What is up with all these people on the left throwing a fit because the House health care "reform" bill doesn't cover abortions?

When did women have a right to not only vacuum cleaner out their babies, but send the bill to the taxpayer? What the hell is up with that?

Look an abortion is only a few hundred dollars. I think they should be forced to take some responsibility when they got pregnant and now want to end the poor kids life. Is it asking too much to expect them or the father to pay to terminate the kid?

Even if you are pro-choice, do you really want your hard earned tax dollars going to subsidize someones poor choices? Doesn't that make us all guilty by making us part of ending the poor unlucky kids chance at life?

[edit on 10-11-2009 by HotSauce]

As an ex american citizen and taxpayer I am probably responsible for more deaths then I care to imagine. In my adopted country of The Netherlands we have gov. subsidized abortions up to the 24th week. I would rather pay for that then for imperial wars of conquest. And now I am off to the coffee bars.

Originally posted by HotSaucedo you really want your hard earned tax dollars going to subsidize someones poor choices? Doesn't that make us all guilty by making us part of ending the poor unlucky kids chance at life?

I dont want my property taken by anyone for any reason. Too many people love it when the gov takes there money. The practive of federal extortion at gun point isnt going anywhere anytime soon.

So, if I have to choose between my stolen property being used to fund 18 years of welfare scams then another 30-life supporting the hood rat in prison or a few bucks to vacu-suck the trash out before it becomes the money pit it is destined to be I choose the latter.

Put an end to welfare queens and their mini-armies of 12 legitimate thugs fathered by means of 12 drug-induced blackout laden nights of ghetto-fabulous lovin'.

Supporters of this should be touting it as fiscal responsibility.

I live in a country where we have Government Run Health Care and we don't cover abortions. I would not want them to.

UNLESS it is the case of a rape victim or some other unspeakable crime that has occured.

People should take responsibility for their actions especially when it comes to children.

~Keeper

Ok, I could be way off on this, but I think the issue is not whether or not to fund abortions but that proponents of abortion are concerned that opponents of abortion could find ways to contend that options that are currently available may be rendered illegal due to new rules imposed by the legislation. For example, if part of the makeover results in some funding to Planned Parenthood, let's say for covering mammograms or birth control pills, then the concern is that because Planned Parenthood receives that funding they would now be prevented legally from also providing abortion services.

In addition, there is concern that such organizations would not be permitted to opt out of the government funding and therefore would be unable to continue their mission. That concern is because of the bank situation where banks were bailed out that did not want or need the bailouts.

Originally posted by HotSauce
.......to not only vacuum cleaner out their babies........
[edit on 10-11-2009 by HotSauce]

Nice technical term.

This sums up the entire position of the OP.

I would rather my taxes pay for an abortion than pay for that mother to be on welfare.

Originally posted by concernedcitizan
As an ex american citizen and taxpayer I am probably responsible for more deaths then I care to imagine. In my adopted country of The Netherlands we have gov. subsidized abortions up to the 24th week. I would rather pay for that then for imperial wars of conquest. And now I am off to the coffee bars.

Nearly 50 million dead babies in the US since 1971.

You would rather pay for that huh?

There's a thread for you.

An average of one in three American women has murdered a baby.

They're serious about that freedom of 'choice' huh?


[edit on 11-11-2009 by badgerprints]

HotSauce are you female?