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.

 

Bart Stupak to Retire

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
What do you mean, I'm "back"? I didn't go anywhere.

Feeling a little cranky since Stupak changed his vote, are you? Your post makes no sense at all. I'm afraid your emotions are clouding your judgment.

[edit on 4/11/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]




posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 10:12 PM
link   
But the sad reality is that funding already goes towards abortions today.

I have taken a few that are receiving medical (as well as other) support from Health and Family Services to different abortion clinics in Cincinnati. How much funding and from what sources does Planned Parenthood receive each year?

Sure, it is easy to say zero dollars from HCR bill will go towards abortion, but what of other federal funding or even state and county funds paid out from some federal distributions? People enjoy being in the dark. But if we look at the cost of the procedure versus the income of those having it done, it doesn't take a huge amount of deductive reasoning to figure out what has been covering the majority of the costs.

Heck just a broken arm examined, x-rayed and put in a cast would be over a thousand if you paid cash at a hospital and had the means to pay. I would think that an abortion would be a little higher priced, unless we are talking about just next day emergency contraceptives like RU486 (was that ever allowed in the US).



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ahabstar
Sure, it is easy to say zero dollars from HCR bill will go towards abortion, but what of other federal funding or even state and county funds paid out from some federal distributions?


Stupak's vote depended entirely on whether or not federal funding FROM THE HCR BILL was going to go toward abortion. Anything else is irrelevant to his vote. If he wanted to stay in Congress and weed out any federal funding that goes toward abortion, then he certainly could have.



I would think that an abortion would be a little higher priced, unless we are talking about just next day emergency contraceptives like RU486 (was that ever allowed in the US).


I'd rather not pay for the drugs to treat high blood pressure, cancer, heart disease, etc. for people who choose to smoke all their lives and eat at McDonald's all the time, either. But I don't get to hold back funding from them. Unfortunately, we don't often get to pick and choose where our taxes go.

To think that someone should have the right to deny funding to a particular LEGAL medical procedure, when we don't have a choice about any OTHER legal medical procedure seems like a clear case of entitlement to me.



new topics
 
6
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join