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.

 

Obama Administration Approves First Direct Taxpayer Funding of Abortion Through New High-Risk Insura

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Obama Administration Approves First Direct Taxpayer Funding of Abortion Through New High-Risk Insurance Pools


www.cnsnews.com

If you want proof that President Obama's Executive Order on taxpayer-funded abortion was a sham, look no further than Pennsylvania, says House Republican Leader John Boehner (Ohio).

Health and Human Services Department is giving Pennsylvania $160 million to set up a new high-risk insurance pool that will cover any abortion that is legal in the state

President Obama pledged that under his health care plan “no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 07:23 PM
link   
Here is yet another example of why Obama's poll numbers are dropping like a stone and why the opinion of Congress is so low.

Several weeks ago, after negotiations with Republicans and Pro-Life Democrats, Obama comes out and states that federal funds will not be directly used to fund abortions. Now through the beauty of the legislative process we have pools being set up to do just that.

This is sickening on a number of levels. First, the absolute disregard for honesty and integrity on the part of our elected officials and second that the government would use federal tax dollars to fund a procedure that many people in the country feel amounts to murder.

Most Americans are for reasonable restrictions on abortion and very few hold the radical view of any abortion at any time. The federal government should abide by the people's wishes here and stay out of the abortion business. There are plenty of organizations that are not supported by tax payer funds that allow unrestricted access to abortion.

This is another example of Obama tossing a bone to his base, because that base is the only thing he has left. A politically weak president is a dangerous president.

Should the Republicans win control of the house, they will strip this funding from the bill and they will do it within 90 days.

www.cnsnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 07:55 PM
link   
95 percent of all insurance companies already cover abortions.




Should the Republicans win control of the house, they will strip this funding from the bill and they will do it within 90 days.


And won't mean a damn thing either. Either way, if you have health insurance you are most likely funding abortions.

(I am not a pro-abortion guy myself...except for certain cases)

[edit on 14-7-2010 by David9176]



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


Insurance policys are a voluntary deal. There are policys that do not cover abortion and should someone feel strongly about it, can use that provider. Different states also have different policys.

I get what you are saying and that insurance is a collective pool and essentially everyone is subsidizing everyone else, but there are choices.

You have a fundamentally different business when mandated federal taxes are used for this purpose



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by dolphinfan
 





You have a fundamentally different business when mandated federal taxes are used for this purpose


Yes, but do most people have a choice in not having health insurance...really? It's tied to our employers after all. Getting it on your own costs a fortune.

I'll guarantee almost no one thinks about whether their insurance company does or not...and they most likely do have insurance that covers them.

I'll admit, I was upset about federally funded abortions when I first heard about them a year ago or so (whenever it was), without knowing health insurance companies already did it.

In the end it doesn't really matter. EIther way your money goes into a pool that funds abortions.

What is your stance on abortion if I dare ask?

[edit on 14-7-2010 by David9176]



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


It does matter. There is a huge difference between being mandated to buy insurance that supports abortion and being able to choose whether or not you want to buy insurance that supports abortion.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by ZuluChaka
 





It does matter. There is a huge difference between being mandated to buy insurance that supports abortion and being able to choose whether or not you want to buy insurance that supports abortion.


Yeah, about 5 percent difference....in which most people probably weren't aware of anyway.

LIke i stated in my earlier post....most health insurance is tied up with your employer. The only choice you will have is if your spouse also has another job with different health insurance.

How many people do you know that have health insurance that isn't tied up with their employer?

-----

Again, my point is that we shouldn't fund abortions PERIOD....except for extreme cases.

So are you saying abortions are ok as long as it's done through business channels and not government channels?



[edit on 14-7-2010 by David9176]



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


I am for reasonably tough restrictions on abortion. I also believe there is no constitutional right to an abortion (funny how the feds consider the only right to privacy we have is when it refers to abortion, isn't it?).

I also think that states should have great freedom in dictating abortion laws, right up to making it illegal.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


The point you miss is that you can choose to opt out of your employers plan, because you are not required by law to buy in.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


Yeah, they do... However, in order to make any comparison you are trying to make, you would have to demonstrate that a higher percentage of insurance customer do not get out of their insurance what they pay in premiums. The majority of tax payers aren't covered under public funded medical services because they have insurance or private means of paying for services. I would find it difficult to imagine that the majority of insurance holders don't eventually draw more out of their insurance than they pay into it (which is why the insurance system was failing in the first place.) Using representative numbers here, let's say I pay $200 a month for insurance coverage for myself, my wife, and my 2 children. That's $2400 a year. I pay (again, representative numbers here, I have no intention of airing my financial means on ATS) roughly 6 times as much in taxes as I pay in insurance premiums. That's all money I will likely never see a return on... I guaran-damn-tee that I see a solid return on the $2400 I spend in insurance premiums, however.

The dollars I pay that insurance company can't be used to kill the unborn, because my family and I use every cent of it by year's end. Sadly, the same cannot be said for those taxes as every time I turn around, Uncle Sam is back with his hand out going "gimme, gimme" like some demonic crackhead who's stolen from enough friends and family members to get kicked out of their lives for good. Never once have I actually seen Uncle Sam draw out his wallet and offer me any jack.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 10:53 PM
link   
So how many broken promises does this leave us at?

So when Joe Wilson in congress shouted out during the Presidential Address in Congress "YOU LIE". He was onto something and everyone in the lame stream media took him out to lunch on it.

Remember those moderate Blue Dog Democrats who were on the Fence until last minute and voted yes after the POTUS issued an executive order barring any funding of abortion with Tax Payer dollars.

POTUS is proven a liar once more.

Everyone in the media thought that the Tea Party anger would die down by November, stuff like this keeps that fire burning super hot.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 10:54 PM
link   
That's disgusting. Ok, I'm outta here.

Some uncle that is that forces innocent people to be murder and innocent moneymakers to pay for the kill.

Ok, where am I supposed to go? Oops, I forgot that I shouldn't talk about politics. Taxpayers should have the high risk to choose if they would like to donate the to abort cause.

Hmmm. I think I would not dontate to this cause...I'm going to get on teh horn right now to tell my local spoke-person to not allow this to happen near me. At least don't tell me about it, thats really gross.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 11:05 PM
link   
Would you rather pay for the abortion or for years of welfare/ Very often that is the choice. Generally thos enot on welfare are able to pay for their own abortions.



posted on Jul, 15 2010 @ 12:39 AM
link   
Without citing a conservative website or christian blog or whatever, can you prove these funds will fund abortions?
I can't get behind this claim because the only info I can find on it is from sites I deem liars with an agenda (CNSN).

Show me if you can, a trail of federal funds going to Pennsylvania then ending up paying for abortions.

I'm sorry but there have been soooooo many wild claims against Obama, democrats, liberals, etc. from conservatives, republicans, tea bangers, that have been so easily disprovable, this sounds like another one, and, well, this song and dance is getting really old and tired.

Every day there is another 5 threads about some new "birther" type conspiracy, always perpetrated by the same crowd. It's getting real hard for some of us to continue to take these things seriously.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join