Republicans attack reproductive rights again

page: 1
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 12:22 AM
link   
This bill is ridiculous and I hope it gets strongly rejected in congress. They want to block people and businesses from getting tax credits if their insurance policies cover abortion. This is insanely partisan meddling in peoples' rights as far as I'm concerned and a backdoor way to force their extreme, tyrannical views on everyone else.

House Republicans Kick Off 2014 With Renewed Focus On Abortion, Birth Control

www.huffingtonpost.com...




posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 12:38 AM
link   
most republicans are of religion, various sects, so nothing new there..news flash...abortion is unethical in their mindset, it should not be used for birth control. This is one of few that I part from the right on, as the government should NEVER tell you what to do with your body...or your healthcare...



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 12:41 AM
link   
reply to post by CB328
 


From the article:

Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) said when he introduced the bill last May that the legislation is intended to make it more difficult for women to access abortion care.

Perhaps he wants them to go to back alley abortionists again. This Rep. is nuts. Most of these types are and it's probably why congress is sitting at such a low level in the polls.

We need to shovel them all into a big dump truck and run them out of town. No business of congress ranting about a women's medical needs or requirements. Let the women and their doctors determine this stuff.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 12:42 AM
link   

CB328
This bill is ridiculous and I hope it gets strongly rejected in congress. They want to block people and businesses from getting tax credits if their insurance policies cover abortion. This is insanely partisan meddling in peoples' rights as far as I'm concerned and a backdoor way to force their extreme, tyrannical views on everyone else.

House Republicans Kick Off 2014 With Renewed Focus On Abortion, Birth Control

www.huffingtonpost.com...



Wait . . . . wouldn't this then remove most all of the potential tax credit offered by the ACA then?

I know the plans available to me pretty much all forced me, a man, to cover prenatal care and several of these packages included things which could easily be considered abortion.

I was already pissed about my deductible increasing $4,000 from my previous plan which covered me for most everything a young man "has" to be concerned about.

Well I guess this is just the incentive I need to pay the fine, count another young person among the uninsured which the ACA so desperately needs to keep it afloat.

Freaking politicians!

-FBB



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 12:46 AM
link   
Well there are some technicalities involved.

Like the Hyde Amendment for example.

Technically (by EO of Obama), some legalities already exist.

It was a point during the ObamaCare debate, and it was addressed by Democrats.

This new "bill" could be a prelude to lawsuits or it could serve as a reference to existing suits if any.

Hyde Amendment


The Stupak–Pitts Amendment, an amendment to the Affordable Health Care for America Act, was introduced by Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan. It prohibits use of Federal funds "to pay for any abortion or to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion" except in cases of rape, incest or danger to the life of the mother,[8] and was included in the bill as passed by the House of Representatives on November 7, 2009. However, the Senate bill passed by the House on March 21, 2010 did not contain that Hyde Amendment language. As part of an agreement between Rep. Stupak and President Obama to secure Stupak's vote, the President issued an executive order on March 24, 2010 affirming that the Hyde Amendment would extend to the new bill



"Federal" funds are being used to pay insurance subsidies.
And technically, any tax credits could be viewed as "lost" funds.

The Hyde Amendment does not carry to States. They can use taxpayer funds as long as those funds are not orignated from the Federal government (I think).



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 12:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Bassago
 
That is not enough, clean out the senate, scotus, and 1600 pennsylvania ave to save this country...
edit on 9-1-2014 by teslahowitzer because: (no reason given)
edit on 9-1-2014 by teslahowitzer because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 12:49 AM
link   
Lawmakers are attacking murder and co-conspirators. Maybe you don't see it that way, but I am not religious and it is still obviously murder to me when people have 'abortions'.

You don't need to be Republican or religious to be against murder.

Some people just have a conscience.

edit on 2014/1/9 by Metallicus because: sp



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 02:47 AM
link   
reply to post by CB328
 


House Republicans Kick Off 2014 With Renewed Focus On Abortion, Birth Control

Heck... They're only trying to counter the "War Against Fetuses".

See ya,
Milt



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 03:22 AM
link   
reply to post by CB328
 


So reproductive rights are the right not to reproduce???? Orwell would be laughing very hard at how on spot he was............
Every day society makes me a little more sad.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 07:22 AM
link   

pavil
reply to post by CB328
 


So reproductive rights are the right not to reproduce???? Orwell would be laughing very hard at how on spot he was............
Every day society makes me a little more sad.


Actually the right to not reproduce is something the Republicans stand for. What they don't stand for is the right to kill offspring because they are inconvenient.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 08:35 AM
link   

CB328
This bill is ridiculous and I hope it gets strongly rejected in congress. They want to block people and businesses from getting tax credits if their insurance policies cover abortion. This is insanely partisan meddling in peoples' rights as far as I'm concerned and a backdoor way to force their extreme, tyrannical views on everyone else.

House Republicans Kick Off 2014 With Renewed Focus On Abortion, Birth Control

www.huffingtonpost.com...



So you don't want the Govt to meddle in the affairs of individuals to get abortions, but want the Govt to meddle in providing tax credits for said abortions.

*Shakes head* It truly is "Always different" for people like you.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Yes and the mean old republicans are supposed to be full of raciest/


Minority women constitute only about 13% of the female population (age 15-44) in the United States, but they underwent approximately 36% of the abortions.

According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, black women are more than 5 times as likely as white women to have an abortion

On average, 1,876 black babies are aborted every day in the United States.

This incidence of abortion has resulted in a tremendous loss of life. It has been estimated that since 1973 Black women have had about 16 million abortions. Michael Novak had calculated "Since the number of current living Blacks (in the U.S.) is 36 million, the missing 16 million represents an enormous loss, for without abortion, America's Black community would now number 52 million persons. It would be 36 percent larger than it is. Abortion has swept through the Black community like a scythe, cutting down every fourth member."




posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 08:56 AM
link   
See, you can't have it both ways. If you want me to stay out of your bedroom and out of the results of everything that goes on in there, then you have to assume full responsibility for what goes in there and all the results.

When you start demanding that my money goes to subsidize what goes on in your bedroom and the results of it, then you let me and every other taxpayer in there.

You can't have it both ways.

I don't like what you choose to do with the results of your bedroom activities and I'm the one you want to foot the bill, so I, in the form of my elected representatives, should now have a say in that decision. Ain't socialism grand?



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 09:05 AM
link   
What do they mean by abortion?
are they freaky kind that consider any fertilised egg to be a baby even if it never implants?
The ones that have funerals every month for their periods.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 10:14 AM
link   
The GOP's & Tea Party views on abortion & women's health remind me of that thing that the GOP has sworn to fight. Sharia Law. Doesn't it?



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 10:21 AM
link   

FriedBabelBroccoli
Wait . . . . wouldn't this then remove most all of the potential tax credit offered by the ACA then?

I know the plans available to me pretty much all forced me, a man, to cover prenatal care and several of these packages included things which could easily be considered abortion.

I was already pissed about my deductible increasing $4,000 from my previous plan which covered me for most everything a young man "has" to be concerned about.

Well I guess this is just the incentive I need to pay the fine, count another young person among the uninsured which the ACA so desperately needs to keep it afloat.

Freaking politicians!

-FBB


I bet your mom would really appreciate you not wanting to chip in for the overall health of the general population since she had lady parts and you do not. Last time I checked, it took a man and woman to make a baby and you were apparently made were you not? Would your mother deny you medical care that covers your prostate? Odd how I never see that argument.
edit on 9-1-2014 by Buttonlip because: eta



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by CB328
 



This bill is ridiculous and I hope it gets strongly rejected in congress. They want to block people and businesses from getting tax credits if their insurance policies cover abortion. This is insanely partisan meddling in peoples' rights as far as I'm concerned and a backdoor way to force their extreme, tyrannical views on everyone else.

How is this any more ridiculous and intrusive than forcing people to carry insurance that provides abortion coverage or forcing people to carry insurance or be fined?? Seems like some tyrannical views are be forced on me, too.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Metallicus
Lawmakers are attacking murder and co-conspirators. Maybe you don't see it that way, but I am not religious and it is still obviously murder to me when people have 'abortions'.

You don't need to be Republican or religious to be against murder.

Some people just have a conscience.

edit on 2014/1/9 by Metallicus because: sp


Odd that they are in favor of the death penalty though.

Many abortions are performed to save the life of the mother. Would it not be murder to just stand back and watch the mom and the baby both die instead of doing whatever it takes to save one of them?



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 10:27 AM
link   

OccamsRazor04
Actually the right to not reproduce is something the Republicans stand for. What they don't stand for is the right to kill offspring because they are inconvenient.


Then why are they also attacking abortions that are the response to rape or abortions used to save the life of the mother?



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Buttonlip

FriedBabelBroccoli
Wait . . . . wouldn't this then remove most all of the potential tax credit offered by the ACA then?

I know the plans available to me pretty much all forced me, a man, to cover prenatal care and several of these packages included things which could easily be considered abortion.

I was already pissed about my deductible increasing $4,000 from my previous plan which covered me for most everything a young man "has" to be concerned about.

Well I guess this is just the incentive I need to pay the fine, count another young person among the uninsured which the ACA so desperately needs to keep it afloat.

Freaking politicians!

-FBB


I bet your mom would really appreciate you not wanting to chip in for the overall health of the general population since she had lady parts and you do not. Last time I checked, it took a man and woman to make a baby and you were apparently made were you not? Would your mother deny you medical care that covers your prostate? Odd how I never see that argument.
edit on 9-1-2014 by Buttonlip because: eta



All right, I'll make it. Why should a single woman buy a policy covering things like prostate exams and impotence drugs like Viagra and Cialis? And I have made that argument plenty of times.

People should only have to buy the coverage they need.

As a married woman, we have a policy that covers both men's and women's health because we need both covered. That's what we need. However, when I hit menopause, why should I still have to pay for maternity? It's not like I will need it anymore.

People are not responsible for everyone else's health. Why should I be responsible for smoker down the street or the marijuana addict two blocks over? Why should I be forced to help cover the obese person who gets diabetes as a result of their own life choices? Why should they be forced to help toe the bills for my migraines?

I am responsible for myself and my family just like you are responsible for yours. Keep your nose out of my business and I'll do the same. Stop telling me that everyone out there is my business to pay for. They're not.





 
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join