Anti-abortion Democrats threaten health care bill

Rep. Bob Stupak: Leader of the "no" brigade (Reuters)

The fate of President Barack Obama‘s signature health care bill in Congress could lie in the hands of a dozen Democrats who oppose abortion and who want a provision barring it.

Michigan Democratic Rep. Bob Stupak says he and his fellow anti-abortion Democrats are prepared to take the heat if they can sink the bill.

“Yes, we’re prepared to take the responsibility,” Stupak says. “Let’s face it. I want to see healthcare but we’re not going to bypass the principles of belief that we feel strongly about.”

Stupak has been down this road before. He held up legislation last year until language was inserted to stop use of federal funds for abotions.

No such language exists in the current plan but Obama may have to agree to some sort of anti-abortion provision if he has any chance of the health plan clearing the House.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius says Obama is prepared to allow some language to bar use of federal money for abotion.

“This will not change the status quo on the policy of abortion,” she said. “It just means there will be no federal funding for abortion.

Stupak and Sebelius made their comments on ABC’s “Good Morning America” program on Thursday.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

17 Responses to "Anti-abortion Democrats threaten health care bill"

  1. silentSCREAM  March 5, 2010 at 8:01 pm

    Legislating morality by any other name…

    Is this not the driving passion that moves freedom hating ‘conservatives’ to throw their hat into the political arena. Well that, and bitchin’ about high taxes and excessive funding levels for everything except the annual Israeli largess and related holy land militaristic misadventures.

    Opposing others FREEDOM OF CHOICE and/or a bill that might relieve existing pain and suffering for millions of Americans… in the name of mystic self-righteousness – obviously not a problem for the judgmental conservative of mind.

    • Garrison  March 6, 2010 at 9:12 am

      Protecting the helpless is the job of the strong. Wise choices must be made. Well-spent public money is a partial solution.

      INSTEAD, we get failed ideals. Spending others money like the War on Poverty. Trillions later and people still being billed.

      • silentSCREAM  March 6, 2010 at 6:33 pm

        Re: Garrison

        “INSTEAD, we get failed ideals. Spending others money like the War on Poverty. Trillions later and people still being billed.”

        True. But are you equally sentimental regarding the mounting expense of our other failing, endless and unwinnable “war” siblings – terror and drugs.

    • griff  March 6, 2010 at 9:17 am

      In case you haven’t noticed, this debate isn’t whether abortions should be legal or not, but whether the government should be funding them.

      I’m not religious by any stretch of the imagination, but I oppose government-funded abortions – period. Something to do with personal responsibility and paying for your own mistakes.

      • silentSCREAM  March 6, 2010 at 5:12 pm

        Re: griff

        “In case you haven’t noticed, this debate isn’t whether abortions should be legal or not, but whether the government should be funding them.”

        I’m not convinced the faithfully fearful care to consider such distinctions.

    • Sally Miller  March 8, 2010 at 5:43 pm

      If pro-abortion activist agrue that abortion is a personal choice than why the hell should it be a public matter where you’re required to pay for other people’s abortions!!!!!!!!!

  2. StokeyBob  March 5, 2010 at 8:46 pm

    Did you here the one about the guy’s wife that killed all of his children because she wanted to make more room for the home invaders?

    Oh what. It wasn’t his wife. It was his country.

    Back in the 60’s the Federal Government came into the public schools and brainwashed us as little children with the message that the children we were about to have were unwanted because the population was rising so fast. They launched a program called, “Zero Population Growth”. They pushed Family Planning and birth control pills. Now they call the same programs, “Safe Sex” but the results are the same. I think you and I both know that you only have to trick people for their few child bearing years and there is no going back.

    Many of us never had a say in the future of our unborn.

    I am the result of two living cells. One from each of my parents. They are the result of two living cells, one from each of their parents. I wasn’t just born. I am a continuation of life. I am a living thing that reaches back into time perhaps 400 million years and the result of billions of joining of pairs of cells. It is possible that if you were to follow my cells back to my parent’s cells and beyond that my family tree touches every living thing here on earth. That is if we limit ourselves to believing life was created here on earth. If it rained down from the immensity of the universe it could reach back into that immensity of time and space, and who knows what relationships and who knows what species.

    My family line succeeded, at least until I came up against the Federal Government.

    I have seen the Federal Government do little else to control the population.

    The open borders, United States laws only apply to some, is a serious slap in the face. No. Not a slap in the face. It reaches well beyond that. Maybe back to the beginning of time and stretch to the bounds of the universe.

    • Almandine  March 6, 2010 at 8:59 am

      “I wasn’t just born. I am a continuation of life. I am a living thing that reaches back into time perhaps 400 million years and the result of billions of joining of pairs of cells.”

      Thanks Bob… the best I’ve ever heard it said. Life began when?

      • Carl Nemo  March 7, 2010 at 12:52 am

        “I wasn’t just born. I am a continuation of life” … extract from post

        I must say Almandine your words concerning our genetic kinship with a long line of variants over the past half billion years or so is quite thoughtful and elegant… : )

        Carl Nemo **==

        • Carl Nemo  March 7, 2010 at 1:00 am

          Hi StokeyBob and Almandine,

          I complimented the wrong person concerning the quote. It seems both Almandine and myself feel the same way concerning your description of the continuation of life as a biological force through deep time. : )

          My apologies for not getting the originator of the wording right. Thanks StokeyBob for what I consider to be a superb, spot-on description concerning the planetary life force.

          Carl Nemo **==

  3. Sandune  March 6, 2010 at 11:45 am

    The problem is not when life begins (ask a Christian and they will say 6000 years ago) (ask a Scientist and it began during a big bang). The problem today is whose choice determines the family size? I can name easily 100 reasons for a woman to have an abortion. We have stepped away from being brood mares.

    I was a member of Zero Population control because I lived in a park like section of the Santa Monica Mountains and the developers bulldozed our area to the ground because of the growth of population in our state of California. We tried to stop this through our zoning laws and our County told us they needed the property taxes to pay for the costs of their government.

    This was just prior to Prop 13 that Mr. Jarvis presented to the voters of California. A quick look at my property taxes show the amount of money from my land to the schools was higher than the tuition of my own private school. Our California schools were over crowded and missing in the general academics offered.

    It is not up to the Federal government to control the population. Today we have successful birth control that was not available during my breeding years. I love it when men try to determine the legality of abortions. There always will be women who refuse to give birth to an unwanted fetus. You can make them illegal and declare a war on abortions that we end up using the Patriot’s act with the federal government in control. Today we have an increase of rapes; many of them come from within the family. Until men learn to keep their pants zipped, shut the phuck up.

    Every discussion means that we cannot determine how much government we want and need. Be the head of your household and say the hell out of mine,…

  4. Arthur  March 6, 2010 at 5:22 pm

    I used to consider myself a conservative… but then I was being mentally lazy. I went with the definition as meaning being for lower taxes, less jack-boot takeover of our liberties and thought processes, more (not less) power for the law-abiding, and less exploiting of the judicial system to ignore the rights of the victims in order to assure the rights of the vile perpetrators to enable them to get away with it.

    Shoot! (get it?) Eliot Ness was a conservative. He swore to uphold a law pushed through by the likes of those who followed in the steps of Carrie Nation (have you ever seen a pic of her??? her eyes say psychopath!).

    To the point here:
    I used to think in terms of the individual’s rights. I mean, how can we deprive a blob a chance at life? It would be inhuman, right?

    Um, let me think…..
    Was the carrier of this precious life blob raped?

    Or… did she spread her legs just because some dude came up and offered her the price of a snootful or told her “i luvs ya baby”?

    I have grown up since then and now I have to ask…

    Shouldn’t we who believe in a decent society be screaming for a law that mandates abortion????????????

    A bit of hyperbole, but you get it, right?

  5. Almandine  March 6, 2010 at 5:29 pm

    Got it Arthur…

    Kill ‘em all and let God sort it out.

    • Arthur  March 6, 2010 at 5:44 pm

      I should have said cogent intelligent arguments welcomed. My bad. But seeing I am a conservative (and therefore believe in God) I need to delve into my beliefs a bit.

      Ok, some believe a rapist gets a victim pregnant, and then the issue is entitled to life because the Creator values all life. Therefore… the rapist’s seed gets passed on and gets to live out its genes down the road (and pass on the same psychotic behavior).

      Maybe we should be asking the Creator if He values life so much, why He allows His creation to defile it in others, and sees to it that He has plenty of enablers of same to champion their right to do so.

      • silentSCREAM  March 6, 2010 at 6:56 pm

        Re: Arthur

        “Maybe we should be asking the Creator….”

        Where does one tender such questions? And more so where does one look to recieve said answers. E-mail? Snail-mail? Other acclaimed believers, or perhaps the depths of one’s own imagination. I suspect the latter works best for most…

        Maybe, just maybe, the time has come for mankind to stop absolving himself of responsibility for his own actions by crediting the “will” of an exalted micro-managing authority.

        • Almandine  March 6, 2010 at 11:26 pm

          Micro-managing authority ???

          Doubt it. Bigger fish to fry.

          Isn’t that whole “we are the chosen” thing a little much?

      • Almandine  March 6, 2010 at 11:19 pm

        Cogent intelligent arguments? Your beliefs matter not in that vein.

        Twiddle dee, twiddle dum.

Comments are closed.