Video: Don’t forget about ObamaCare and abortion

posted at 3:55 pm on August 19, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Later this evening, Barack Obama will meet with religious leaders in an effort to press home the What Would Jesus/Elijah/Mohammed/Buddha Cover argument. Obama wants to get some support from faith-based communities by arguing that government management of health care is the only way to provide for all in America, an argument that has not worked at all so far. Sixteen leaders of the pro-life movement want to remind those meeting with President Obama that the bill will result in taxpayer-funded abortion on demand:

The confirmation of this comes from Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), who told a town-hall forum in her San Jose district that she’s happy to pay for abortions with taxpayer funds:

On the campaign trail, Obama told Planned Parenthood that the Freedom of Choice Act, which would eliminate state restrictions on abortion and repeal the Hyde Amendment ban on federal funding for it, would be his first legislative priority. ObamaCare allows him to pass FOCA without the head-on fight. If the public option remains in the bill and it covers abortion, that will have the de facto effect of repealing the Hyde Amendment. The interstate nature of ObamaCare and the public plan may also allow the Department of Justice to fight state abortion restrictions, such as parental notification, on the grounds that the regulations interfere with interstate commerce. It’s FOCA by other means.

From Stop the Abortion Mandate’s press release:

Stop the Abortion Mandate coalition is urging its members to contact their elected officials, attend Townhall meetings to ask if their representative supports taxpayer funded abortion and make their voices heard on this important issue. …

Other supposedly Christian groups are attempting to speak for all Christians and pro-lifers and are including President Obama in their propaganda to Americans. One such group is holding a national webcast this evening to promote the healthcare bill, taxpayer funded abortion included.

“Don’t be fooled by double speak and rhetoric,” said David Bereit, national director of 40 Days for Life and a member of STAM. “No true pro-life or Christian group would be support a bill that mandates abortion.”

With Lofgren’s statement on abortion coverage in ObamaCare, it’s difficult to see how faith-based communities can act in faith to support a government takeover of the health-care system. As STAM says, call your elected representatives to register your opposition, but also take the time to ask these leaders of faith communities to explain their positions, because it looks as though they have a different agenda in allying with the White House for this plan.

Update: The NRLC explains how HR3200 enables government funding of abortions, even apart from Lofgren’s rather clear statement above.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

It’s Mr. Terry.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:36 PM

Oh, like South Parks Mr. Slave… Do you ever want to wear regular pants? Heck, even Mom-jeans?

Upstater85 on August 19, 2009 at 4:40 PM

Ouch, that one hurt man.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:39 PM

Would you like to threaten to whup my a@# again today? Are you feeling tough?

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 4:41 PM

HR3200 factsheet from teh National Right to Life Committee.

daesleeper on August 19, 2009 at 4:42 PM

Would you like to threaten to whup my a@# again today? Are you feeling tough?

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 4:41 PM

You wanna come up to Sconny witch?

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:42 PM

Once again HotAir spreading misinformation (lies) Google the Hyde Amendment to see this is a false story only designed to lead the dumb.

jero_jones on August 19, 2009 at 4:42 PM

You wanna come up to Sconny witch?

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:42 PM

Wait, what am I saying? You could never afford to travel.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:42 PM

This is a very clear violation of the free exercise portion of the amendment.

TKSnider on August 19, 2009 at 4:15 PM
Hmm is that kind of like this claim….

The Church of Jesus Christ Christian, et.al., vs. Senator Barack Hussein Obama, et.al., #08-3205-CV-S-AFS
.
The “church” claimed that a black president was against their religion.

Or maybe it’s like the Rastafarians that claim denying them pot is against their religion?

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 4:25 PM

I could actually see the Rastafarian claim more than the first one, but is not pot illegal by state statue, not federal?

As for the first one, as there are constitional provisions in that do not deny one the rights of citizenship there is no conflict, since the original constitition makes no reference to a racial requirement (thus opening it to all races). Personally, I’d see no conflict there at all and the case should be thrown out as groundless.

Yet, forcing christians who find abortion a moral sin should have the ability to not be forced to pay for them. I won’t say that people shouldn’t be allowed to get them (as that law would also be in violation of the first amendment) even though I disagree with them.

TK, the First Amendment, as interpreted by US Supreme Court and other decisions, only prohibits the government from favoring one religion over another, establishing a state-sponsored religion or favoring religion (or secularism) over secularism (or religion). It doesn’t pertain to this.

However, almost all states have laws that, to some degree, give some health care workers the right to opt out of procedures they feel violate their religion.

Jimbo3 on August 19, 2009 at 4:30 PM

That is actually incorrect, as there is a clause in that decision that falls under the concientious objection theory. If you feel that the law would put you in the position that you could not both follow your faith and follow the law that it was in violation of that constitutional amendment. Actually, if they would just not allow abortions to be covered (specifically exempt them from coverage) this whole line of argument would be gone.

The problem I see about abortion being included (and oddly enough being discussed in the reconcilliation topic)is it is in obvious violation of the first amendment by requiring people into a position where they have to either choose their relegion or their state (and pay taxes that violate their relegion). This is a very clear violation of the free exercise portion of the amendment.

TKSnider on August 19, 2009 at 4:15 PM
Even Christ allowed that Caesar could have his money and do what he wanted–and Roman Emperors did some pretty cruel things with the money.

The First Amendment doesn’t allow you to not pay your taxes for religious reasons. If it did, the churches that taught that all taxation was sinful would be very crowded on Sunday.

I will grant you the first part, but the romans and those they ruled didn’t have these protections either. :)

TKSnider on August 19, 2009 at 4:44 PM

Faraway, I hate to break it to you, but that picture is of a fetus much older than 6-7 weeks. Even a 8 week fetus is only about .6 of an inch and that fetus is much longer than that.

By the way, did you read the other posts at the Missionaries to the Preborn site which celebrated Teller’s killing?

Jimbo3 on August 19, 2009 at 4:44 PM

Wait, what am I saying? You could never afford to travel.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:42 PM

Seriously? You didn’t see the broom joke in there?

I thought you had improved. I’m going to have to demote you to level 4/10 troll.

Upstater85 on August 19, 2009 at 4:44 PM

Seriously? You didn’t see the broom joke in there?

I thought you had improved. I’m going to have to demote you to level 4/10 troll.

Upstater85 on August 19, 2009 at 4:44 PM

Oh damn! Your right, your right. Promotion taken with acceptance.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:46 PM

Demotion.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:46 PM

Seriously? You didn’t see the broom joke in there?

I thought you had improved. I’m going to have to demote you to level 4/10 troll.

Upstater85 on August 19, 2009 at 4:44 PM

What the loser doesn’t realize is that have traveled extensively around the world. I just don’t associate with losers.

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 4:46 PM

Oh damn! Your right, your right. Promotion taken with acceptance.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:46 PM

Ah, don’t be to hard on yourself. I did think you were better than 3/10.

Upstater85 on August 19, 2009 at 4:47 PM

What the loser doesn’t realize is that have traveled extensively around the world. I just don’t associate with losers.

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 4:46 PM

What does your world comprise of? Houston to Dallas? lol. Maybe you’ve been to west Texas, lol.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:48 PM

What does your world comprise of? Houston to Dallas? lol. Maybe you’ve been to west Texas, lol.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:48 PM

Terry, Darling, I have been to more countries than you as a low-life troll reject can count.

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 4:49 PM

Do we have to draw you a map? (nope just cite the page in the bill) Liberal bureaucrats will be writing the standards for all private insurance policies that will be allowed in the “exchange” as well as the standards for coverage in the public plan. Do you really expect them NOT to cover abortion? At the very least, there will be a ridiculously easy threshold for abortions that are deemed “medically necessary.” And even if there are no explicit requirements or abortion coverage, what liberal bureaucrats or Democrat-controlled Congressional oversight committee do you expect to enforce this and make sure no abortions are funded ( oh I see, because the bill doesn’t prohibit it, it’s there…worse, if it doesn’t provide an enforcement mechanism to prosecute violators of a non-existent provision, the provision must exist)?
rockmom on August 19, 2009 at 4:30 PM

So bottom line is it is not in any bill currently being discussed.

So then Ed and people like him claiming the bill will fund abortion will look foolish when they claim as much when they can’t point to the provision when asked.

Yup, that’s much better than dialing down the rhetoric and discussing ways to prevent slippery slope language being inserted.

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 4:49 PM

The Hyde Amendment is only a limiting amendment tied to funding that flows through the HHS. Obamacare does not go through the HHS, it is direct funding thus not limited by Hyde.

TendStl on August 19, 2009 at 4:50 PM

Terry, Darling, I have been to more countries than you as a low-life troll reject can count.

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 4:49 PM

I’m sure. Care to share?

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:50 PM

Frumian,

I’ll believe they aren’t funding abortions with it, when the bill excludes them as allowable. I do not trust the progressives to limit themselves otherwise.

TKSnider on August 19, 2009 at 4:51 PM

I’m sure. Care to share?

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:50 PM

Terry, actually it’s only 1O but I figured that I would give you the benefit of the doubt. England, Scotland, Wales, France, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Mexico, Jamaica.

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 4:53 PM

So bottom line is it is not in any bill currently being discussed.

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 4:49 PM

By this logic, lets take a look at things that “won’t” be covered:

Broken arms
Breast cancer
Prostate cancer
Head injuries
Diabeties
Alzheimers

Shall I go on? All of those aren’t in the bill, er go they must not be looking to cover them.

TendStl on August 19, 2009 at 4:55 PM

If we lose this fight, we may find out What Jesus Will do.

fourdeucer on August 19, 2009 at 4:08 PM

That almost makes me want to lose.

Daggett on August 19, 2009 at 4:11 PM

I found myself thinkin the same thing. It’s gettin dark outside – time to go home.

oldfiveanddimer on August 19, 2009 at 4:56 PM

Terry, actually it’s only 1O but I figured that I would give you the benefit of the doubt. England, Scotland, Wales, France, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Mexico, Jamaica.

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 4:53 PM

I got England, France, Italy, Germany(just the Frankfort airport) Switzerland, Canada, Mexico, Jamaica, Dominica, Ethiopia, and Somalia. Although I don’t think you can count Scotland and Wales as separate countries.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:57 PM

What does your world comprise of? Houston to Dallas? lol. Maybe you’ve been to west Texas, lol.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:48 PM

Can you even fathom how sorry and pathetic you look attempting to demean a lady in such a childish and inept manner? Or is this how you get your kicks before going to your nail appointment?

TXUS on August 19, 2009 at 4:58 PM

Although I don’t think you can count Scotland and Wales as separate countries.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:57 PM

Tell that to the Scotts and Welsh.

Upstater85 on August 19, 2009 at 4:58 PM

Tell that to the Scotts and Welsh.

Upstater85 on August 19, 2009 at 4:58 PM

–I would but I never can understand what they’re saying with their thick accents.

Jimbo3 on August 19, 2009 at 4:59 PM

Can you even fathom how sorry and pathetic you look attempting to demean a lady in such a childish and inept manner? Or is this how you get your kicks before going to your nail appointment?

TXUS on August 19, 2009 at 4:58 PM

Its just jokes, lighten up man. And nail appointment? They call me Mr. Terry!

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 5:00 PM

Tell that to the Scotts and Welsh.

Upstater85 on August 19, 2009 at 4:58 PM

Well if we are counting those two, than I claim Puerto Rico too.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 5:01 PM

I got England, France, Italy, Germany(just the Frankfort airport) Switzerland, Canada, Mexico, Jamaica, Dominica, Ethiopia, and Somalia. Although I don’t think you can count Scotland and Wales as separate countries.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:57 PM

Terry, they are under the crown yes.

The United Kingdom is a constitutional monarchy and unitary state consisting of four countries: England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

Were you visiting Somalia for terror training camp?

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 5:01 PM

Well if we are counting those two, than I claim Puerto Rico too.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 5:01 PM

Hey, whatever makes you happy.

Upstater85 on August 19, 2009 at 5:02 PM

Were you visiting Somalia for terror training camp?

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 5:01 PM

Hahaha, it was right next door when I was in Ethiopia. My parents are from Ethiopia. Northern Somalia or Somaliland has been autonomous and democratic ever since the gov’t in Mogadishu fell apart in ’91, so it was plenty safe.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 5:03 PM

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 5:03 PM

Well, I thought it was funny. You really shouldn’t threaten women. Don’t you think that crosses a line?

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 5:05 PM

Well, I thought it was funny. You really shouldn’t threaten women. Don’t you think that crosses a line?

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 5:05 PM

I might have been over the top the other day, but if you know me you would know that I’m a big teddy bear, and sometimes I take jokes too far.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 5:06 PM

I might have been over the top the other day, but if you know me you would know that I’m a big teddy bear, and sometimes I take jokes too far.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 5:06 PM

If that was an apology, I am prepared to accept it. Peace?

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 5:07 PM

Its just jokes, lighten up man. And nail appointment? They call me Mr. Terry!

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 5:00 PM

So long, Mr. Terry, and don’t be late for your appointment. If you’re lucky, it’ll be ball gag day at the parlor.

TXUS on August 19, 2009 at 5:07 PM

Shall I go on? All of those aren’t in the bill, er go they must not be looking to cover them.

TendStl on August 19, 2009 at 4:55 PM

You can go on as long as you want…but you will be just as wrong.

I know abortion extremists will claim ALL abortion is an elective procedure and a mother’s health is irrelevant, but in the real world medically necessary abortion is already covered by medicaid AND medicare, and not many people care to much.

So your examples of conditions not ‘mentioned’ in the bill is wrong because each of those conditions is covered by language in the bill.

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 5:08 PM

So long, Mr. Terry, and don’t be late for your appointment. If you’re lucky, it’ll be ball gag day at the parlor.

TXUS on August 19, 2009 at 5:07 PM

I don’t have any more time for Terry, anyway. Thanks for coming to my aid.

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 5:09 PM

If that was an apology, I am prepared to accept it. Peace?

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 5:07 PM

You got it.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 5:09 PM

So long, Mr. Terry, and don’t be late for your appointment. If you’re lucky, it’ll be ball gag day at the parlor.

TXUS on August 19, 2009 at 5:07 PM

Haha, so long.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 5:10 PM

You got it.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 5:09 PM

Thank you. See, we even have manners down here.

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 5:10 PM

The more the government tries to fix all that ails a society, the weaker faith based programs will be. The government asks little else, other than that you continue to cast your vote for the party that takes care of you. As a Christian, I am more than willing to help anyone who I am able to help, so long as they are willing to take responsibility for their own recovery/restoration.

What would Jesus do? What he DID was tell his followers to go care for the sick, not to abdicate that responsibility to the government.

realityunwound on August 19, 2009 at 5:15 PM

So your examples of conditions not ‘mentioned’ in the bill is wrong because each of those conditions is covered by language in the bill.

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 5:08 PM

Nice incoherent ramble. Proof positive you have not read the bill.

TendStl on August 19, 2009 at 5:19 PM

I don’t have any more time for Terry, anyway. Thanks for coming to my aid.

TXMomof3 on August 19, 2009 at 5:09 PM

Your welcome, but you didn’t need any help. God help any counter-protesters who might get in your face in DC on the 12th.

TXUS on August 19, 2009 at 5:19 PM

Nice incoherent ramble. Proof positive you have not read the bill.

TendStl on August 19, 2009 at 5:19 PM

Sure thing. On what page is abortion covered again?

Repetition of tp doesn’t make them true.

Because you don’t have a source page cite that says the bill will cover abortion on demand doesn’t mean I haven’t read the bill. lol.

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 5:24 PM

“Generic god” discussions always wind up assuming that if there is a deity he thinks just like the people in the discussion. They define him and thus he becomes an extension of them. God becomes nothing more than a divine rubber stamp for what they want to do anyway.

29Victor on August 19, 2009 at 5:25 PM

Because you don’t have a source page cite that says the bill will cover abortion on demand doesn’t mean I haven’t read the bill. lol.

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 5:24 PM

If Democrats want to assure the majority of Americans who oppose abortion that it will not be covered, they had the opportunity to do so right up front when an amendment was offered to the Waxman bill, AND THEY REFUSED. Care to explain that?

rockmom on August 19, 2009 at 5:30 PM

MULL THIS OVER.
Nazi Euthanasia

In October of 1939 amid the turmoil of the outbreak of war Hitler ordered widespread “mercy killing” of the sick and disabled.

Code named “Aktion T 4,” the Nazi euthanasia program to eliminate “life unworthy of life” at first focused on newborns and very young children. Midwives and doctors were required to register children up to age three who showed symptoms of mental retardation, physical deformity, or other symptoms included on a questionnaire from the Reich Health Ministry.

A decision on whether to allow the child to live was then made by three medical experts solely on the basis of the questionnaire, without any examination and without reading any medical records.

Each expert placed a + mark in red pencil or – mark in blue pencil under the term “treatment” on a special form. A red plus mark meant a decision to kill the child. A blue minus sign meant a decision against killing. Three plus symbols resulted in a euthanasia warrant being issued and the transfer of the child to a ‘Children’s Specialty Department’ for death by injection or gradual starvation.

The decision had to be unanimous. In cases where the decision was not unanimous the child was kept under observation and another attempt would be made to get a unanimous decision.

The Nazi euthanasia program quickly expanded to include older disabled children and adults. Hitler’s decree of October, 1939, typed on his personal stationary, enlarged “the authority of certain physicians to be designated by name in such manner that persons who, according to human judgment, are incurable can, upon a most careful diagnosis of their condition of sickness, be accorded a mercy death.”

Questionnaires were then distributed to mental institutions, hospitals and other institutions caring for the chronically ill.

Patients had to be reported if they suffered from schizophrenia, epilepsy, senile disorders, therapy resistant paralysis and syphilitic diseases, retardation, encephalitis, Huntington’s chorea and other neurological conditions, also those who had been continuously in institutions for at least 5 years, or were criminally insane, or did not posses German citizenship or were not of German or related blood, including Jews, Negroes, and Gypsies.

A total of six killing centers were established including the well known psychiatric clinic at Hadamar. The euthanasia program was eventually headed by an SS man named Christian Wirth, a notorious brute with the nickname ‘the savage Christian.’

At Brandenburg, a former prison was converted into a killing center where the first Nazi experimental gassings took place. The gas chambers were disguised as shower rooms, but were actually hermetically sealed chambers connected by pipes to cylinders of carbon monoxide. Patients were generally drugged before being led naked into the gas chamber. Each killing center included a crematorium where the bodies were taken for disposal. Families were then falsely told the cause of death was medical such as heart failure or pneumonia.

But the huge increase in the death rate for the disabled combined with the very obvious plumes of odorous smoke over the killing centers aroused suspicion and fear. At Hadamar, for example, local children even taunted arriving busloads of patients by saying “here comes some more to be gassed.”

On August 3, 1941, a Catholic Bishop, Clemens von Galen, delivered a sermon in Münster Cathedral attacking the Nazi euthanasia program calling it “plain murder.” The sermon sent a shockwave through the Nazi leadership by publicly condemning the program and urged German Catholics to “withdraw ourselves and our faithful from their (Nazi) influence so that we may not be contaminated by their thinking and their ungodly behavior.”

As a result, on August 23, Hitler suspended Aktion T4, which had accounted for nearly a hundred thousand deaths by this time.

The Nazis retaliated against the Bishop by beheading three parish priests who had distributed his sermon, but left the Bishop unharmed to avoid making him into a martyr.

However, the Nazi euthanasia program quietly continued, but without the widespread gassings. Drugs and starvation were used instead and doctors were encouraged to decide in favor of death whenever euthanasia was being considered.

The use of gas chambers at the euthanasia killing centers ultimately served as training centers for the SS. They used the technical knowledge and experience gained during the euthanasia program to construct huge killing centers at Auschwitz, Treblinka and other concentration camps in an attempt to exterminate the entire Jewish population of Europe. SS personnel from the euthanasia killing centers, notably Wirth, Franz Reichleitner and Franz Stangl later commanded extermination camps.

Copyright © 1997 The History Place All Rights Reserved

Col.John Wm. Reed on August 19, 2009 at 5:31 PM

29Victor on August 19, 2009 at 5:25 PM

No worries. You’ll see him for yourself soon enough.

jgapinoy on August 19, 2009 at 5:33 PM

If Democrats want to assure the majority of Americans who oppose abortion that it will not be covered, they had the opportunity to do so right up front when an amendment was offered to the Waxman bill, AND THEY REFUSED. Care to explain that?

rockmom on August 19, 2009 at 5:30 PM

twice you’ve mentioned an amendment yet both times failed to link to the language or the vote break down.

How did Collins vote?

How did Martinez vote?

How did Conrad vote?

Provide a link.

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 5:33 PM

Col.John Wm. Reed on August 19, 2009 at 5:31 PM

Are you LaRouche nut job? Nazi analogies are monstrous when used for political point scoring. Didn’t you see the post by Allah proving that only LaRouche trolls make such awful analogies?

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 5:36 PM

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 5:33 PM

Try this.

kingsjester on August 19, 2009 at 5:38 PM

Sorry, frumian. The link didn’t transfer. Here it is:

hotair.com/archives/2009/07/24/awesomely-awesome-war-breaking-out-among-democrats-over…

kingsjester on August 19, 2009 at 5:40 PM

Question:
Can an individual state opt out of ObamaCare?

d1carter on August 19, 2009 at 5:49 PM

Kingsjester that link is toast too.

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 5:50 PM

Question:
Has anyone noticed that the health reform bill uses the IRS as the enforcement arm? Will the IRS now have all our financial info as well as all of our health care info?

d1carter on August 19, 2009 at 5:54 PM

dicarter, AZ has passed a bill to try to do just that but I believe the public needs to vote on it. Several other states, like Utah, are considering it.

Jimbo3 on August 19, 2009 at 6:02 PM

when did murder become a benefit of a healthcare package? Sick!

Neo-Chase on August 19, 2009 at 6:04 PM

Sixteen leaders of the pro-life movement want to remind those meeting with President Obama that the bill will result in taxpayer-funded abortion on demand

Obviously this bill would cause an increase, but why are we acting like we’re not spending millions in tax dollars to fund abortions already?

RightWinged on August 19, 2009 at 6:05 PM

How did Collins vote?

How did Martinez vote?

How did Conrad vote?

Provide a link.

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 5:33 PM

It was in the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Surely a genius like you knows there haven’t been any votes yet in the Senate.

Federal Funding for Abortions: (Capps, Stupak and Pitts, Pitts #1) Concern over taxpayer dollars to fund abortion has been raised in all three House committees and in the Senate HELP committee. Rep. Lois Capps (D., Calif.) offered an amendment that would require at least one insurance plan to cover abortion in each geographical region. The amendment would also require the newly-created public plan to cover all abortion services, depending upon the fate of the Hyde Amendment, the measure that currently restricts federal funding of abortion. Representative Capps’s amendment would also allow affordability credits, which are taxpayer-funded subsidies, to be used for health-insurance plans that cover abortions.

Rep. Joe Pitts (R., Pa.) and Rep. Bart Stupak (D., Mich.) jointly introduced an amendment that would specifically prohibit federal funds from being used to cover abortion services. The Pitts-Stupak amendment failed. Representative Pitts also offered an amendment to block any government requirement on health-insurance networks to include abortion. Although this second Pitts amendment initially passed, it was reconsidered and it failed on the second Committee vote. Based on the passage of the Capps amendment and failure of the Pitts and Stupak amendments, taxpayers would end up financing abortion.

Read it and weep

rockmom on August 19, 2009 at 6:19 PM

Black Pro-Lifers Ask Obama for Meeting on Abortion Impact of Health-Care Legislation

Abortion has claimed the lives of about one-third of the black community. If healthcare reform passes, we have no doubt the number of African American women having abortions will sky rocket. The healthcare bill text needs to clearly exclude abortion from any taxpayer-subsidized or government-mandated benefits. Abortion is not health care.” So states a letter sent to President Obama today, from the National Black Pro-Life Union (signers include Democrats for Life’s Kirsten Day). Here’s the complete letter:

President Barack Obama
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC
August 18, 2009

Dear President Obama:

We would like to respectfully request a meeting with you to discuss the impact of the very important healthcare reform legislation and how it will impact the African-American community and other at-risk groups. Many leaders have come to Washington, DC this week in bipartisan support for “Define the Dream” healthcare discussions in the spirit of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in search of The Beloved Community.

Mr. President, in the Beloved Community envisioned by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., equal justice means that young people in the womb are not terminated and the elderly in ill health are not denied care because of their age.

We are concerned that your current healthcare plan will not serve the needs of those who are most at risk.

The African American community is severely disproportionately affected by abortion, which would not only be expanded under current healthcare proposals, but also be paid for by taxpayers. Planned Parenthood’s informational branch, The Alan Guttmacher Institute, reports that 37 % of all abortions are performed on black women[1], even though blacks constitute roughly 13% of the U.S. population. Abortion has claimed the lives of about one-third of the black community.

If healthcare reform passes, we have no doubt the number of African American women having abortions will sky rocket. The healthcare bill text needs to clearly exclude abortion from any taxpayer-subsidized or government-mandated benefits. Abortion is not health care.

People with disabilities, terminal illnesses, and the elderly, all who need special and expensive care, are also at risk of losing accessibly to doctors and having care denied or delayed. There are 49.7 million citizens who live with disabilities. We are concerned that patient care would be made based primarily on cost and that people with disabilities or special health needs will be put on waiting lists, or worse yet, denied potentially life-saving procedures outright. We want to make sure that these citizens will not be delayed or denied healthcare.

Doctors and healthcare professionals are also at risk of losing their conscience protections. A national scientific survey of Americans found that 62% oppose rescinding the conscience clause. This country was founded upon the respect for personal freedom. No one should be forced to go against his or her conscience in order to keep their job. Without specific language in the healthcare bill to protect healthcare professionals who decline to perform or refer for abortions, doctors, nurses, pharmacists, midwives and other health processionals will be forced to go against their moral values or forfeit their jobs.

We, the undersigned, urge you and your colleagues to seriously consider the concerns we have outlined above. Now is the time for Democrats and Republicans to come together to stand for compassionate care for all Americans, joining the chorus of “Free At Last” as proclaimed in Dr. King’s “ I Have A Dream” speech.

Dr. Alveda King
Director African American Outreach
Priests for Life

Day Gardner
President
National Black Pro-Life Union

Bishop Harry Jackson
Senior Pastor of Hope Christian Church and founder High Impact Leadership Coalition

Pastor Dean Nelson
Executive Director
Network of Politically Active Christians

Dr. Donna Harrison
President
American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists

Kristen Day
National Director
Democrats for Life

Stupid black people and Democrats think ObamaCare will cover abortion

rockmom on August 19, 2009 at 6:23 PM

How does saying it will cover abortion when Obama will just say it doesn’t help here without a source cite from the bill?

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 4:13 PM

The courts have generally ruled, with respects to abortion, that a lack of law creates an inherent right to the procedure. I believe that’s why the Hyde amendment is needed.

So the fact that the bill doesn’t specifically mention abortion, or that taxpayer money won’t be used to fund it, implies that the right will be there and the money will too. An amendment to prohibit funding for abortions was brought up in one of the house committees and shot down along party lines.

Combine that with the unelected board deciding what procedures are or aren’t covered and you can see why people have concerns.

BadgerHawk on August 19, 2009 at 6:26 PM

rockmom on August 19, 2009 at 6:23 PM

Heh.

I’m not quite sure how you’re the only person in almost two full pages to bring up the amendment, but I see it didn’t really sway frumian’s thinking on the matter (apart from getting him to run from the thread).

BadgerHawk on August 19, 2009 at 6:39 PM

But but but Obama claims the public option will be self-sustaining without need of taxpayer funds!

Dan Minardi on August 19, 2009 at 6:55 PM

BadgerHawk on August 19, 2009 at 6:39 PM

No I didn’t go anywhere, the text of her quote shows it wasn’t partisan and it wasn’t funding abortion on demand as claimed.

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 7:00 PM

I’m still prayin’ for an earth quake in DC to bring so many pieces of scum down.

Jeff from WI on August 19, 2009 at 7:03 PM

Link to the thread in which AP’s Mighty Ban Hammer fell on liberal343 (scroll to August 19, 2009 at 3:17 PM)

Mary in LA on August 19, 2009 at 8:51 PM

I just emailed Donnelly (D-2nd Dist., IN) (for the tenth time this week) and suggested he go to the NLRC website and read that. Then, if he still insists on voting for the bill, he should renounce his Catholic faith publicly. At least then he would be honest about where he stands. I don’t expect anything positive from him, but I want him to know he can’t hide behind confusing verbiage and legalistic doubletalk anymore.

SKYFOX on August 20, 2009 at 9:34 AM

So then Ed and people like him claiming the bill will fund abortion will look foolish when they claim as much when they can’t point to the provision when asked.

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 4:49 PM

I know abortion extremists will claim ALL abortion is an elective procedure and a mother’s health is irrelevant, but in the real world medically necessary abortion is already covered by medicaid AND medicare, and not many people care to much.

So your examples of conditions not ‘mentioned’ in the bill is wrong because each of those conditions is covered by language in the bill.

frumian on August 19, 2009 at 5:08 PM

As you can see, moron, you contradicted yourself. You first claimed the bill would NOT fund abortion because there was no explicit provision mentioned in the bill, then you claimed that it doesn’t matter what is ‘mentioned’ as long as it’s ‘medically necessary’. It’s never difficult to spot a death-culter.

runawayyyy on August 20, 2009 at 11:09 AM

Although I don’t think you can count Scotland and Wales as separate countries.

Terry Silver on August 19, 2009 at 4:57 PM

Tell that to the Scotts and Welsh.

Upstater85 on August 19, 2009 at 4:58 PM

LMAO, Upstater. Game, set, match.

Not sure what that pissing match was all about, but it belonged off the page.

Jaibones on August 20, 2009 at 1:16 PM

Comment pages: 1 2