After all these years, the GOP has finally released their full repeal and replace plan. By “GOP”, I mean certain insiders who seem to have missed the mark. Here’s Paul Ryan’s statement
“Obamacare is rapidly collapsing. Skyrocketing premiums, soaring deductibles, and dwindling choices are not what the people were promised seven years ago. It’s time to turn a page and rescue our health care system from this disastrous law. The American Health Care Act is a plan to drive down costs, encourage competition, and give every American access to quality, affordable health insurance. It protects young adults, patients with pre-existing conditions, and provides a stable transition so that no one has the rug pulled out from under them.
“Working together, this unified Republican government will deliver relief and peace of mind to the millions of Americans suffering under Obamacare. This will proceed through a transparent process of regular order in full view of the public. I want to thank all of our members who have contributed their ideas, especially Chairman Walden and Chairman Brady, as well as Secretary Price and the Trump administration, for their commitment to keep this promise and get this right.â€
Reading the entire bill, color me not impressed. Nor are many Republicans. Senator Rand Paul called it Obamacare Lite. Justin Amash referred to it as Obamacare 2.0. Many others are slamming the bill, as well.
Key talking points from the GOP are
- Dismantles the Obamacare taxes (a thumbs up in the bill’s favor is getting rid of all the taxes)
- Eliminate the individual and employer mandate penalties (more in a minute)
- Prohibit health insurers from denying coverage (had to keep this. Should have had a section on insurers not drastically increasing premiums/deductibles or dumping people who’ve been paying for insurance for actually using it)
- Help young adults access health insurance (keeping the part about staying on parent’s insurance till 26. Good idea)
- Establish a Patient and State Stability Fund (entitlement time. But, this is still needed for the short term as Ocare is wiped away)
- Modernize and strengthen Medicaid (Medicaid expansion. Still needed till Ocare is wiped away)
- Empower individuals and families to spend their health care dollars the way they want and need by enhancing and expanding Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) (still need to get rid of all caps on these)
- Help Americans access affordable, quality health care by providing a monthly tax credit—between $2,000 and $14,000 a year—for low- and middle-income individuals and families who don’t receive insurance through work or a government program. (some are calling this another entitlement, and that government is still too involved)
Back to the mandate penalties portion, there’s this (starts on page 61)
Under GOP bill, anyone who goes w/o health coverage for two months or more would face a 30% surcharge on premiums for a year. pic.twitter.com/krmLYLTOTn
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) March 6, 2017
Obviously, the point here is to disincentivize those who would not have health insurance, then get sick and want to purchase. However, this is almost worse than the Ocare mandate. Let’s say you change jobs: the typical occurrence is that you are not eligible to sign up for the company health insurance until you’ve been there for 90 days. Sure, you could purchase COBRA for a month. It’s not cheap. What if you are out of work for several months or more? Can you afford more expensive insurance? For all intent purposes, this is a mandate and a penalty, just like with Obamacare.
If it was more like 6 months, or had a measure for waivers, it would be fine. Regardless, what this requires, per the legislation, is that you file a form with The Government stating you had insurance without a 63 day gap. Weren’t Republicans protesting against this kind of thing?
The employer mandate is wacked, though, as is the specific language for the individual mandate.
The NY Times has an interesting breakdown of what is kept, what’s changed, and what’s repealed.
How about that “Cadillac tax?” That is kept around
A number of Obamacare taxes would be repealed, including the Medical Device Tax and health insurance taxes, but the Cadillac tax would be restored after 10 years to comply with the Byrd Rule, allowing Republicans to pass the measure using budget reconciliation.
Of course, they can always wack that tax at some point in the future.
The plan would stop giving Planned Parenthood federal taxpayer money for one year. This is silly. It alienates certain GOP squishes, like Susan Collins, while being nothing more than patronizing Republican voters, as it is only one year. Planned Parenthood makes enough money on their own as a private business, and shouldn’t be subsidized by the federal government. Instead, they could have done something like reimbursing for services rendered, except for abortion.
Speaking of abortion, the bill itself pretty much starts out by diving in to the abortion debate and stating that federal money will not be used for abortions, except in certain cases, such as rape, incest, and the health of the mother. Health exclusions do not include “I want to continue partying and having irresponsible sex, so I’m sad.”
Right now, overall, this plan is not particularly good. Is it better than Ocare? Yes. Does it fully repeal Ocare? Yes. Does it involve the government in our health insurance decisions? Yes. Mandate and penalty? Yes. Does it utterly forget about other GOP ideas, like allowing cross state purchasing of health insurance? Sure does. Does it forget to create a pathway to get people out of the Ocare exchanges and into private insurance in an orderly fashion? Yes. Does it reduce the things that government requires insurance plans to offer? Only back to pre-Ocare days.
Is this a work in progress or what the House and Senate will be forced to vote on? We’ll see. Now that it is out, the usual pattern is to tweak proposed legislation. We’ll have to see if this happens.
UPDATE: Trump tweets
Don't worry, getting rid of state lines, which will promote competition, will be in phase 2 & 3 of healthcare rollout. @foxandfriends
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 7, 2017
This jibes with some rumbles I’m hearing, in that the bill was crafted in a manner so that it can be pushed through the Senate on a 50+1 vote in a manner that would do away with any sort of filibuster, perhaps reconciliation, in the same way Ocare was passed. Once it is in place, there are other bills which will institute more free market solutions which minimize federal government involvement in our health insurance and health care.
Of course, this is the GOP. Can we trust the Establishment to do this?
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Fewer covered, higher costs, tax cuts for the wealthy…
Sounds like a terrible plan. Ya see what the radical leftist dis there? “Tax cuts for the wealthy…” means right from the start he is unwilling to listen, compromise or participate in anything that is not 100% what HE wants regardless with what anybody else wants. Typical fascist leftist. That’s why we can no longer even talk to them.
I have no idea what Jeff is referring to. I read the entire bill, and there was nothing in there about any tax cuts for anyone. Tax incentives for people based on age and income, with phase-outs for those making above $75k individual/$150k joint filer. Does Jeff now consider $75k individual “rich”?
As for higher costs, lefties like Jeff told us that Ocare would bend the curve down. Obama specifically told us time and again that Ocare would save families up to $2500 a year. Instead, costs went up up up.
Whether this plan increases costs to citizens remains to be seen. How this shakes out in making it easy for people to move from their extremely limited and failing Ocare plans to non-Exchange plans remains to be seen. But, Jeff and his ilk won’t wait for actual details. They’ll just scaremonger.
One example:
Under the ACA, Health Insurance companies cannot take tax deductions for executive compensation over $500,000 per year. The new bill removes that cap.
At the same time the bill will reduce subsidies for trump voters.
Uh, we don’t want any competition between college loan money and Healthcare insurance premiums for young adults, do we?
Repeal LooseShoeCare PERIOD!
“Young adults” access to health insurance has nothing to do with keeping them on their parents policy until 26. That’s ridiculous. First off Obamacare originally stated that forcing the young and healthy to buy insurance will keep the costs down for the older and sick. That can’t happen if they are on their parents plan. Secondly, when I was 26 I had done 3 years in Vietnam, graduated college in three years straight with no breaks, got married and opened my first restaurant. If kids today can’t buy their own insurance they are retarded or the entire education establishment should be deconstructed and rebuilt with responsible adults capable of teaching rather than pandering and propagandizing.
BTW, “the young” don’t usually buy health or life insurance. They have other things they’d rather spend their hard earned money on. Like supporting Jeffery’s immigrants. I never had health insurance until I was in my late 30’s and only then because I wanted a group plan for my employees so I could be more competitive for quality people.
Planned Parenthood is not subsidized by the government.
That’s exactly how it works. Planned Parenthood provides health services under Medicaid, primarily in poor, underserved communities. They are reimbursed on a services-rendered basis, except for abortion.
Cutting off funding for Planned Parenthood means, in many cases, leaving underserved communities unserved.
Haha, pull the other one…
It’s a terrible plan, Obamacare Lite.
Zachriel wrote:
Not sure how anyone can (reasonably) say that Planned Parenthood is not subsidized by the government and, in the same comment, complain about cutting government funding for Planned Parenthood.
As for “leaving underserved communities unserved,” that’s perfectly fine with me! Why should I be taxed to support “underserved communities?”
If planned parent is not subsidized by the government then why do the Dems insist on funding it. There is no need for ppl as Medicaid and other insurance covers its services.
The crazier the radical loons on the left get, he richer the Trump’s get. I love it. BTW I ust gave my wife a pair of Ivanka’s boots and she loves them.
Dana: Not sure how anyone can (reasonably) say that Planned Parenthood is not subsidized by the government and, in the same comment, complain about cutting government funding for Planned Parenthood.
Republicans want to exclude Planned Parenthood from services-rendered Medicaid funding.
Dana: As for “leaving underserved communities unserved,†that’s perfectly fine with me! Why should I be taxed to support “underserved communities?â€
Then your argument is with the Medicaid program, not Planned Parenthood. Of course, your position would be that poor women not get contraceptive and pre-natal care, as well as poor elderly not receiving medical care.
In fact, 60% of Planned Parenthood’s federal funding comes from reimbursements from Medicaid and Title X funding for preventative and primary care (things like birth control and cancer screenings).
“The Government Accountability Office estimates that 390,000 women would lose access and up to 650,000 would face reduced preventive care within a year if Congress blocked Medicaid patients from Planned Parenthood,” CBS News reported earlier this year.
A little advice there, Z.
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/2ec02f1c-583a-48d2-ae31-9036d7a89662
Handwaving is not an argument.
Go to school. Learn something.
Fallacy of diversion. Let us know when you wish to address the point raised.
Nothing to address, kiddies.
Your statement is false and misleading.
Planned Parenthood gets about $500million a year in taxpayer funds and since money is fungible it may all go for abortions or none for abortions, there is no way to tell. On thing is for sure, people are getting abortions in places funded by our tax dollars. Therefore, PP should either not be eligible for government funding of any kind or it should cease providing abortions. They imply that the majority of their blood money comes from non abortion services so cutting abortion should be no problem. Abortion only clinics would be set up to fill the market void and they would provide no services other than abortion. Then the left can still kill babies and the right won’t be forced by the fascists to pay for it.
Or is that just too fair for the left?
Here’s one for ya: This idiot wants his genitals removed to become a “genderless alien”. Worse, he want to adopt children.
http://rightwingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/3DDDA6E800000578-4274396-image-a-1_1488447815292-1.jpg
As the money is spent on a services-rendered basis, we know that the money is used for services rendered. Indeed, Medicaid generally pays less than the market rate. If you want an abortion at Planned Parenthood, you must find another source of funding.
Planned Parenthood considers abortion a fundamental option for women’s health, consistent with the Planned Parenthood v. Casey Supreme Court decision.
In fact, Republicans around the nation are working to make abortion clinics very difficult to set up and operate by passing laws that are only tangentially related to women’s health needs. (Basically, they lie about the purpose of the law.)
Both of these statements are true:
60% of Planned Parenthood’s funding comes from reimbursements from Medicaid and Title X funding for preventative and primary care (things like birth control and cancer screenings).
The Government Accountability Office estimates that 390,000 women would lose access and up to 650,000 would face reduced preventive care within a year if Congress blocked Medicaid patients from Planned Parenthood,†CBS News reported earlier this year.
Defunding Planned Parenthood actually means defunding poor patients that rely on Planned Parenthood.
http://time.com/money/4692943/the-gops-obamacare-replacement-cuts-funding-for-planned-parenthood/
Your statement is false and misleading.
Nothing to address. Nothing to argue.
Go to school, kiddies. Learn something.
Especially the meaning of the words you use.
Funny you should write that dp.
That’s pretty much the same message the Z-bots are receiving at Maggies Farm where the Z-bots are also wasting their time.
Classic!
Yet the Casey decision restricted abortions in many cases.
You really don’t want to be citing Casey in this argument.
Several have diverted. No one has actually responded substantively.
A substantive response to your nonsense.
So did Roe. Casey upheld the “essential finding” of Roe: (1) Women have the right to choose to have an abortion prior to viability and to do so without undue interference from the State; (2) the State can restrict the abortion procedure post viability, so long as the law contains exceptions for pregnancies which endanger the woman’s life or health; and (3) the State has legitimate interests from the outset of the pregnancy in protecting the health of the woman and the life of the fetus that may become a child.
Once again you show that you have no clue as to what you are talking about. Roe established a heretofore “right of privacy” that was extended to include the killing of children. Roe did not restrict the right to the deadly procedure, it enabled it.
“Viability” was not in the Roe decision. Not one mention.
Which was previously not a part of Roe.
Just out of curiosity Zach, do you have any idea how many kids that are aborted survive and make it to adulthood?
It is amazing watching the number of times you get caught lying about things and then try to maintain that you are right.
From the Democratic Party Dictionary:
Subsidies: things fossil fuels companies get that are really just tax code provisions that every company is eligible for.
Reimbursements: large amounts of money given directly to abortion providing companies that make oodles of money on their own and don’t you dare call it a subsidy.
Trump made the offer to Planned Parenthood to stop providing abortions and the funding would remain.
Planned Parenthood declined.
The refusal shows two things: 1) abortions are a major part of their business plan and 2) they don’t really care about the health of women at all. They claim that only 3% of their income is from abortions, but they are willing, according to people like Zach, to abandon 97% of funding and abandon the women they claim to serve.
The big money for these butchers is in the organ trade.
How’s a girl supposed to pay for her Lambo?
(O’Keefe video)
I’m wondering about that too, fellas. I was in the restaurant business and just for fun let’s say the government was giving me $500 million but said I had to stop selling 7-Up which accounted for 3% of my sales or I’d loose the money. Guess what? Buh-bye 7-Up.
I agree. But then look at it from this point of view….
You are telling the world that the sales of 7-Up is only 3 percent of your sales but in matter of fact, it is 97% of your business.
Then what?
That’s the only way this makes sense – that the percentage of abortions is much higher than Planned Parenthood admits to. Or the funds they are using are fungible.
Either Planned Parenthood is lying about the amount going to abortions or Planned Parenthood is throwing women under the bus and really doesn’t care about the health of woman as leftists (including those on this site) claim.
(see: https://youtu.be/VMlBJEgSK8A)
The battle cry from the left used to be that Planned Parenthood didn’t supply abortion to people.
Cecile Richards, the president of Planned Parenthood, disagrees:
From her tweet:
I don’t know, I was always taught that child bearing is a family event…..not a tax payer burden.
Let’s say you’re a government contractor and 3% of your business is with Jews. So-called president trump offers to continue your government business but only if you stop selling to Jews.
If you refuse trump’s offer is it because you REALLY do more than 3% of your business with Jews or is it because you’re more moral than conservatives and refuse to discriminate for money? The conservative mantra has always been “Money first”.
We get it. In its effort to continue social patriarchy and control the lives of women, the far right opposes legal abortion, even falsely calling it “murder” or “baby killing”. Yet the right sits athwart the chest of the body politic opposing any efforts to increase contraception and decrease unwanted pregnancies. The ctrl-right wants total control over women. We get it.
#BlindedByYourReligion
#WhyReligiousZealotsAreBadForAmerica
As expected the Republican plan punishes the working classes (many trump voters in MI, WI, OH, PA, etc) and rewards Health Insurance execs and wealthy investors, the true Republican base.
“Trump” counties throughout the upper midwest and rust belt have some of the highest rates of working class suicides and drug abuse – they need more help from our healthcare system, not less. It’s hard to see how reducing the tax burdens on the already wealthy will help.
#Ah…Republicanism!
#RepublicanLoveAmericaButHateAmericans
The Heritage Foundation, AARP, AMA, American Hospital Association, CATO, FreedomWorks, Center for American Progress and others oppose the current Republican “Plan”, aka TrumpKare…
That’s the difference between us. When you are wrong, we assume you are probably speaking out of ignorance, as you are here.
“Viable” and “Viability” are mentioned nine times in the Roe decision (including the Syllabus).
Roe v. Wade:
(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman’s attending physician.
(b) For the stage subsequent to approximately the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health.
(c) For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.
“Viable†and “Viability†are mentioned nine times in the Roe decision (including the Syllabus).
You are correct. I apologize for that. However, it is not used as you seem to think it is. Casey changed the test on abortions from the tri-mester approach in Roe to the viability test in Casey. The viability test is much more restrictive which is what I said and you denied.
You read but do not understand. The trimester approach in Roe assigned viability in the third trimester. Casey defined viability in a more strict medical term.
Abortion represents 3% of health services provided by Planned Parenthood. As a percentage of revenues, abortions represent about 15-30% of total revenues.
Abortions are paid for separately from other services.
The claims of percentages are all based on what Planned Parenthood says. That’s the point.
As for the “fungability” of the money, you are speaking out of ignorance.
You are telling me that in a business 3% of what is sold generates 15-30% of income? Preposterous. First of all there is no such thing as “15-30%” in business. In business you work with 2-3% margins not 15% therefore, 15-30% is nothing more than an outrageous guesstimate. How much do they charge to abort ones child these days? Can one have the little bastard cut to ribbons and vacuumed out for $1,000, $5,000, $10,000? Or is it more? And where do these “poor” people get this fee? Or do they do the killing for free and take it out of “other services”?
So one way or the other taxpayers many of whom are morally opposed to abortion are being forced to pay to kill the babies of other people.
And you guys think Hitler was a monster? You all make him look like a rookie.
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-8jYVgtKCJFc/VcIdOHMw1jI/AAAAAAABYnI/3JA9RX4_VS8/s1600/hitler-abortion.jpg
Zachriel, exactly how are “Abortions are paid for separately from other services.”? I run my restaurant and put money received for sandwiches in the bank along with 7-Up money. When I pay my bills exactly which money am I using? Money is fungible, I use it all. Idiot. It would help if you actually had some business experience.
Um, it was a percentage of revenues.
Most abortions range from $1500-$3000, and cannot be paid for by Medicaid reimbursement or other taxpayer funds.
Turns out that you can account for sandwich revenues and expenditures separate from 7-Up revenues and expenditures. The process was codified by a Franciscan friar in the 15th century.
http://thefederalist.com/2015/10/14/4-ways-planned-parenthood-has-billed-taxpayers-for-elective-abortions/#disqus_thread
Turns out the only way to do that is with completely separate bank accounts HOWEVER, even if that is done if the rent is paid by the “non abortion account” it supports abortion by providing a place to perform them. This is all beside that fantastic monk from way back when.
So, again if they are not paid through Medicaid or taxes how exactly are they paid? The abortion procurement fairy? BTW, do you always range everything from 15-30 when illustrating? Now it’s $1500-$3000 for an abortion. How does a poor person pay that kind of money? What does that $500 million subsidy pay for at PP, bottled water for the abortionists? Can’t they make up that money by selling baby parts?
Well, duh. Most of Planned Parenthood’s revenue is from the federal government, such as through Medicaid — except abortions. Therefore, most of the non-government revenue is for abortions.
This sort of distortion indicates the article is propaganda, and not a balanced review of the evidence.
But, but y’all stated…
Your statement is false and misleading.
sub·si·dize
ˈsəbsəˌdīz/
verb
support (an organization or activity) financially.
synonyms:give money to, pay a subsidy to, contribute to, invest in, sponsor, support, fund, finance, underwrite; informalshell out for, fork out for, cough up for; bankroll
“they have agreed to subsidize the after-school program”
pay part of the cost of producing (something) to reduce prices for the buyer.
“the government subsidizes basic goods including sugar, petroleum, and wheat”
By the definition, the federal government does not subsidize abortoin.
So you admit that your statement…
is false and misleading.
Thanks, kiddies, go back to school.
You’ve learned something.
You are being vague. Are you trying to draw a distinction between the federal government (which does not provide subsidies) and state and local governments (some of which do provide subsidies). If so, why didn’t you just make your position clear upthread? Or are you trying to obfuscate?
Here’s the context of our statement:
The topic was the federal government, so if you have a point to make, it’s usually best to just make it rather than waving your hands.
Payment for abortions services have to be arranged in advance. Many people pay for their abortions. There are grants available. And some states provided funding.
Our estimate of cost was too high. We thought to write $300-$1500.
“advocates and opponents of abortion rights have calculated somewhere between 15 percent and 37 percent … But this type of math is speculative and has limitations. … a Western Pennsylvania clinic lists $390 to $1,090 for abortions, and first trimester abortion is priced at $515 in Arizona.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/08/12/for-planned-parenthood-abortion-stats-3-percent-and-94-percent-are-both-misleading/?utm_term=.a5cbacebd1f8
It’s not a subsidy, but payment for services rendered.
Multiple investigations have shown that Planned Parenthood was operating within the law.
Look. We understand you are against abortion, but lying about it does nothing to further your cause.
That’s whole the whole point of double-entry bookkeeping. You don’t have to keep separate books for every product.
The usual way is to divide the cost of the floorspace. It may not be necessary in a small restaurant where the owner can eyeball most everything, but in a large concern, such as Wal-Mart, that is how they determine which areas of the store are profitable, and which are not.
Uh, no. My point was quite clear.
Uh, no. You are.
The language is quite clear in all my comments.
Uh, no. That’s what y’all do when you get caught posting false and misleading statements such as…
You don’t “understand” anything since I am not against abortion. I am against taking money from people who are morally opposed to abortion by force and using it for abortion. I am against any government paying tax money for abortion. Finally, I am against using abortion for birth control.
Fortunately abortion is employed mostly by the poor and minorities. Sadly, more females are selected for abortion than males. Well, sadly for the females. The good news is since that is the basic groups which employ this form of infanticide they happen to be predominantly democrat voters therefore, so are their potential spawn. So who needs’em?
I’m not talking about bookkeeping. I’m talking about cash deposits and cash expenditures and they are fungible. It has nothing to do with determining what makes a profit and what does not (although you’re wrong there too). What you describe is an accountants cost allocation but it bears no relevance to banking. It has to do with comingling of funds.
Rev,
What kind of “man” believes that abortion is infanticide or murder, yet supports abortion?
Taxation always takes money from people to spend on activities they don’t support. Should only supporters of a war be dunned for paying for it? My tax monies were used to invade Iraq, and invasion that I did not support. According to your “logic” you, the GOP and trumpy owe me some money.
Several proven ways to reduce abortion is to reduce poverty, improve educational opportunities, expand healthcare opportunities, expand sex education and to make reliable contraception more available… incidentally, activities that the GOP opposes. How many million women will lose reproductive healthcare services when the GOOP slashes Medicaid? We’ll see in increase in abortion numbers for certain.
Cons do not care about babies, children or even fetuses. They care about controlling women.
I did not say I “support” abortion, did I? Lying again? Please quote where I said I support abortion. But if you murdering Nazi’s want to kill your own babies who am I to stop you?
I know you hate America and anyone who is a patriot but we don’t have a choice in supporting our military since it’s there for all of us. If you didn’t like the invasion of Iraq it’s too bad but your representatives voted for it. That’s life. BTW, neither I, the GOP nor trumpy invaded Iraq, the US did. Idiot.
We spent a trillion on the war on poverty.
We can’t improve education when the teachers are only interested in propaganda and when the democrats control the unions and won’t allow vouchers for free choice.
What do you mean “expand healthcare opportunities”? Are you an idiot?
How can we “expand sex education” any more than having it taught k-12? Another dumbass motto meaning nothing.
You really mean reliable contraception is not available? Seriously? You really don’t realize you can grab a condom at the gas station on any corner? Again a worthless motto made to make you “feel good” but with zero substance. Idiot!
You really never think for yourself do you? You just mindlessly repeat all the crap from the left and never question a thing. You really are the definition of the “useful idiot”.
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-3ImOWaPhYHg/WK0hOq1SfjI/AAAAAAAAIRs/1cyztaLDL7EkJfwhptxLZvKIpaqG1PNpQCLcB/s320/thought%2Bpolice%2Bmind-control.jpg
The federal government doesn’t fund abortions, nor do most states, except in cases when the life or health of the mother is threatened. Some states do fund elective abortions, however. Your beef would be with those states then. Other countries have different rules concerning abortion.
So is Planned Parenthood, which works hard to provide contraception to women. However, even the best contraception fails, and some women may choose to abort at that time.
The funds for abortion have to come from sources other than federal government funding.
Not just federal, Zachriel, all government funding. But no one has explained what or who this “non government” money comes from. I don’t think they sell $500 million in chopped up baby parts.
I personally find abortion to be inhuman and barbaric especially when so many Americans are looking to adopt. Why on earth would a major political party have as it’s core the “right” to dissect an embryo and sell off its parts? That said, I would not outlaw abortion in all 57 states because I have more respect for the American people. I would leave it up to the individual states to determine what their conscience will allow. Unlike the left who for some reason uses brute force to make people who disagree allow the abomination. They’re all for “choice” unless it’s the choice of the people of the state to disagree. Then it’s FU. That’s the way the left rolls. Just like it was “shut up, we won” when it was Obama but with Trump it’s the verge of civil war. Seems they only like the republic and choice and freedom of speech when it agrees with their point of view. All others need not apply. Just look at what happens at colleges if a conservative even trys to speak. It’s insanity.
Actually no woman is forced by the state to have an abortion. The “choice” you disdain is the choice to have an abortion or not. What you advocate is a reduction of freedom. Do you object to women in your state obtaining abortions? If so, why not move to a state or even a nation that is more restrictive?
No one is interfering with your right to disagree. Even when told to shut up, you don’t have to – it’s America – at least for now.
It has become obvious that trump is temperamentally unfit to be president and should be removed for the good of the nation.
Vice President Pence, who is even more an extremist conservative than trump, would become President. He would be bad for America but at least he is temperamentally fit for the job. Pence would sign all the same damaging bills as trump, but Pence is not nuts.
Roe v. Wade: (c) For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.
What we said was that Casey upheld the “essential finding†of Roe. Notice the quote marks.
Planned Parenthood v. Casey: After considering the fundamental constitutional questions resolved by Roe, principles of institutional integrity, [505 U.S. 833, 846] and the rule of stare decisis, we are led to conclude this: the essential holding of Roe v. Wade should be retained and once again reaffirmed. It must be stated at the outset and with clarity that Roe’s essential holding, the holding we reaffirm, has three parts…
Of course, that should read “essential holding”.
Personal funds, state or local governments, or private grants.
Because women want to decide for themselves whether to carry a fetus to term.
The Democratic Party does not advocate fetal organ trade.
Um, state law is “brute force” too. Please note that the Roe and Casey decisions both allow states to proscribe abortions after viability.
What are “personal funds”? State and local governments have no more moral right to fund a persons abortion with money taken by force than the feds do. They should publicly list the “private grants” so that through honesty and transparency citizens can see the truth.
And upon that lie is based the law. It’s not carrying a fetus to term, it’s having a baby, a human being. You do realize it’s another human beings life? Life is cheap to you leftists, from Adolph and Stalin to modern leftists lives are just numbers.
By advocating abortion and not stopping it they do.
Should I give you my most studious and condescending Ummm, too? Yes, state law is brute force but one can go to another state and at least state law is Constitutional. Both the Roe and Casey decisions were very bad decisions, unlawful and unconstitutional. The very idea that the feds can decide abortion is anti American too. But why is allowing each state decide for themselves cause such consternation? I thought leftists were for choice.
Abortion is law Zachriel because the left willingly ignores three basic truths: 1) an unborn fetus is just a stage of a human’s development like an embryo or child or teen. We all go through it, you did too. and 2) the SC twisted and turned to make a federal law from thin air. The question should always have been a states rights question. So it’s very, very bad law and the fact that some people you among them want to keep it means you place your agenda above truth. Not an unusual characteristic for leftists. And 3) the left managed to stack the SC with like-minded ideologues who ignored the 9th and 10th amendments and by doing so established “lawfare” as a method of defeating the Constitution, the law and the will of the people, because if you recall Zachriel, back in 1973 the overwhelming majority of American were against abortion. Just a point for all you leftists who seem to believe majority rules.
Planned Parenthood was the brainchild of racist and eugenics proponents Margaret Sanger and Ethel Byrne and it’s goal was the killing of minority babies and the sterilization of minority adults. As usual the Party of Slavery jumped on the bandwagon with these two lovely genocidal maniacs and remains firmly dedicated to the destruction of minorities today. From their modern day plantations called ghettoes, to the abortion mills of Planned Parenthood, to the refusal to allow vouchers to obtain better education to creating hostility among the races the Democrat slave party has never really given up on their bitter hared of black Americans.
Martin Luther King, Jr. said:
Our schools have spent over sixty year propagandizing rather than teaching and the end result is you guys can’t tell the difference between a wee human and a “livable wage”. To you all either has become is a slogan to usurp the authority of the Constitution and ultimately our Republic.
When you lost God you lost your conscience and your morality and I’m afraid you’ll never get them back.
Your own money, you know, money in your pocket.
That’s presumably a decision for the people of the state, along with other public expenditures you may or may not support.
Psst. They’re hiding on the Internet.
http://wrrap.org/about-wrrap/
https://www.lilithfund.org/
Fertility clinics use procedures that are risky to the zygote in order to help couples have children, often destroying multiple zygotes in the process. Should they be charged with child endangerment?
No. That would be a falsehood. One can support a right to an abortion without supporting a market in fetal organs and tissues.
The Supreme Court has held that the right of the woman to choose has precedence before fetal viability.
That’s a historical falsehood. We could provide you the facts, but as it won’t fit your preconceptions, you will surely ignore it.
Martin Luther King Jr. wrote, “There is a striking kinship between our movement and Margaret Sanger’s early efforts. She, like we, saw the horrifying conditions of ghetto life. Like we, she knew that all of society is poisoned by cancerous slums. Like we, she was a direct actionist – a nonviolent resister. She was willing to accept scorn and abuse until the truth she saw was revealed to the millions. At the turn of the century she went into the slums and set up a birth control clinic, and for this deed she went to jail because she was violating an unjust law.”
You have done an excellent job of using the links from specious sources like Politifact and Planned Parenthood to argue your case. You even point out that since the Supreme Court says so it therefore is. You even managed an MLK quote out of context and before he realized her intent. Good job. So, in the end you support the murder of babies. We are not surprised.
Margaret Sanger died the same year as King’s award from Planned Parenthood, at the age of 86, a year after the Griswold decision legalizing birth control in the U.S.
In 1966, the year you reference, my sister and I spent the summer organizing civil rights workers in Mobile, Alabama on behalf of the Episcopal Church Diocese of Pennsylvania. At that time many senior civil rights workers were concerned about the attempt of the communist inspired abortion movement to intertwine with the Black Civil Rights movement and informed the leaders including MLK of the dangers. He was assassinated and there the story ends.
The communists had already taken over the “Peace” movement which was turned into an anti draft movement with a generous splash of anti Americanism which was the groundwork for todays white privilege and de-Christianization movements in schools and colleges. The insidious radical left communists and Nazi’s are nothing if not far thinking, far planning folks.
I’ve read some of Sanger’s propaganda, admittedly only her “Selected Papers” volumes and one horrible thing the name I can’t recall. She was a lousy writer but then she wasn’t trying to be Hemmingway. But she definitely was both a eugenicist and a racist. She was also a white supremacist. A real one not what you leftists call conservatives today. One of her most famous quotes is: The most merciful thing that a family does to one of it’s infant members is to kill it”. Notice the word “infant” not zygote or embryo or fetus. The woman was a beast who favored mass murder. She specifically supported abortions and sterilization of blacks, minorities, the imperfect and inferior. Sorry, them’s the facts.
Abortion is murder whether or not the Supreme Court says it’s legal. Just like killing Jews and gays and gypsies and the handicapped was still murder even though German law said it was legal. I know that you atheists don’t understand God’s Law but the Right to Life is just that, God’s Law. It is not granted by government, the Supreme Court or the Laws of Nazi Germany and cannot morally be taken away by them except for extreme reasons. Choice is not one of those extreme reasons. Choice is an excuse for bad behavior and the refusal to accept responsibility for such.
The one thing zygote, embryo, fetus, infant, baby, child, pre-teen, teenager, young adult, adult, senior, elderly or dead have in common is that they all describe one part of the development of a human being. Kill it at any stage is murder.
Hoggie,
We get it. You lied about your position on abortion, likely to conceal your own lack of honor. Fail. Letting states decide is kicking the can down the road. Then why not let counties or cities decide? Or the smallest unit of government, the individual, decide? Whatever.
The anti-abortion forces would force every impregnated woman to carry to term (or miscarry or die in the process) rather than choose to terminate her pregnancy. NO ONE is forcing a woman to obtain an abortion, but current law allows her to choose to terminate if she so desires. What is your reasoning for opposing a woman’s right to decide whether or not to give birth?
Do you consider birth control methods that block implantation after fertilization to be murder and infanticide?
In many US states, murder is a capital offense. Would you prosecute the doctors, the clinic managers, the nurses or just the patient? If guilty, should they be executed?
90% of induced abortions are performed in the first trimester (12 weeks or before). 67% are performed before 8 weeks gestation. If you were King of your state, would you advocate banning these early abortions or would you let a state-wide referendum decide?
If one believes in some form of a supreme being, a God or gods, for example, and if one further believes their selected god is all-powerful, it’s clear that the all powerful god aborts more babies in a year than women do. More embryos are lost “naturally” than are born.
Little guy explaining God now.
Takes an atheist to clearly solve His message.
Thanks little guy.
Have a cookie.
Unlike you Jeffery, I don’t lie about anything because unlike you Jeffery, I don’t have to. I don’t agree with abortion AS BIRTH CONTROL. That is what Planned Parenthood does, it performs murder as birth control. Women who have pregnancy emergencies requiring abortions do not go to PP, they go to the hospital. Do you think we are all stupid?
You stated: “The anti-abortion forces would force every impregnated woman to carry to term (or miscarry or die in the process) rather than choose to terminate her pregnancy.”. That is an out and out lie for most anti abortion people. We recognize the need for medically necessary pregnancy termination and you are just being ingenuous.
If you’re going to take part in the conversation Jeffery, you have to keep up with it. It’s not her “right to give birth” I object to. It’s her murdering a living HUMAN BEING to do so that I object to. Quite frankly Jeffery for you to believe a womans right to “choose” somehow trumps another person’s right to live is disturbing and speaks volumes about your lack of character, morality and compassion. Nobody has that right.
I don’t know since I’ve never considered the question before. My gut says if it’s not implanted for gestation it is not an abortion.
If abortion was made illegal on a state by state basis I would imagine each state would develop it’s own laws pertaining to the subject. Don’t you?
If I were “King” of my state they would all be illegal but since this is a Republic the people of each state would decide. I would acquiesce to the result. Unlike you radical pro-abortionists I don’t feel the need to force everybody to do want.
As a person who does not believe in God and as a person who does not understand theology in the least you really need to keep these type of remarks to yourself. They only prove your complete and utter ignorance of the subject. Equating miscarriages to abortions and blaming God is like equating having a heart attack to being killed by a moslem terrorist and blaming God. Clearly one is found in nature and the other found in the darkest reaches of an evil human soul. We know which side you choose.
What is your reasoning for being against murder?
(assuming that you are, of course.)
If you are, then it is you whose position is inconsistent, not the pro-life people
If you actually thought abortion was murder you’d do more than whine online, hypocrite.
According to you, nearly 1,000,000 children are murdered each year in the US alone. That’s nearly 3000 babies a day. You even know where these “murders” are being committed, and when, yet here you sit typing about how others are murdering children.
If I thought children were being murdered I would try to stop it. Yet, anti-abortionists rely on politicians to do the hard work for them.
No, calling abortion “murder” only reveals your abject hypocrisy.
Since this is “murder”, whom would you prosecute for the crime?