Feds suing more anti-abortion activists

The Justice Department under President Barack Obama has taken a harder line against anti-abortion activists accused of trying to block access to clinics, suing at least a half-dozen of them under a federal law that lay mostly dormant during the Bush administration.

The lawsuits "send a very strong message that extremists are not going to be able to make threats, much less carry out threats, without consequences," Spillar said. "The sooner and more diligent the response, then you don't get a ratcheting up and ultimately a horrific act of violence."

www.msnbc.msn.com...

What is wrong with this world?
It's not as simple first of all to just say "Activists are disallowing people to get abortions"
It's not as simple as that when they force taxpayers to fund abortions especially when they do not agree with the act.

As far as I know taxpayers still pay for abortions, if I am incorrect in this and that is old news please correct me.

What is with the bailing out of irresponsible people way of thinking?

Ya, I don't really agree with Federal oversight and persecution of people. But then again, they were definitely asking for it. And as far as taxpayer dollars going towards abortion. Its very very little. I mean its really just a misconception. Womens reproductive rights as far as insurance goes is very limited. Viagra is payed for by insurance but birth control isn't. And it doesn't help when you have dumb Senators (i.e. Jon Kyl) reporting false statics such as Planned parenthood using 90% of its funds for abortion when its really only roughly 3%. [Source]

reply to post by ModernAcademia


Yeah, it is old news...

Congress has been voting every year since the 1970s to prevent federal funds from paying for abortions.

www.cbn.com...

reply to post by ModernAcademia


Frankly, any message of a lack of support for any extremists is a good thing. I don't believe We are paying for abortions directly - medical expenses can be deducted, however. (And if We get the new stuff They're trying to legislate, women will have to prove to the IRS that They were raped! if They want to deduct the expense.)

So...

As far as abortion itself, I take the stance that life begins at first breath. The Abrahamic God said so in the Talmud, I believe, as well as a number of other religious and philosophical teachings around the globe. Since We need a point, and since that is so well supported, I choose that.

Interestingly... about 20 years after Roe V Wade, crime began to drop precipitously. Though many things were claimed, it turned out that the reason was because the bulk of abortions were done for those women who were in poverty. Poverty breeds criminal mindsets. With the reduction of births into poverty, a reflection in the crime rate was seen about the time when the aborted fetuses would have been reaching the age at which most crime is committed.

All in all, I think bringing unwanted children into this world is a bad move - regardless of how the pregnancies began. There is no way to legislate sexual activity (look at all the silly laws that didn't work - like its being illegal to have sex any way but in missionary position!). Ergo, the best way to handle things is to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies in the safest way possible.

My perspective.

You know I think Eric Holder is probably the worst most corrupt Attorney General ever. A Bankster Cartel blackmails everyone in America via Congress and Hank Paulson and not one major criminal prosecution of anyone in any of the bailed out entities. Yet this Justice department seems to focus on cases that are politically divisive like abortion and race.

The ineptitude of this Attorney General is enough reason for me to make sure I do all within my capability to make sure Obama doesn't get a second term.

Ok sorry to come off like a douchebag, but we should be arresting and jailing these activists. You may want to take a left at this post and rejoin the moral high road but you know what, I'm a realist, and sometimes people like me need to remind you about the reality of the situation.

The comparative cost of abortion vs. the cost of placing a child in foster care as a ward of the state for 18 years is miniscule. Clothes, food, doctor visits, montly stipends, school trips, emergency care, it's all money money money. Kids are ludicrously expensive.

Therefore, it is far beyond the simple question of whether or not it is murder, or to put it more mildly, whether or not it is morally acceptable to abort a foetus.

Any number of cases where abortion is put into play as an option have an inescapable outcome if abortion is not chosen. Orphan children. Unwanted orphan children that become the responsibility of state governments and taxpayers. If the question were disengaged from any moral entanglements the sheer cost comparison would make you say the same thing I am. We need abortions in our society. I am not claiming it is right, or it is wrong. It simply IS. The facts are there.

The real question about abortion is whether or not those who perform it or choose to have it performed on them can live with the choice they have made. It is a private decision. That's it, and that's all.

In short, bravo for governments suing the # out of these people. They terrorize doctors who work at these clinics, hurl abuse down upon those who need to use the clinics, and generally make people uncomfortable with their white-knuckled picketing zealotry.

Originally posted by jefwane
You know I think Eric Holder is probably the worst most corrupt Attorney General ever. A Bankster Cartel blackmails everyone in America via Congress and Hank Paulson and not one major criminal prosecution of anyone in any of the bailed out entities. Yet this Justice department seems to focus on cases that are politically divisive like abortion and race.

The ineptitude of this Attorney General is enough reason for me to make sure I do all within my capability to make sure Obama doesn't get a second term.

Or... He is very ept. He is dividing Us. That is the goal, for then We can be conquered.

Tax payers pay for these unborn fetuses when they become impoverished welfare babies too. The price tag on abortion is much smaller than the economic drag that poverty stricken/orphan children have on taxpayers.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not heartless, but your argument is about the toll on taxpayers is it not?

The government is doing just what it should be doing protecting just and legal activities from right wing terrorists. Frankly I don't see your issue.

good.

If one doesn't like abortion then they shouldn't get one. If they'd rather live where abortion isn't carried out, then they can move.

First I think they should mind their business and worry about themselves and not what others do.
Abortions do not cost taxpayers this astronomical amount like the GOP would have us believe. It's nothing more than a religious attack.

Let the pregnant make their own decision. It's 2011, not 1311.

Originally posted by Loki
I'm a realist, and sometimes people like me need to remind you about the reality of the situation.

Okay... this should be interesting, let me get some popcorn lol

Originally posted by Loki
The comparative cost of abortion vs. the cost of placing a child in foster care as a ward of the state for 18 years is miniscule. Clothes, food, doctor visits, montly stipends, school trips, emergency care, it's all money money money. Kids are ludicrously expensive.

People are ludicrously expensive, you support abortions and note the costs of keeping a child alive but then go off and support Universal Healthcare am I correct? Why not note the costs of that or is that exempt?

I think that part of the problem is the cost of adoption, sure, but that if adoption costs are lowered then that's a very good first step.
Why should the taxpayer have to pay for other people's promiscuity?
Rape is another issue, i'm not talking about rape cases here.
It is immoral to FORCE responsible people to bailout irresponsible people and the cost of this degredation of society is much more than the costs you mention.

Originally posted by Loki
Unwanted orphan children that become the responsibility of state governments and taxpayers.

Abortions also fall on the laps of taxpayers, why not allow taxpayers to decide which route they would prefer?

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Abortions also fall on the laps of taxpayers, why not allow taxpayers to decide which route they would prefer?

But abortions *don't* fall into the laps of the taxpayers, as I pointed out in an earlier post...

Not to confuse the issue, but how is abortion special in any way? I don't support the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Lybia... I don't get a voice in "opting out" of those federal funds. I also don't like several programs that the DOE, the FDA, etc. do... Why can't I opt out of those?

I simply don't understand the way these issues are framed.

Originally posted by rogerstigers
But abortions *don't* fall into the laps of the taxpayers, as I pointed out in an earlier post...

Not true
www.catholicnewsagency.com...

Look at that, and Obama is saying he will Veto it
White House: Obama Would Veto Bill Banning Taxpayer-Funded Abortions
www.lifenews.com...

I'd personally LOVE to see legislation that made any attempt to block any access to ANY medical facility a felony. There are ways to make your voice heard without infringing on the rights of others. Any of these extremists should be jailed.

No one has a right to stop anyone else from getting any legal medical procedure, and to think otherwise is grossly narcissistic.

reply to post by ModernAcademia


And the differance is:

Congress has been voting every year since the 1970s to prevent federal funds from paying for abortions.

vs

The U.S. House of Representatives voted 251 to 175 Wednesday to permanently ban that funding.

www.cbn.com...



So this isn't about letting the people maybe change their minds based on cultural shifts, etc. This is about permenantly putting a ban in place that has been voted on every year for about 30 years.

I for one don't approve of federal funding of abortions and more than I approve of other federal funding of things that are 100% unrelated to the base functions of the USGOV. But I would rather approach the issue with a clear and valid understanding of the facts as they appear, rather than idealogical spin.


Besides, why can BP write off all of their clean up costs in the Gulf and make us taxpayers pay for it, but some gal who gets an abortion can't write the cost of the procedure off of her taxes?

Well they have all the rights to protest and voice their opinion. They however don't have the right to block venues of travel to / from the places.

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Well they have all the rights to protest and voice their opinion. They however don't have the right to block venues of travel to / from the places.

They do have a right to protest, but once they verbally assault or physically block someone from entering the venue, it is no longer a protest, it is harassment and possibly criminal mischief.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Well they have all the rights to protest and voice their opinion. They however don't have the right to block venues of travel to / from the places.

They do have a right to protest, but once they verbally assault or physically block someone from entering the venue, it is no longer a protest, it is harassment and possibly criminal mischief.

And cutting a breathing unborn human being from its host and barring their entry into this wondrous world is just medical procedure I guess.

So hands up those who say their is no life before the first breath outside the womb....you know that for sure?
Because many people remember existence in the womb, our spirit is tested there,or do we all just believe what we are told, not what we experience?

So much passion to defend the practice of mass abortion, some hear have spoken of God s word.
The question we should all ask perhaps is "Would you have wanted your Mother to have terminated your journey into this life?
So what makes you different than the millions upon millions of spirits who have had their chance for life stopped mid stream?

Are we so stupid as to believe that given a choice that unborn wouldn't rather have had life over death regardless of poverty or foster life?
Some people have had wonderful lives despite childhood neglect, poverty ect.
Who are any of us to say stopping any life is OK?
Abortion may be the right of those raped or mentally unable to go the term, but should it be encouraged?
A quick fix and another pot of Gold for the Doctor?

IN Australia Muslims mothers regularly have multiple children, they are encouraged to make life and cherish it, the Christians are encouraged to make life , but only cherish it if you tick all the optimum boxes.
Otherwise it will be best for the unborn child to kill it, or God forbid it may grow up poor or with a single parent.
The hypocrisy of this so called civilised world truly could make Angels Puke.

Originally posted by Dr Expired

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Well they have all the rights to protest and voice their opinion. They however don't have the right to block venues of travel to / from the places.

They do have a right to protest, but once they verbally assault or physically block someone from entering the venue, it is no longer a protest, it is harassment and possibly criminal mischief.

And cutting a breathing unborn human being from its host and barring their entry into this wondrous world is just medical procedure I guess.

So hands up those who say their is no kife before the first breath outside the womb....you know that for sure?
Because many people remember existebce in the womb, our spirit is tested there,or do we all just believe what we are told, not what we experience?
So much passion to defend the practice of mass abortion, some hear have spoken of God s word.
The question we should all ask perhaps is "Would you have wanted your Mother to have terminated your journey into this life?
So what makes you different than the millions upon millions of spirits who have had their chance for life stopped mid stream?
Are we so stupid as to believe that given a choice that unborn would rather have had life over death regardless of poverty or foster life?
Some people have had wonderful lives despite childhood neglect, poverty ect.
Who are any of us to say stopping any life is OK?
Abortion may be the right of those raped or mentally unable to go the term, but should it be encouraged?
A quick fix and another pot of Gold for the Doctor?
IN Australia Muslims mothers regularly have multiple children, they are encouraged to make life and cherish it, the Christians are encouraged to make life , but only cherish it if you tick all the optimum boxes.
Otherwise it will be best for the unborn child to kill it, or God forbid it may grow up poor or with a single parent.
The hypocrisy of this so called civilised world truly could make Angels Puke.

Like it or not, abortion is a medical procedure, and one that is protected by the supreme court. Dont like it? Dont have one. But you have absolutely NO RIGHT to stop someone else from having one. And YOUR religion does not have any bearing on what others can and cannot do. And that is all I will say on your attempt to turn this into an 'abortion is wrong' debate (there are plenty of threads on that subject, if you wish to discuss it).

I personally find it fun to truly mess with the protestors. My personal fave is to go out and stand next to them with a sign that says "I Support Your Right to Choose". Really pisses off the protesters, which is funny. Apparently they feel they are the only ones who should be able to have a voice this topic.

Originally posted by Dr Expired

And cutting a breathing unborn human being from its host and barring their entry into this wondrous world is just medical procedure I guess.

Yeah actually it is now that you mention it.

...our spirit is tested there...

...some hear have spoken of God s word...

...truly could make Angels Puke...

Can you prove to me that there is such a thing as spirit, god and angels? No you cant. Point being that you have your belief and you have a right to it. Other people have their own and you don't have rights to that. You can voice your own belief all you want but that's as far as your rights go.