Obama to Lift Ban on Funding for Groups Providing Abortions Overseas

Originally posted by dawnstar
so us spending money to teach these women about abstinance is just a waste of time.....you might as well be teaching the men of the village instead!

I'm down with that. Teach the men as well in addition to encouraging parental responsibility, love, leadership, etc.

Originally posted by XTexan
Just to clear things up, he's not authorizing any more funds than were already authorized.

Amount "X" which was available to only group A, is now availble to groups A,B and C...

I think you are confused...I don't think the posters railing on here about this issue are concerned with "clearing things up".

You are correct though...this is not providing further funds to these programs.

This is a recinding of the "Mexico City Policy" which was instituted by Reagan, recinded under clinton and re-instituted under Bush...and now recinded again under President Obama.

The final language of the "Mexico City Policy", instituted in 1984, was negotiated and edited by Alan Keyes...A genuine whacko.

The issue with the policy is that it excludes funding of any NGO's that even associate with any groups that advocate abortions...thus leaving ALL of the family planning funding to primarily Christian based NGO's and Family Planning NGO's that do not promote condem use etc..but rather take a strict religious view of family planning.

Just say no..God doesn't want you to have sex...

reply to post by maybereal11


Thank you that was the point I have been trying to make from the beginnign of this thread.

Whether abortion is right or wrong is mostly irrelevant here, because the wording of this law was so poor that it restricted almost any kind of birth control.

If Obama or the next president wants to put in another abortion-funding ban, fine, i just want it to specify that the funding is off-limits for medical abortions only, and not penalize people for merely discussing abortion or leave the definition of abortion ambiguous.

Given the situation in many of these countries, which has already been detailed here, I beleive it is indirect murder to push an abstinence-only agenda rather than properly equip these people to take care of their health.

[edit on 23-1-2009 by asmeone2]

How many teens singly handedly murder a hundred million or so potential babies everyday without thought?

pun intended.

Seriously, the whole miracle of making a baby deal is a joke, There is no miracle here, Sperm + egg = baby, It's that simple there's nothing special about it, every female has the ability to give birth unless they have health issues, it's not some magical thing that can't be reproduced and only happens once in a lifetime...

P + Vagee = baby

Now fundamentalists are to judge mental, first it's not any of your business what someone else chooses to do with their body. Second, Why are the right wing Christians always the first to bang the drums or war and thus condoning the murder of fully developed human beings who are self aware. Yet are also the first to ridicule, judge and force their fundamentalist views on any woman who decides she's not ready do bring a child into this world? And at the time the woman makes this decision that "potential" child will be nothing more than a small blob of goo covered flesh that doesn't even know it exists?


Now I fully understand nothing will change the mind of a fundamentalist right wing Christian, they want to have their cake and eat it, well so long as their not the ones who have to feed, clothe, and raise it...

However understand this, these are your moral values, Not everyone else's.
You have no right to force your morals and your values on others, Nor can you ever through you forced compliance, change a persons character.

I've found over my life that Christians live in a world with padded walls, They shelter their children from anything they deem "evil" when if they truly had "faith" in their religion or there god then they should be able t place their child in any test of evil and know that those children will pass that test...
Not only that but they also try to force blue laws and such down our throats, you can't force goodwill if you do then it isn't goodwill.

God placed the Tree of Knowledge in Eden, He didn't have to, he could have never put it there and Adam and Eve and their children could have lived a sinless life, but he placed that tree there to test them, He told them never to eat from it, but he never took away their ability to eat from it, free will, choice, Even God himself never attempted to force compliance, So who exactly are you to tell others what choices they can and cannot make?

Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by dawnstar
so us spending money to teach these women about abstinance is just a waste of time.....you might as well be teaching the men of the village instead!

I'm down with that. Teach the men as well in addition to encouraging parental responsibility, love, leadership, etc.

and then will you discard the idea that if she didn't want to have a baby she should have not had the sex, and instead proclaim that if he didn't want to have the bably, well, he should have not had the sex....if it is known before the conception by him that the pregnacy was likely to cause or serious injury to her or death, will you hold him responsible...even to the degree of murder charges if she dies due to the pregnacy?
For some reason, I doubt it....

it's interesting though, you object to using this money to teach women how to prevent conception and the birth of a baby, which in some ways at least is helpful, but you are perfectly okay with having it wasted in countries where "just saying no" is not even an option for them!!



[edit on 23-1-2009 by dawnstar]

Well, it's a done deal.

The Mexico City Policy has officially been overturned.

I thought Obama was about down sizing and fiscal responsibility.

Why would he do this the USA is already bankrupt?

What he should do is sign a bill that would abort all current politicians and lobbyists, then you would see some great progress.

WELCOME THE ANITCHRIST - OBAMA
Obama The Anti-Christ

WELCOME TO "THE NEW WORLD ORDER"

Social Justice

"Thou shalt not kill" is a basic law for Christians. It's disgusting to learn that even on this day and age people are still rallying around with their pro-choice tags. People can be so selfish if their convenience is on the line. Sickos.

Perhaps the pro-choicers here hasn't seen the documentary "Silent Scream" yet.

A few pro abortion points ive picked up on

We’re all just animals… well with that type of rationale you can disregard just about every evil man has committed in all of human history

The rape cases, the disadvantaged cases, the mothers that could possibly die… so out of the billion and half (and more) abortion cases what is the approximate percentage of those cases do you think? 5% 10% 20% on grounds of compassion
I find it very difficult to see how more than 50 million woman are raped or cannot give birth every year
This was after all the argument that allowed abortion to be instated into western nations, on compassionate grounds but a billion plus abortions later surely this argument has proven itself void

Pro lifers only care about the fetuses and then don’t give a s@#t after that about anyone… where does this stupid pathetic slander have any grounds for argument?? What an imaginary argument that is
(in western nations) look around your own communities, who is giving help to the homeless and poor, who is giving help to the elderly and dying, mental health support and also helping the poor girls that suffer from the mental health issues that come from having abortions
(in third world nations) missionaries, schools, hospitals, farming and infrastructure
Christians are trying to build a better world instead of promoting death as an answer to hardship
Get a dose of reality

reply to post by Unknown Truth


Did you know there are some species of fish that rape the mouths of other species in order to procreate?

The animal world is a lot weirder than some give it credit for.

Here is what I find interesting... Every time someone religious or religiously against something states "This or that isn't natural or good", the rational folks come in and throw examples of things that are in nature and happen all the time.

Then the rhetort is, "Human beings aren't animals!"

I've come to the conclusion that Religious people think that Nature only consists of Humans, and the rest of God's creatures don't matter.

Why?

Because Reality hurts their case for arguments!



[edit on 23-1-2009 by TheColdDragon]

reply to post by saint4God


Saint...

Fiscal/Social disadvantage causes more misery than abortion does.

Have you done research on the studies of how Abortion legality affects state by state well being and success?

Or how it affects social problems such as crime and poverty?

I love it, i thought he would do something incredibly stupid his first days instead a surprise of good fortune for other countries who have problems like us. Restoring freedom to those who dont know what that is, is a fresh outlook so far. I applaud him for this great contribution to our worlds health.

Those of you who want to take this freedom away should be ashamed of yourselfs. Why do you care what other people do with their own body? What we don't have enough homeless, or orphaned children around already? You want more pain and suffering? You know common scene would say since you people are so religious you would want the unborn "soul" to remain with "god" not to suffer with an unwilling or undeserving parent. But since i know there is no god and you people are hypocrites, you do the opposite. I cant say it enough, LEAVE peoples FREEDOM alone.

Originally posted by Notroh est
well with that type of rationale you can disregard just about every evil man has committed in all of human history

Yes, you can. Because evil is a concept existant to moral absolutists. There is no perfect human. Christ told you that. Listen to Jeebus.

The rape cases, the disadvantaged cases, the mothers that could possibly die… so out of the billion and half (and more) abortion cases what is the approximate percentage of those cases do you think? 5% 10% 20% on grounds of compassion
I find it very difficult to see how more than 50 million woman are raped or cannot give birth every year

Well, you have to consider statutory rape laws or other such situations... and the fact that Women tend to be abusing their power over men in the current era we live in. I personally think the numbers are questionable as well, but then it depends on your definition of what Rape is.

This was after all the argument that allowed abortion to be instated into western nations, on compassionate grounds but a billion plus abortions later surely this argument has proven itself void

As I stated to Saint, you need to look at the demographics that abortion affects. In particular, you should look at Crime incidence in states or nations which forbid it. It is a complicated issue, not black and white.

Pro lifers only care about the fetuses and then don’t give a s@#t after that about anyone… where does this stupid pathetic slander have any grounds for argument?? What an imaginary argument that is

No, it isn't. Conservative Christians tend to be some of the most devout people against social welfare programs for adults, for unwed mothers, and tend to be the first to rail about the destruction of family values in america, the gays, and anyone else that doesn't fall into their milieu. On top of that, they tend to be the staunchest supporters of a militant government which generally tends to mean suffering for other countries, as well as deaths of American soldiers and increased malaise for the future.

(in western nations) look around your own communities, who is giving help to the homeless and poor, who is giving help to the elderly and dying, mental health support and also helping the poor girls that suffer from the mental health issues that come from having abortions

Mental health issues which would be far reduced if our culture didn't shove Christian soul theology and guilt onto the decision of abortion.

NOT ABSENT. Reduced.

(in third world nations) missionaries, schools, hospitals, farming and infrastructure
Christians are trying to build a better world instead of promoting death as an answer to hardship
Get a dose of reality

Really? You're going with christian works in other countries? Missionaries cause a lot of harm too. They tend to be the sort who want to "CIVILIZE" cultures, bring them modern amenities and education.... they tend to be the people who contribute to untenable population explosions in cultures that had been at good balance for centuries or millenia...the road to hell is paved with what?

Aside from that, there are also histories of Missionaries helping only those who would support what the missionaries were doing in trying to bring god to the godless heathens.

Another complicated topic, but the simple comments you've made are cardboard compared to the complicated issues that plague them.

This is a good thing Obama did (and I can say that, even though I didn't vote for him).

It isn't like he is sending money to organizations in these countries and mandating it be used for abortions. He isn't forcing organizations in these countries to perform abortions or lose the funds.

He is allowing the funds to be available to organizations within these countries who offer abortion as a choice (along with education and birth control); this is what wasn't allowed before.

Say what you will about abortion; some agree that it is a choice that a woman has and some think that it should be outlawed. To each his/her own. But, in the countries where it is legal, it should be offered as an option, should be allowed to be discussed, and should not be demonized by people who have never been where these women (and any woman anywhere in any country) are, physically, mentally, and emotionally.

Originally posted by antar
...Picture a world of smiling faces all over the planet, healthy, laughing, learning, working side by side to build communities based in the true fundamentals of our highest order.

No more throw away, unwanted or needed children, beautiful children, sad children. It is our responsibility to stop the maddness because what happens to 'those' children, happen to our children.

I'm not trying to misinterpret what you say here, but to me it sounds more like this ...

"Let's get rid of all the ugly hungry children around the world, so that we are only left with the pretty and happy children. Then the world will be a better place."

Good. Kill those fetuses! booyah! there are bigger issues to deal with, quit being morons and stop focusing on this irrelevant issue. Abortion should be legal, everywhere, forever. Or at least until we're in a world where we can sustain an unlimited amount of children, giving them all loving homes and provide all the necessities a human being requires. Until that point, leave it up to the mother on whether she wants to allow her fetus to turn into a conscious human being.

reply to post byC0le
"I fully understand nothing will change the mind of a fundamentalist right wing Christian, they want to have their cake and eat it, well so long as their not the ones who have to feed, clothe, and raise it... However understand this, these are your moral values, Not everyone else's. You have no right to force your morals and your values on others, Nor can you ever through you forced compliance, change a persons character."

But you think you have the right to force your morals and your values on everyone who is against your beliefs? Please, for arguments sake, explain the difference. I think it is. assinine to expect me to personally pay for something that I abhor.

Are those countries willing to give me money to help raise my autistic son, here in the States? My new president isn't going to do a thing to help improve the availability
Of services for the special needs children.

He is asking me to help end life, all I'm trying to do is provide quality of life. Yet while we are so financially strapped in the U.S., this is one of Obama's highest priorities.

What character?

[edit on 01/12/2009 by paxnatus]

reply to post by paxnatus


If you don't like it, you can run for office and then misappropriate funds that people don't want you to use to put forward an agenda of your own.

You can never please everyone. Providing funding to present options, even if they are options that YOU despise, is good. Options are good. Less options means less freedom.