jump to last post 1-5 of 5 discussions (32 posts)

Back to second-class status.

  1. lovemychris profile image81
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    "On a conference call with reporters and bloggers this afternoon, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) characterized the GOP’s recent legislative effort to restrict access to abortion and contraception as “the most comprehensive and radical assault on women’s health in our life time,” promising to wage a campaign against the effort. Pelosi was referring to the Republican-backed H.R. 3 “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act” and H.R. 358, “Protect Life Act,” as well separate measures to eliminate federal funding for family planning.

    “They’re proposing raising taxes on small business,” Pelosi said of the two bills. “Under current law, women can buy insurance that covers a full range of reproductive health care. Under the Republican plan, women in private plans can’t use their private money to purchase a full range of reproductive health care, effectively taking away the right of women to spend their own money on the health care they choose.” “Small businesses that received tax credits for their employees will lose their tax credit if they choose a full range of plans that cover women’s health,” Pelosi added."


    Can't use private money to buy a private service...because Repubs are making our private life the public's business.

    It's an assault on the 4th amendment.

    http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2011/ … rtion-hr3/

    1. profile image0
      Sophia Angeliqueposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I see absolutely no reason whatsoever that public money should be used for contraception and/or abortion.

      I do, however, believe that people need to be taught personal responsibility from birth.

      There is a complete dearth of personal responsibility when it comes to certain areas of behaviour.

      If people want abortions, they need to pay for them. I have no ethical problm with the act. I just don't think my taxes ought to be paying for someone else's compete and utter irresponsibility.

      1. Doug Hughes profile image61
        Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        No reason for taxpayer funding of contraception?

        What costs more - a condom or 18 years of welfare for a single mother and child?   DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        1. kerryg profile image87
          kerrygposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Seriously!

          Also, getting an abortion is not necessarily an indication of "complete and utter irresponsibility." Birth control sometimes fails, and if you've made a good faith effort to prevent pregnancy, but it happened anyway and you recognize that you're not prepared to deal with a pregnancy or a child, then I'd have to say abortion is the more responsible choice. Not all people getting abortions are sleeping around with a different guy every week, you know, and although I'd prefer that people give up the baby for adoption in the situation I described above, as someone who's been pregnant and knows what it does to your body, I'm not going to blame anyone who can't bring themselves to go through with it.

          Pro-lifers gloss over the fact that, rare as it is in this day and age, pregnancy can still literally kill you, and permanent effects ranging from the mildly annoying to the serious are not at all unusual. The US has one of the highest rates of maternal mortality in the developed world.

          In the developing world, complications from unsafe abortion are the second leading cause of death among teenage girls and women of child-bearing age - about 70,000 women per year. The top cause of death? Complications from childbirth - more than 340,000 per year.

        2. profile image0
          Sophia Angeliqueposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Contraception isn't expensive.

          Why can't people be taught personal responsibility.

          If you honestly believe that getting pregnant was the result of not having money to pay for contraception, then you need to go do some research.

          It has more to do with they don't think about the consequences, and they don't have to think about the consequences, because there is always someone to bail them out.

          Having said that, does everybody currently get free abortion, or is there a means test?

          The state cannot rescue everybody from their stupidity, lack of responsibility, and whatever. Sometimes, the State needs to let people suffer the consequences of their irresponsibility.

          Having said that, I'm not fan of the fact that laws are skewered to favor the rich and many are caught in a poverty trap.

          1. Doug Hughes profile image61
            Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            "Having said that, does everybody currently get free abortion, or is there a means test?

            The state cannot rescue everybody from their stupidity, lack of responsibility, and whatever. Sometimes, the State needs to let people suffer the consequences of their irresponsibility."

            Let's look at those two statements. The federal government  does not pay for elective abortions now. So there is no 'means test'.

            The second statement is judgemental as hell. Who are YOU to decide if someone was stupid or immoral?  How are you going to hook up a meter to evaluate reason vs passion? The idea that pregnancy and childbirth is a punishment you can inflict on the poor is twisted. (because rich folks can ALWAYS get an abortion - even if they have to fly to Sweden)

            1. profile image0
              Sophia Angeliqueposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              And the idea that humans cannot control passion is the result of a hedonistic, self-indulgent society that has lost sight of self discipline. Self control has always been the backbone of civilisation. Without self control, why not go out and murder people, just because one is passionately hating someone at the moment. It's the same sort of reasoning to say that people cannot control their attraction to a person of the opposite gender.

              It's not about judgment or immorality. I'm an atheist. If yo.u'd like to read my hubs on ethics, you will discover they are based on sciences like sociology and cause and effect. In fact, I never mentioned morality. That was your presumption, as were your other statements.

              If there isn't a means test, it means that many that could afford to pay for their irresponsibility will continue to behave in irresponsible ways.

              And your statement reeks of even more presumption and assumption. The rich don't have to fly anywhere. They can have the abortion done right here.

              I did NOT say that abortion was to be made illegal - simply that the state shouldn't pay for it.

              You need to read what is being said.

              1. kerryg profile image87
                kerrygposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                "And the idea that humans cannot control passion is the result of a hedonistic, self-indulgent society that has lost sight of self discipline."

                Maybe, but when have we ever had self-discipline? There hasn't been any magical age of morality that I've ever heard of.

                1950's? Estimates of the number of illegal abortions performed annually range from 200,000 - 1.2 million.

                Victorians? Rampant illegitimacy to the point that there were professional baby killers - men and women who would take bastards from their mothers and neglect them to death in exchange for a small fee.

                Colonial era? Abortion was legal.

                Medieval/Renaissance Europe? Rampant illegitimacy.

                Some of the most deeply conservative Muslim and Hindu societies have managed to minimize extramarital sexual activity, but mainly thanks to the threat of honor killings and the frequency of child marriage. I'll take a "hedonistic, self-indulgent society" over that any day!

                1. profile image0
                  Sophia Angeliqueposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I think you really meed tp read what I said.

                  I said that abortion shouldn't be paid for by the tax man.

                  I did NOT say that abortion must be abolished. Please understand that I am NOT American. I do NOT have issues with Abortion. I am NOT a Christian. And saying that the state mustn't pay for Abortion is NOT saying that Abortion is wrong or people cannot have Aboriton.


                  I have issues with the State PAYING for it.

                  And neither the Victorians or any other age ever had the State pay for Abortion.

                  As I said previously, READ what I said.

        3. Evan G Rogers profile image81
          Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Doug, you're ignoring the "public" funding part of the equation.

          "Hey, let's steal money from our brethren, then give it to people who want to spend it in ways we don't want them to."

          I suppose I'll be lambasted for this, but I won't bother replying.

          1. lovemychris profile image81
            lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            "Hey, let's steal money from our brethren, then give it to people who want to spend it in ways we don't want them to."

            Taxes are used for a WHOLE lotta things I disagree with....WHY pick on ABORTION????

            1. Evan G Rogers profile image81
              Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I hear numerous people talking about "ending the war" "shutting down gitmo" "ending the fed" "legalizing drugs" and COUNTLESS other topics.

              Don't act like people are "singling out" abortion - there are thousands of issues that people are arguing against, and YOU singled out abortion.

              YOU'RE the one that singled it out.

              1. lovemychris profile image81
                lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Because it affects me and my children directly.
                It is an issue of freedom for me, and if you were a true Libertarian, you would respect that.

                You see, I saw Ron Paul speak at a pro-life event in DC years ago.

                He is not a true Libertarian either...that's why he is a Republican.

                Personal Freedom is American freedom, and as long as it doesn't affect anyone else--such as these businesses and banks with their freedom to rob, loot and steal...

                A true Libertarian would stay out of my womb.

      2. lovemychris profile image81
        lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        This is not about public monies...it's PRIVATE money.

        "Under the Republican plan, women in private plans can’t use their private money to purchase a full range of reproductive health care, effectively taking away the right of women to spend their own money on the health care they choose.”

        Nothing to do with public funding...they won't let women use their own money! They don't want abortion. Period. AND they will RAISE TAXES to get their ideological way!
        “Small businesses that received tax credits for their employees will lose their tax credit if they choose a full range of plans that cover women’s health,”

        So you see...the "no taxes"
        crowd is really OK with raising taxes....if it suits their agenda.

        And it's an assault on the 4th amendment.

        1. profile image0
          Sophia Angeliqueposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I think there's a filty methodology in this country of combining two different laws under one piece of paperwork so that they can get the unpopular aspect through with the popular aspect.

          I do not believe that state money should be used for abortion - unless there is a means test and there is no other way. Contraception should be available to all at lower costs. Uganda killed HIV and AIDS through the most amazing contraception advertising campaign in history.

          However, the one sick thing is the continual interference of the Christian right in the affairs of others. There needs to be a serious campaign to get religious dogma out of State business.

          1. Rajab Nsubuga profile image60
            Rajab Nsubugaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Sophia, out of curiosity, tell me more about Uganda killing HIV and Aids victims through the contraception advertising campaign.

            1. profile image0
              Sophia Angeliqueposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Rajab, respectfully, I don't have time to write it out. You can google it. smile

              1. Rajab Nsubuga profile image60
                Rajab Nsubugaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I have tried to google it and failed, help me with the link.

                1. profile image0
                  Sophia Angeliqueposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Rajab, please don't ever talk to me again. I don't have the time to talk to people who are too lazy to do a single search.

                  I typed in the words Aids Uganda Program

                  http://www.avert.org/aids-uganda.htm

                  There are thousands and thousands of links to it. There are books on it.
                  There are socialogical studies on it.

                  I get the impression that because you're Ugandan, you're thinking that I can't know what I'm talking about and you want me to not be able to come up with a link so that you can prove it's not true.

                  Just  for the record, Rajab, I'm from South Africa which has a far worse problem with AIDS and HIV currently. It's about one in four people, 25% of the population unofficially and officially. In certain sections, 40% of the people had HIV.

                  http://www.avert.org/safricastats.htm

                  1. Rajab Nsubuga profile image60
                    Rajab Nsubugaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Sophia, lets keep it calm and don't let emotions run you. I have viewed whatever link that talks about Aids in Uganda but failed to relate any information thereof to the statement you made that.'Uganda killed HIV and AIDS through the most amazing contraception advertising campaign in history.'

                    At first glance I thought you meant that the Uganda gov't had a policy engineered to kill all HIV and Aids patients.
                    But then on 2nd glance, I realized that you hadn't mentioned anything like "patients or victims." So, I figured it out that by "killing" you meant, "wiping-out" the Aids epidemic in Uganda; which is not also not true.

                    You have stated that you are just down in South Africa and that you follow Ugandan events closely. I will then refer you to the words of Dr. Apuuli regarding this very subject.That even with the ABC campaign strategy, there is complacency within the population and a resurgence in the number of people affected with the virus.

                    Let it not seem that I am challenging you for the sake but rather that we should be responsible and careful with the statements we make. A lot of people pick on what we write here and use it as the gospel truth.

                    I pray that you talk to me again, Sophia.

            2. SiddSingh profile image60
              SiddSinghposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I think she meant (and wrote) "Uganda killed HIV and AIDS through the most amazing contraception advertising campaign in history". She did not mention "victims".

              But I may be wrong wink

              1. Rajab Nsubuga profile image60
                Rajab Nsubugaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I eventually noted that. And you are not wrong. I guess my own problem is the malapropism she applied when using the word "killed."

                1. profile image0
                  Sophia Angeliqueposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Yup. You do not understand using language colloquially.

    2. profile image61
      C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Not exactly Chris. What they are saying is that the Small Business CAN'T get the tax credit IF the plans they purchase have abortion coverage...... It's the whole sticking point of NO GOVT FUNDED ABORTIONS.

      My take is this. ALL MEDICAL EXPENSE DEDUCTIONS SHOULD BE EXPANDED. So I would tend to disagree with the GOP on this issue. There are three things the Government can do to effectively and easily lower medical cost for all.

      Expand tax deductions for medical care.
      Tort Reform.
      Over site for canceled coverage and denied claims.

    3. lady_love158 profile image61
      lady_love158posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Gee this sounds a lot like Obamacare except Obama forces you to buy insurance which he dictates what will be covered...
      Maybe Pelosi should pass this bill too so we can see what's in it because I am SURE she didn't read it! Lol

    4. couturepopcafe profile image61
      couturepopcafeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Personally, I don't believe anything Pelosi says.  She didn't read the health care bill before she voted for it.  I don't take her at face value.  I believe she misconstrues the truth.

  2. Amanda Severn profile image92
    Amanda Severnposted 6 years ago

    It's easy to judge others by our own standards. You or I might have self-control, and might be in safe relationships where we can take considered chances, or make mutually agreeable decisions. Not everyone in the world is in that priveleged position. Many women are subjugated and controlled. Many women are raped and abused. Many more have inadequate educations, or live in an environment where promiscuity goes hand in hand with drug and alcohol abuse. Sometimes the State has to pick up the pieces.

  3. lovemychris profile image81
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    You have it totally backwards, as usual.
    Republicans are denying me coverage unless I play it their way.
    They GIVE tax credits for Viagara....they want to take them away for abortion.
    They GIVE tax credits to move jobs overseas....they want to take credits away from me exercising my 4th amendamnt rights to a legally sanctioned medical procedure.
    See? Republicans TAKE AWAY rights.
    They dictate what I CANNOT have. Because THEY don't like it.

  4. Mighty Mom profile image91
    Mighty Momposted 6 years ago

    If the Republicans are successful in getting that legislation passed it puts the moral dilemma squarely on the shoulders of employers. They will have to decide which is more valuable to them, the federal tax credit, or providing for their employees.
    King Solomon meets Sophie's Choice.
    And they talk about the Dems being anti-business. Ha!

    1. lovemychris profile image81
      lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Horrific Bill Takes the GOP's War on Women to a Whole New Extreme
      This bill would let public hospitals refuse to provide emergency abortion care even when necessary to save a woman’s life.
      February 12, 2011     

      "This week, I attended the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health hearing on HR 358, the so-called “Protect Life Act,” sponsored by Representatives Joe Pitts (R-PA) and Dan Lipiniski (D-IL). Despite its name, this bill would actually put the lives of women at risk. In addition to making it all but impossible for women to get insurance coverage for abortion care in the new state health exchanges—even if they use their own money—this bill would let public hospitals refuse to provide emergency abortion care even when necessary to save a woman’s life."

      http://www.alternet.org/reproductivejus … n=alternet

  5. lovemychris profile image81
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    It Is a war on women.

    Since we don't want abortion, how bout we cut off all male genitalia? Would stop abortion, right?

    Too extreme?

    OK OK.....how about this: every woman who gets pregnant and does not want to carry it to term....you pro-life women can offer up your wombs! YOU carry it if it means so much to you.

    No? Asking too much of you to live up to your words? You'd rather just force them on me huh?

    How about this: Let me decide. You mind your own business. Too "radical"
    for the home of  the free?

 
working