Stop the abortion mandate
Pro-life leaders are holding a live webcast tonight to brief citizens on the Demcare plans to force taxpayers to provide health care coverage for abortion:
To get the latest breaking news from our nation’s capital, you are invited to participate in a LIVE webcast event on Tuesday, December 15, at 9 PM Eastern (6 PM Pacific, 7 PM Mountain, 8 PM Central.)
The event will be approximately one hour long. If you have access to the Internet — even with a dial-up connection — you can listen to the live webcast audio and ask questions.
During this important nationwide event, you will discover:
* The LATEST UPDATES straight from our nation’s capital…
* The shocking implications of the bill that the abortion industry is trying to ram through the United States Senate RIGHT NOW…
* Why respected leaders, national organizations, and pro-life people are joining together in record numbers to BLOCK this attempted power-grab…
* How YOU can make a difference at this crucial moment…
*… And much more!
Stay informed and register here.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Choosing Life and Beating the Odds
February 11, 2012 11:50 AM by Doug Powers
31 CommentsObama’s fraudulent abortion mandate “accommodation” Updated: Prez condemns “cynical” opposition
February 10, 2012 10:05 AM by Michelle Malkin
244 Comments‘To Stop the Multiplication of the Unfit’
February 10, 2012 09:06 AM by Michelle Malkin
151 CommentsFormer Democrat Rep. Regrets Vote for Obamacare Due to Contraceptive Coverage
February 7, 2012 03:40 PM by Doug Powers
75 Comments
How to Make a Liberal Politician Stand Up Against Intrusive Government
February 6, 2012 04:28 PM by Doug Powers
95 Comments
Your Friday IRS regulation dump: Obamacare’s job-killing medical device tax
February 3, 2012 04:21 PM by Michelle Malkin
58 Comments
First, they came for the Catholics
January 31, 2012 10:51 PM by Michelle Malkin
181 CommentsThe SIGA scandal: Calls for investigation mount
January 27, 2012 02:13 PM by Michelle Malkin
58 Comments
Categories: Abortion,Health care
Riehl World View
» Whitney Houston: If I should stay I would only be in your wayPatterico
» Rick Santorum and the two playbooksRiehl World View
» Romney's Blood Is Blue, Not ConservativePundit & Pundette
» King Barack vs. the NonconformistsJustOneMinute
» Cat Blogging In A Harsh New Light
I donated a small amount to these people for an anti-Obamacare/anti-abortion ad campaign.
Language in both the early version of the Reid and the Pelosi atrocities to rub our noses in it that money would be set aside to pay for voluntary abortions.
Link
The earlier version of the Reid bill people actually got to read has essentially identical language.
If they do this to us, an organized tax revolt should definitely happen..
Up until the 1860′s, the terrible institution of slavery created a market for Black humans, who were then too valuable a commodity to abort.
Since 1973, genocide on Black Americans (and others, of course) has not only been practiced, it is an industry.
This whole medical industry take-over by government is wholeheartedly accepted by the majority of Black Americans, who continue to empower the government with their vote.
Yet, try and make any disparaging remark against Obama and listen to the cries of “Racist!!”
Seems to me, if folks think abortion is great; let them donate their OWN money to a free abortion fund.
Excellent point Sir.. Talk about speaking REAL “truth to power”..
THAT is the hard cold truth.
Quick quiz for pro-abortionists…
Does the right to bodily privacy extend to suicide ? After all, the choice is being made by the affected party with suicide.
Universal coverage for abortions will definitely hurt the Hawaii economy.
In 2006, Hawaii enacted a law allowing late term abortions in a clinic or doctor’s office. It also removed residency requirements.
The current fad is to jet to Hawaii, obtain your abortion, and then relax on the beach for a few days recuperating.
“Oh, Helen, you really lost weight in Hawaii. How was your trip?”
Follow up…
DNA samples should be saved from any abortions to make sure that, the father is of age and, not a close relative. Destruction of criminal evidence is behind under-aged abortions by default.
Kind of like those Reno divorces years ago, eh?
I think it is suicide, not genocide; if self-inflicted.
You got it. Kind of like the Botox-weekends in Palm Springs.
It would be suicide if the fetus aborted itself, but since it has no say in the matter, I would call it murder.
Isn’t there precedent for not having to pay taxes on something that is against your religious beliefs? Maybe time to change my witholding to zero and not file taxes until I am assured no tax revenue goes to fund abortion.
Well, Hangfire…Hawaii isn’t a bad idea except, Obama seems to like hanging out on the beach…
My point was solely based on the word genocide being used. Most races do not self-genocide.
We already have our taxes going to pay for abortions.
Planned Parenthood gets over $300 million in government “grants” a year. Their total operating budget approaches the $1 billion dollar mark.
And Planned Parenthood is only one of many tax-free “non-profits” that perform abortions.
What gets me upset is, any restrictions and pro-abortionists talk about incest and rape. If there are a large number of incest/rape cases…We need the DNA from the baby to prove it.
Since abortion is currently a ‘cash’ business, it’s inexpensive. If covered under insurance, expect the price to go uo by a factor of ten.
Pray for our Country and our un-born children that they may be saved from this insane Democrat initiative.
Of the almost 50 million (that we know of) abortions since 1973 in America, I’m sure that a few incest/rape pregnancies were involved.
On a parallel logic, I’m sure it is conceivable that Anheuser-Busch was involved in a few as well. Ditto, Boones Farm and prom nights.
Hmmmm….that gives me an idea about government coverage for tattoos and face metal.
All serious moral issues aside, this is an ELECTIVE procedure. Pregnancy is not an illness.
Jeff, I left you another LOL cat on the other thread.
If they want to continue murdering children, I think they should extend the allowable abortion age to 18. After all, as a minor, my child lives in my house, eats my food, and is given a lot of other consideration, and if he/she isn’t turning out the way I want, or I no longer want the child, I should, by their logic, be able to “abort” all the way up until they are, by law, considered adults. Just saying.
You know…
Even as a pro choicer, I just can’t get worked up about a ban on any sort of abortion coverage, directly or indirectly.
Abortions are (relatively) cheap and should be as rare as a total eclipse of the sun. If you can’t pony up the $300 or so…tough. Even the poorest of person can scrape that together every once in a great while so that public funding becomes a nonissue.
I for the life of me can’t understand why this should be a sticking point to the left.
Maybe drop them off at the hospital or local fire/police station.
On December 15th, 2009 at 7:53 pm, chapoutier said:
Me neither, Chap.
I can’t figure out why abortion is the crown jewel of the left. You would think it was free education.
Follow the money.
It’s the sacrifical offering to the god of enviromentalism…they already have determined that the problem stems from too many people on the earth. Whose expendable?
Lord have mercy!
I wanna know about the tax revolt idea mentioned earlier…
If this “health care” frontal attack on our Constitution passes, I’m going to cancel any health insurance that I have and let the feds come after me.
Gee, I was just wondering, what happened to the live CSPAN coverage of the health care debate/discussions that our president promised us so we would all know step by step what was going on in the health care bill construction???????? Why, did prez obama lie to us? Why all the closed door, democrat only meetings prez obama??? Why are you lying to us???? I was just wondering if this is some new fad in government that the president and congress would just lie and lie and lie and lie and lie about everything that is going on and expect that the public is a bunch of dumb-ass idiots that will believe all of these lies. Well gee pardner, we are not a bunch of dumb-assed idiots and we want you to quit lying about everything and listen to what WE WANT and not what you want. What
WE THE AMERICAN CITIZENS WANT
is more important than what
YOU AND YOUR BUTT-SMOOCHING GOVERNMENT IDIOTS WANT.
Can’t wait for election day.
Bye.
And I do mean
BYE BYE!
It is a shame that Hawaii, the Aloha State, is involved in pushing abortions as explained by Hangfire and others here.
Induced abortion is a sick, perverted, horrific act which takes the life of an innocent human being.
It should be outlawed, perpertarors should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, and taxpayers should never be coerced into supporting it!
It’s interesting that the same people who strongly support abortion are against the death penalty, because they believe in the value of life.
Has anyone considered that some blacks may be in favor of abortion in order to reduce competition for tax dollars towards handout programs?
It’s a sick thought, but wouldn’t surprise me, given the liberal world view these days. And no, I’m not racist, just honest.
Chap,
Problem is that abortions are NOT as rare as a total eclipse.
Generally speaking, abortions are a form of birth control for most people who get them.
According to research I’ve been able to find online, approximately 97% of abortions are done for the same reasons one would normally take Birth Control pills for. Essentially, 97% of aboortions are retroactive birth control.
Of women who are about to have an abortion, over 47% of them have had at least one prior abortion.
So much for the “rare as a total eclipse” abortion, huh?!?
First, I do not mean rare on a macro scale. I meant rare as it pertains to an individual person. Even if a woman has two or three abortion between the ages of 15-44 (which is NOT the case for a majority of women), I would consider a ten year phenomenon to be rare.
.
because they believe what their father, Satan the Devil, tells them.
If taxpayers are forced to fund legalized murder, many taxpayers will refuse to pay taxes. Watch for it. This will happen. There are many ways to revolt and this is one of them. I will not pay for someone’s abortion! They can’t make me. This is one of the sickest things they have done so far, in a very sick administration. To purposely try to force people who are pro-life to pay for abortion is a very special kind of evil.
#38
I think that is almost the point. Rub people’s noses in it.
Lets see if some pork bribes and the threat of closing Offut AFB forces the one Dem Senator with any principles to cave.
Casey ran on the pro-life mantle of his father when he was up against Santorum, but he is a complete fraud.
The bishop of Rhode Island privately forbade Patrick Kennedy from receiving the Sacraments because he is pro-abortion, that became public because Kennedy publically criticized the bishop, Kathleen Sebelius was denied the Sacraments by the Archbishop of Kansas City. There are some Catholic bishops doing the right thing.
Now I am waiting on cultural Catholics like Pelosi, Casey, Biden and Kerrey to also be called on the carpet for denying the authority of the Pope and promoting the murder of the unborn.
I think you are right. They want abortion to be so commonplace and accepted that no one will be able to oppose it without being ridiculed or vilified. This is just another step in that plan. It is the same way they are forcing the gay marriage issue…getting a bit more pushy every day until we cave. The progressive agenda is getting progessively more evil all the time.
This is exactly one of the reasons the the 1st Amendment and the whole seperation of church and state thing exists.
The Pope is a foriegn power, don’t you see that?
I would say, if forced to choose….. I don’t know what is worse, paying for an abortion or paying for a lifetime of public assistance. But that is a debate for another day.
The greater issue here is that we should not be discussing this…..It is not the place of our government to be in this business.
KILL THE BILL!!
Did you call your senators today?
Zeroangel
Are you a moron?
To be a Catholic, one has to be a Christian, (believe in the Divine nature of Jesus Son of God and Son of Man), and accept the authority of the Church.
Yes, the Pope was born in Germany and lives in Vatican City.
But denying cultural Catholics the right to pretend they are Catholic, as Pelosi does, doesn’t violate the Separation at all. Pelosi can support killing babies all she wants, and if the voters of her twisted and perverse little district like it, they can keep electing her to the House.
But she has absolutely no right in the Constitution to call herself a Catholic if she isn’t one.
She should join the Metropolitan Community Church, which now claims the Bible not only doesn’t condemn homosexuality, but endorses it.
Or, if she wants a church service that superficially resembles the Catholic liturgy, she can join the Episcopal Church USA. Yes, the Queen of England is the titular head of the Anglican Communion, of which the EC is a member, but she certainly has no real role in that church. And the leaders of that church have decided that Leviticus, Paul’s Letter to the Church of Rome, and two thousand years of tradition are meaningless if it isn’t hip and cool, and finds approval with ‘The Lord of This World’.
Nancy can go Episcopal. Or Unitarian. But she certainly isn’t really a Catholic.
Ed:
No, but F you too.
Anyone can call themselves anything they want. We have freedom of religion in America. Pelosi can call herself a Catholic or a Scientologist for all I care. Of course, you also have the right to express your opinions about her position and to “judge” her.
In any case, none of that changes the fact that one of the reasons the founding fathers wanted this freedom of religion and no religious tests for office is because they didn’t want to find themselves in the situation of many European nations and governments, that is, beholden to the Vatican.
Actually, yes, she does.
Zero is here. Another thread ruined by his very insulting and demeaning remarks. Being an atheist is one thing, but he continually trashes and totally disrespects our beliefs, including purposely swearing and then saying he doesn’t care that it offends the Christians who post here. If it was just a post here and there, I could handle it. But he goes on and on and on and completely takes over the entire thread. I will no longer waste my valuable time reading his posts. On to another thread. Buh-bye.
OK, she has as much right to call herself a Catholic as I do to call myself anything I want.
But if I called myself Jewish (which I am not, well, a tiny bit from way back, but not at all per Halacha) and proudly proclaimed myself as one, while eating bacon cheeseburgers, and dressing like Brittany Spears, real Jews would find me an obnoxious twit.
I, as a real Catholic, find Pelosi to be an obnoxious and vile woman.
And a bishop telling a Catholic politician who sneers at the tenets of Catholicism to refrain from partaking in the Catholic Sacraments in no conceivable way, except for a moron, be considered any kind of interference of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
With all of the emphasis that the Left has placed on “Choice” as regards abortion, I can’t help but wonder what it portends when Obama makes someone like John Holdren his “science czar”. Seriously, how long before abortion goes from “choice” to “mandate”. Does anyone believe that the Left would shy away from REQUIRING abortion of anyone they determine to be unfit?
OT but fun.
Amspec blog.
And the entire bill is over 2000 pages…
Coburn/Palin 2012.
Dr. Coburn, who has delivered thousands of babies (not killed them), rocks!
Oh, BTW, anyone recall Babs Boxer having a cow because some Army officer called her m’am? How “she worked hard to be called ‘Senator’”?
I don’t know, but I have a funny feeling Coburn is much more proud of the title “Doctor” than he is “Senator”.
Oh, yeah. Frankly, I wouldn’t have the nerve to speak to an officer that way.
Without him, she wouldn’t have a country to represent.
Happy:
Quote me in this thread where I disrespected anyone’s beliefs. I just pointed out how the 1st Amendment and rules against religious tests for office help prevent US politicians in some way from being influenced by foreign forces. I also just said that anyone has a right to believe whatever they want. Where did I insult anyone’s faith?
Ed:
…and they have the right to do so. None of that changes the fact that you can call yourself whatever you like and that part of the reason the founder fathers were so concerned about freedom of religion was that so foreign powers (like the pope) didn’t have major influences on our government. Those were my points.
These are your words:
and
The pope has no legitimate authority over any one of us and people have a right to call themselves whatever they like.
Ed:
I’m not sure how you got this. I was saying that that First Amendment protects us in some way from this. I wonder, if the Pope were calling for open borders and barring Catholic politicians from Communion that were pro-border control would you have an issue with that?
Zero goes out of his way to miss the point.
If the Pope were to flat out tells Pelosi she is going to hell for voting a certain way, there is no violation of the Establishment Clause.
She can still vote any way she chooses. If she is excommunicated from the church, her rights as a US citizen are not violated in any way.
Religious leaders, whether in Rome, Italy, or Rome, Georgia, are free to express their moral misgivings to members who publically proclaim to be members of their religion.
If that witch doesn’t want her religion mentioned, she should never mention it in public, and certainly shouldn’t go on the Sunday morning talking head shows and try to claim that the writings of St. Augustine justify elective abortion.
The Pope has no legal authority over anyone, but he has religious authority over those who insist on claiming to be Catholic. Pelosi actively supports killing unborn babies, anathema to the church. You can make sophistic arguments over anybody calling themselves anything they like, an exercise in reductionism, but part of the definition of being a Roman Catholic is following the religious authority of the Pope.
Actually, the Establishment Clause was to prevent Congress, at some point in history, or in our future, from establishing a ‘Church of America’, or favoring one religion over another.
I’m pretty sure there were not enough Catholics in America when the Bill of Rights was written that there was major concern about the Pope running America.
Ed:
What are you babbling about?
I’m not the one missing the point. You aren’t even addressing mine.
I said nothing about any violation of the Establishment Clause. I was pointing out that the Establishment Clause protects us against the Pope having any real authority over Americans.
Agree.
Agree.
Agree.
That’s your personal opinion and it still doesn’t change the fact that Pelosi can call herself whatever she wants, be a practicing Catholic, and still sin (in your or the pope’s eyes).
So what? Does that mean that all politicians that call themselves Catholic should have to vote the way the Pope wants them too? Ummm… no.
Yes, I’m sure that everyone that calls themselves Catholic does so every day of their lives.
It doesn’t mean that the founders couldn’t have recognized the dangers of mixing church and state by looking at European examples.
Ed:
In case you missed it:
Quite a few Catholic dioceses are friendlier than I’d like to illegal aliens.
I feel sorry for illegals, they come from extremely dysfunctional countries, but large scale immigration of low skilled people who won’t assimilate is bad for the country.
But immigration policy, and the requirement to treat even illegal aliens with a certain level of human dignity, doesn’t involve one of the Ten Commandments, or the grievous sin of willfully taking a human life.
BTW, just try to guess which famous Catholic wrote the following.
#58
Didn’t miss it, just searching the interweb for the precise quote I wanted…
Ed:
The Pope?
So, I get it, the Pope doesn’t feel so strongly about anything other than abortion. So what?
None of this changes my points. I strongly suspect that IF the pope came straight out and started denying Communion to politicians that were pro-border control (or any other issue that you agree with) you would be all about saying the Pope is wrong. Am I wrong? Do you honestly think the Pope communicates with the creator of the Universe and he can do no wrong?
The Pope it is.
And yes, the Pope says reasonable people can disagree on, say, the death penalty for murderers, but willfully promoting the murder of the unborn is beyond what the church will tolerate.
Nope, the Pope is quite allowed to be wrong on any number of things. He is a human being after all.
Some things are more serious, like murder and euthanasia. I know, in the world of moral relevance, whatever is most important to you is most important.
BTW, just to fill you in, when the Pope makes a pronouncement on religious doctrine ex cathedra, or from his seat as Bishop of Rome, it is Catholic doctrine that he has been inspired directly by the Holy Spirit. I know, gibberish for a non-Catholic, particularly a sneering atheist or agnostic.
The Pope doesn’t do this lightly. Pope John, Pope Paul, Pope John Paul I, Pope John Paul II, and Pope Benedict the 16th have not made a single proclamation of religious doctrine ex cathedra.
Ed:
OK, so the Pope is only talking with god when he makes “a pronouncement on religious doctrine ex cathedra.”
So, then, suppose he makes such a pronouncement ex cathedra that you disagree with?
What then?
OK, you really are just arguing for the sake of arguing.
BTW, nice lack of capitalization on “god”.
It is a matter of faith for me that the Holy Spirit will only inspire the Pope, in one of his once every 140 year ex cathedra pronouncements, to not promulgate a religious doctrine that clearly contradicts the Scriptures and traditions.
Hard concept for the militant atheist to accept, I know.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_cathedra#Internal_opposition_to_the_doctrine_of_papal_infallibility
It seems a great many Catholics aren’t “real” Catholics.
Ed:
Well, I am a moron afterall.
I’ll capitalize Yahweh if you like.
So is this pronouncement on abortion ex cathedra?
If no, why can’t Pelosi hold that the Pope is wrong?
If yes, what about all those Catholics that say they don’t think the Pope is infalliable?
Ed:
I think it’s even a hard concept for moderately religous people to accept as evidenced by the poll results.
Lots of “cultural” or “cafeteria” Catholics in the world. About half of the self-identified Catholics voted for Obama, after all.
Numerous Popes have identified abortion as a particularly evil practice, and while one may have Irish-Catholic or Italian-Catholic parents, even been baptized, even drag oneself to church every Christmas and Easter, if one doesn’t recognize the authority of the Pope, one is at best a cafeteria Catholic. And Catholic doctrine holds it sacriligeous for one who is not Catholic or in a state of mortal sin to receive the Eucharist. Actively promoting abortion, even taxpayer funding for abortion, has put Pelosi in a state of mortal sin.
BTW, since you’d have to go back six Popes to find an ex cathedra pronouncement, odds are good that no Pope in your lifetime (since 1950) has claimed to be infallible on anything.
There are people born Mormon who drink, and Jewish people who eat bacon cheeseburgers. The existence of “jack Mormons”, ethnic Jews who eat treyf food, or people who call themselves Catholics but ignore church doctrine says nothing about those who do follow Mormon doctrine, observe kashrut or faithfully follow church teachings.
But you’re far too stupid to comprehend that, apparently.
Ed:
Oh, is that so? Then I guess any Catholic (Pelosi included) that is pro-choice is basically in the clear since the Pope could be wrong about things that aren’t ex cathedra.
As far as “Cafeteria Catholics” et al.: way to disrespect their faith. “No true Scotsman” much?
…you think that occasionally the creator of the universe communicates with a mortal man and I’m the stupid one? You are insane, and clearly, (considering that so many people reject the Pope’s infallibility) one doesn’t have to be an atheist to recognize just how incredibly deluded you are.
Ed:
…just keep stepping up the invective, afterall, everyone will think you are completely justified since you are talking to me. No one will recognize that it’s you who seems to want to degrade into name calling.
WAY TO GO, ZERO!
Are you proud of yourself?
What’s the point of writing out Christmas cards when you ruin seasonal good cheer at this venue? SIWOTI.
Your rainbow coalition of joyless non-Christian is a real downer.
I needs me an LOL Cat.
Pure:
Whatever. Ed the delusional lunatic calls me a moron for pointing out one of the concerns the founding fathers had about mixing religion and state and I’m the bad guy.
Why doesn’t Ed get chastised by you?
zero: Because you’ve been getting on my nerves a lot longer than him, but I can look into it. Heh.
I called you a moron because you have no understanding of the intent of the First Amenment’s Establishment Cause.
It was not to keep people from using religious belief to form their morality and philosophy. It was to protect religion from the state, by prohibiting the adoption or stablishment of a state religion to the detriment of all others, more than it was to protect the state from religion.
I disagree, I am not a delusional lunatic. You, however, are a moron with a poor grasp of the Constitution and history.
Pure:
Probably because you disagree with me more often. The fact is, I am quite capable of being polite and I respond in kind. This is in stark contrast to Ed here, who laspes into juvenille name calling as soon as his little world gets shaken up a bit.
Ed:
Are you seriously trying to deny that the idea of a foriegn or domestic religious figure (like the Pope) gaining too much influence in our government was NOT a concern of the Founding Fathers and was NOT part of the reason behind ideas of religious freedom?
If that’s the case, then it’s you who is both delusional and stupid. Are you seriously going to sit here and deny that Locke influenced the Founders heavily?
Strawman.
Absolutely, that’s part of it.
Yes you are. Furthermore, you can’t seem to craft a post without strawman or ad hominem. Not only are you a stupid, delusional lunatic, you are a sophist as well.
Okay, so it’s my fault and Ed’s fault?
If you were truly MORAL, you would be polite and kind all the time.
*** runs away REALLY fast*****
Ed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson_and_religion#Anti-clericalism.2C_anti-mysticism.2C_and_anti-Calvinism
Pure:
…some might say that’s being a bit naive. Besides, there’s not a single person on this blog that can make that claim.
OK, maybe Snark… but he hasn’t been around that long.
Yawn.
No kidding. if that isn’t an inaptonym I don’t know what is.