for abortions?

Let me decide what I choose to fund.

Don't demand it.



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 01:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: rockintitz
a reply to: theMediator

How about taxpayers vote with their tax dollars.

How many dollars do you cede for public transportation?

How many dollars do you cede for healthcare?

How many dollars do you cede for abortions?

Let me decide what I choose to fund.

Don't demand it.


Public services fail if theyre not paid for by people who arent making use of them. Theyre not private services which are funded only by users. Public services require funding from a wide pool in order to not be prohibitively expensive. As an example: How many of the roads that you're paying for upkeep on do you actually use?



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 02:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

Exactly. I'm paying for things that I do not use.

Why do you think I should have to pay for that?



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 02:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: rockintitz
a reply to: Aazadan

Exactly. I'm paying for things that I do not use.

Why do you think I should have to pay for that?


Because the cost of living in a society that has infrastructure for people and more importantly businesses to use requires that you contribute to the upkeep of that society. These projects are very expensive, and only become affordable through economies of scale and having large tax bases. The two pretty much necessitate that you pay taxes to those services. Take your cities bus system if you still have one. If you didn't pay taxes towards that, what would it do to your towns economy? People wouldn't be able to get to work, which means more unemployment, less velocity of money, fewer businesses, reduced competition (higher prices), more cars (more wear on the roads, more pollution).

I could go on.



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 04:57 AM
link   
If only we could choose to not have public funds spent on wars, the NSA and other crappy things our Government forces us to pay for every day.
edit on 2015/1/28 by Metallicus because: corrected autocorrect



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 05:08 AM
link   


`308. Treatment of abortions related to rape, incest, or preserving the life of the mother.


If that means it won't cover it when it's preserving a mother's live then I bet ten to one if it does get passed it will be shot down by the supreme court!!

And if I am a women who is being denied coverage for a treatment that will prevent death why in heaven's name should I be shelling out money in taxes so that others can have treatment for anything whatsoever??? let alone so you can have your free colonosopy or viagra pills which never are needed to prevent imminent death??



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 05:45 AM
link   
Why do I have to pay for a man's impotency?



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 05:58 AM
link   
The link in the op didn't work for me.

Here's the wording of the bill:

docs.house.gov...

and they will fund it for rape incest and mother's health.

But I bet they try to carry it over to many of the birth control methods!



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 06:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Since Obama will (probably) veto this, maybe that's the plan.

Then Obama gets "credit" for the efforts !!!


Assuming the Senate passes this first, that is...



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 06:39 AM
link   
I wonder what's next on the list for this congress.

Wouldn't be surprised if a war on christmas bill get's passed next.



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 07:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: theMediator

Nice spin job. The simplicity of this is your "freedom" doesn't demand my paying for it.

To quote the 'right wing', "Freedom isn't FREE".

Pay for it yourself and quit whining....just saying.



So when the baby is forced to come to term, do you also not want to pay to support helping that baby survive in a healthy environment? As long as the baby comes to term right, then it's not your problem I assume. Never mind the huge drain that child will cause on the system being cared for by parents that didn't want it who are probably unprepared mentally and financially to take care of it, good chance that they aren't married either and it may just be the mother taking care of it. It may end up in social services (meaning your tax money is supporting it, probably moreso). But damnit! You made sure that baby wasn't killed before all these compounding costs could pile up and cost us all WAY more money.

This bill is going to get vetoed anyways. Something tells me, we will be seeing many stupid bills like this over the next 2 years.
edit on 28-1-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 07:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: infinityorder
a reply to: xuenchen

Good...I am not religious but killing a human is murder.

An embryo is a human, it is simple biology.

Calling it a " lump of cells" is like the Nazis dehumanizing the Jews and other " undesirables".

It is still killing an innocent.... It is murder.

Many unfertile females would love to carry the child to term.


Well there are plenty of children up for adoption in the country that those unfertile females could get. How about they start there?


How many einsteins have Americans alone killed if in the last 20 years?


Go ahead and hate...I will meet your bs with a strong dose of truth.

Don't have unprotected sex no problem.... Give it up for adoption....drop it off at any police fire or welfare office.

It is a life, it was snuffed out......

At least be honest.


It's a choice that the mother must make. She has to weigh the decision against a wide range of things. To distill it down so simply is dumb. Our adoption system is currently overwhelmed. There are so many children in and out of social services and group homes, it is ridiculous. Single motherhood is higher than ever and ALL of this is with abortion being legal. You want to speak about truth, how much worse do you think all that will get if abortion is illegal?



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: theMediator

So explain why taxes need to fund the killing of innocent life?



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 08:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: theMediator

So explain why taxes need to fund the killing of innocent life?


We already spend hundreds of billions of dollars killing and bombing innocent people in the middle east, seems to me like denying a woman's right to decide what goes on inside her body should be the least of our concerns.

But then again I'm expecting a lot of bills like this one from the current congress. Thankfully we have a president that's not shy about using his veto power.



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 08:29 AM
link   
a reply to: muse7

That doesn't in any way answer my question.

Instead of political grand standing, just answer the question.


Why should the tax payer fund the killing of an innocent life?


And how on earth does removing tax dollars from funding this, interfere with a "woman's right to chose"?







 
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join