Anti-Choice Amendment Restricts Abortion Funding

[nhboy]

Anti-Choice Amendment Restricts Abortion Funding for Indian Health Services

"US Senate passed Senator David Vitter's (R-Louisiana) anti-choice amendment that would prevent funding for abortion for the Indian Health Services (IHS) yesterday. Reproductive Health Reality Check reports that this amendment to the Indian Health Services Act would not change the current policy regarding funding to the IHS because the Hyde Amendment, which restricts federal funding of abortion. However, Sen. Vitter's amendment would be a roadblock if the Hyde Amendment were to be changed.

Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said in a press release, "Sen. Vitter's amendment is simply a political tactic that will do nothing to improve health care for Native Americans, nor reduce the number of unintended pregnancies. If Sen. Vitter is serious about preventing unintended pregnancies, he would support preventative legislation that invests in family planning programs. Unfortunately, Senator Vitter's amendment puts politics over the health and welfare of native Americans."

According to Planned Parenthood, Native American women are three-and-a-half times more likely to be raped or sexually assaulted, and the teen birth rate on reservations is soaring. The IHS is the only federal agency responsible for Native American health care, and it does not provide the necessary sexual health care for Native American Women.

Feminist Wire Daily Newsbriefs: U.S. and Global News Coverage

The last time we heard from Senator David Vitter (R-Whorehouse), was when he was embroiled in a prostitution scandal with the prostitute claiming he liked to dress up in diapers. Then his name turned up in a D.C. Madam's little black book. The "Honorable" Vitter apologized and said he was sorry. Now he is attacking native American women! What a sleazebag!

 

[This_person]

Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said in a press release, "Sen. Vitter's amendment is simply a political tactic that will do nothing to improve health care for Native Americans, nor reduce the number of unintended pregnancies."

How does abortion reduce the number of "unintended" pregnancies? That's laughable. Seems to me she means "unintended lives, not pregnancies.

 

[Go G-Men]

Anti-Choice Amendment Restricts Abortion Funding for Indian Health Services

"US Senate passed Senator David Vitter's (R-Louisiana) anti-choice amendment that would prevent funding for abortion for the Indian Health Services (IHS) yesterday. Reproductive Health Reality Check reports that this amendment to the Indian Health Services Act would not change the current policy regarding funding to the IHS because the Hyde Amendment, which restricts federal funding of abortion. However, Sen. Vitter's amendment would be a roadblock if the Hyde Amendment were to be changed.

Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said in a press release, "Sen. Vitter's amendment is simply a political tactic that will do nothing to improve health care for Native Americans, nor reduce the number of unintended pregnancies. If Sen. Vitter is serious about preventing unintended pregnancies, he would support preventative legislation that invests in family planning programs. Unfortunately, Senator Vitter's amendment puts politics over the health and welfare of native Americans."

According to Planned Parenthood, Native American women are three-and-a-half times more likely to be raped or sexually assaulted, and the teen birth rate on reservations is soaring. The IHS is the only federal agency responsible for Native American health care, and it does not provide the necessary sexual health care for Native American Women.

Feminist Wire Daily Newsbriefs: U.S. and Global News Coverage

The last time we heard from Senator David Vitter (R-Whorehouse), was when he was embroiled in a prostitution scandal with the prostitute claiming he liked to dress up in diapers. Then his name turned up in a D.C. Madam's little black book. The "Honorable" Vitter apologized and said he was sorry. Now he is attacking native American women! What a sleazebag!

Can you say - one nation under - the same god or else -..

That is what it will come too. If you are not a hypocritical "extreme" right-winger you will either become one or be ostersized (sp)...

 

[cwo_ghwebb]

I thought Indian nations were just that, independent. Does this bill restrict the foreign aid to another nation? If so, why the outcry?

Ok, posts from Wonkette and now MSMag for news. What's next Metrosexual SMIB?

 

[This_person]

Can you say - one nation under - the same god or else -..

That is what it will come too. If you are not a hypocritical "extreme" right-winger you will either become one or be ostersized (sp)...

Not having the federal government pay to kill babies is a "hypocritical extreme right-winger" thought?

 

[Toxick]

"US Senate passed Senator David Vitter's (R-Louisiana) anti-choice amendment that would prevent funding for abortion for the Indian Health Services (IHS) yesterday.

Wow....

What do the Anti-Life people think of this?

 

[czygvtwkr]

I don't see anything about prohibiting them to make a choice, just who pays for that choice.

 

[vraiblonde]

Can you say - one nation under - the same god or else -..

That is what it will come too. If you are not a hypocritical "extreme" right-winger you will either become one or be ostersized (sp)...

Are you for real?

Because "federal funding" is merely code for "tax dollars". That would be my money and your money, that we worked hard for. And I do not want one single dollar of my money going to fund abortion. That is complete and total crap.

You feel free to pay for all the abortions you want. Leave my money out of it.

I love how the Feminazis spin that to make it sound like Vitters is being unreasonable.

 

[cwo_ghwebb]

Are you for real?

Because "federal funding" is merely code for "tax dollars". That would be my money and your money, that we worked hard for. And I do not want one single dollar of my money going to fund abortion. That is complete and total crap.

You feel free to pay for all the abortions you want. Leave my money out of it.

I love how the Feminazis spin that to make it sound like Vitters is being unreasonable.

Same darn thing with stem cell research, they want my money to fund it, even though they can get plenty of dollars elsewhere.


Beam me up, Scotty!

 

[Go G-Men]

Not having the federal government pay to kill babies is a "hypocritical extreme right-winger" thought?

I can see your point... So what we should do is let all those folks out there who want Roe -v- Wade turned over adopt all these babies the minute they are born seeing as they care soooo much... I never hear that offer from the churches or right wingers who speak for the churches...

They don't want to be accountable they just want everyone to live by there gods rule..

 

[Go G-Men]

Are you for real?

Because "federal funding" is merely code for "tax dollars". That would be my money and your money, that we worked hard for. And I do not want one single dollar of my money going to fund abortion. That is complete and total crap.

You feel free to pay for all the abortions you want. Leave my money out of it.

I love how the Feminazis spin that to make it sound like Vitters is being unreasonable.

While your issue with this is that your tax money is being spent on these abortion I assure that this is a religious issue for the majority of conservatives.

 

[vraiblonde]

While your issue with this is that your tax money is being spent on these abortion I assure that this is a religious issue for the majority of conservatives.

You'd probably be wrong. I am a conservative Republican, for the most part. I know many other conservative Republicans who couldn't care less if dumb women want to abort their inconvenient spawn. But it's rare that anyone wants to pay for it.

Again, you feel free to spend your money that way if you like.

I think they should put out the federal budget and let us decide what we want to kick in for. If some hippie wants to allocate their share to save the whales and doesn't want to give a dime to the military, let 'em have at it. And if people like me will happily fund the military and could give a crap about the whales, we should have that choice.

 

[Go G-Men]

I think they should put out the federal budget and let us decide what we want to kick in for. If some hippie wants to allocate their share to save the whales and doesn't want to give a dime to the military, let 'em have at it. And if people like me will happily fund the military and could give a crap about the whales, we should have that choice.

On that point... I would agree...

On the abortion issue... At least in case of this bill... It is an attempt to legislatively over turn Roe V Wade.. btw... Federal funding to provide abortions is already not authorized by previous amendment or act this is a just in case amendment.

 

[cwo_ghwebb]

I can see your point... So what we should do is let all those folks out there who want Roe -v- Wade turned over adopt all these babies the minute they are born seeing as they care soooo much... I never hear that offer from the churches or right wingers who speak for the churches...

They don't want to be accountable they just want everyone to live by there gods rule..

I don't know what your beef is with religion, but I believe it's clouding your thinking. It's not a religious issue, it's a moral issue. Even atheists have morals, maybe guided by different thought processes or origins, but still valid and their morals are in agreement with the general society.

That out of the way, adoptions of foreign children are wayyyyy up. But why? In this country, liberal thinking has it one can't adopt a child not of one's race. Absurd thought, but that's fine it that's what they want to believe. There are plenty of children in the world that could use a loving home.

I just don't believe abortion should be a form of birth control. And unfortunately, there's a belief that abortion should be paid by taxpayers on demand for folks who don't hold the same values as the majority of society.

 

[Go G-Men]

I don't know what your beef is with religion, but I believe it's clouding your thinking. It's not a religious issue, it's a moral issue. Even atheists have morals, maybe guided by different thought processes or origins, but still valid and their morals are in agreement with the general society.

You actually got it wrong... Morally, I am personally against abortion.. but I am also personally against anyone who would force their belief system or moral system on others through legal means.

I have told my daughter that if she ever considered abortion that i would not want her to do it and if she was pregnant and decided to have the child rather than have an abortion I would support her and my grandchild. But I would not ask the courts to make my feelings on this LAW!

 

[theArtistFormerlyKnownAs]

Wow. I'm a firm believer in choice. If you feel you can't handle the responsibility of having a kid and you somehow manage to get pregnant...you should have that option to have an abortion...ON YOUR OWN dime.

I do not want to pay for all of the stupid young ladies (or anyone for that matter) getting pregnant and not understanding how...after having unprotected sex with different men each week.

 

[vraiblonde]

I am also personally against anyone who would force their belief system or moral system on others through legal means.

Who is doing that? All that's being blocked is federal funding, i.e. our tax dollars.

 

[Go G-Men]

Wow. I'm a firm believer in choice. If you feel you can't handle the responsibility of having a kid and you somehow manage to get pregnant...you should have that option to have an abortion...ON YOUR OWN dime.

I do not want to pay for all of the stupid young ladies (or anyone for that matter) getting pregnant and not understanding how...after having unprotected sex with different men each week.

I don't want to pay for the abortion either but we either pay now or pay later via welfare and social services. That is the way I see it.

 

[Go G-Men]

Who is doing that? All that's being blocked is federal funding, i.e. our tax dollars.

The truth or basis behind this bill was not an attempt to save the taxpayers money. It was an attempt to make a rule of law through the legislature.

 

[vraiblonde]

The truth or basis behind this bill was not an attempt to save the taxpayers money. It was an attempt to make a rule of law through the legislature.

Glad you have ESP and can divine these things. I, personally, prefer to go with what the bill actually says.