Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 11-17-2008, 09:29 PM
 
Location: Romeoville, IL
1,242 posts, read 2,459,731 times
Reputation: 516

Advertisements

Regardless of your views on abortion, I find this bill to be downright disturbing. Obama supports it.

Quote:
The pro-abortion lobby is pushing this bill which will knock down every single restriction on abortion in this country. Effects of this bill include:

1. Partial-birth abortion, or the dismembering of babies as they are being born, will now be legal.

2. Parental consent laws for minors will no longer be in effect. Although a seventeen-year-old girl has to have her parents present in order to get acne medicine, a thirteen-year-old can get an abortion without her parents knowing. Think of the injury done to these young women, as well as to their children!

3. Laws prohibiting public funding of abortion will be struck down. The American taxpayer will now have to fund something many of us know to be murder.

4. Laws requiring women to be shown information about (including being shown ultrasounds) and alternatives to abortion will be struck down. Think about any other surgery that's performed: you are bombarded with information. And yet, in one of the most invasive medical procedures, women would be kept ignorant of the facts.

5. Laws allowing medical staff and hospitals to refuse to perform abortion on grounds of conscience will be struck down. (Where's the freedom of choice here?)

6. Laws prohibiting medical personnel other than licensed physicians from performing abortions would be invalidated because they may "interfere with" access to abortion. (Talk about protection for women!)

7. Government agencies and officials are prohibited from taking any action that would "discriminate against the exercise of" the FOCA-created legal rights, with respect to any "benefits, facilities, services, or information," would leave government officials open to lawsuits for anything that anybody thought "discriminate(s)" against abortion.

Barack Obama said that the first thing he will do as President is to pass this law: Hot Air » Blog Archive » Ad: Obama and abortion. Also see a statement on his website: Barack Obama and Joe Biden: The Change We Need.

Legalized abortion on demand has pitted mother against child and has created a culture of death that forces women to choose between their children and their educations, jobs, and housing. We need REAL, life-affirming solutions to difficult pregnancies, not more of the same. We need laws that support the rights of mothers and babies, not laws that, like FOCA, abandon women and their children to the unregulated greed of the abortion industry.

FOCA defends "to the death" a choice that is invalid in the first place - the idea that mothers and their children are enemies. Legalized abortion perpetuates the status quo - that a pregnant woman must choose between meeting her child's needs and her own. We can do better than that - we can and we must love them both. We can and we must change the status quo in this country that says that abortion is an acceptable solution to an unexpected pregnancy. We can and we must offer creative and practical solutions that identify and solve the root causes that drive women to abortion. FOCA perpetuates more of the same and does NOTHING to eliminate the root causes that drive women to abortion in the first place.

Furthermore, FOCA eliminates the freedom of pro-life doctors to refuse to perform abortions. Doctors who continue to refuse to perform abortions could be sued and barred from practice. Fewer doctors = higher healthcare costs for Americans and unemployed doctors.
I am not looking for a direct abortion debate, but more or less a debate on the specifics of such a bill.

 
Old 11-17-2008, 09:36 PM
 
13,186 posts, read 14,972,499 times
Reputation: 4555
Here's the bill. Not near as bad as you make it out.

For instance, your #1 fails to mention the most important part....WHEN THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER IS AT RISK.

Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
 
Old 11-17-2008, 09:39 PM
 
13,186 posts, read 14,972,499 times
Reputation: 4555
Also your number #3.

You pulled that one out of your asse. The bill doesnt say anything about requiring funding for abortions.
 
Old 11-17-2008, 09:39 PM
 
Location: Charlotte, NC (in my mind)
7,943 posts, read 17,244,959 times
Reputation: 4686
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher View Post
Here's the bill. Not near as bad as you make it out.

For instance, your #1 fails to mention the most important part....WHEN THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER IS AT RISK.

Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
When the "health" of the mother is at risk...which basically can mean anything.
 
Old 11-17-2008, 09:40 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
8,998 posts, read 14,782,217 times
Reputation: 3550
You regardless of your views on abortion but then call abortion murder and make all sorts of anti-choice statements.
I am not 100% for this bill and I am pro-choice.

I am more on board with:
Prevention First Act


2007-2008 Regular Session Senate S 21 & HR 819


Summary: The bill includes provisions to:
  • Increase access to family planningservices through the national family planningprogram (Title X) and allow states to expand Medicaid family planningservices to women with incomes up to 200 % of the federal poverty level.
  • Ensure that private health plans offer the same level of coverage for contraception as they do for other prescription drugs and services.
  • Ensure that women who survive sexual assault receive factually accurate information about emergency contraception (EC) and access to EC upon request.
  • Support state-level comprehensive sexuality education programs that include medically accurate information about abstinence, contraception, and disease prevention.
  • Implement important public education initiatives about EC and its benefits and uses to women and medical providers.
  • Enable competitive grants to public and private entities working to establish or expand teen pregnancy prevention programs.
  • Require that all information provided about the use of contraception as part of any federally funded program is medically accurate and includes accurate information about the health benefits and failure rates of contraception
What You Should Know: The Prevention First Act is intended to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, abortions and sexually transmitted infections in the United States by increasing access to information and services to make this goal a reality.




Moving on...
Most teens involve their parents when they choose to have an abortion. The ones who don't have good reason not to, they fear physical harm from a parent or guardian.

As far as 4, I know some Pregnancy Crisis Centers that try to shame the women into continuing on with their pregnancy and making up all sorts of lies. I'm pretty sure the women know they are pregnant. Why show me a picture of a fetus? I personally could care less, just give me my abortion already and let me move on with my life.
 
Old 11-17-2008, 09:44 PM
 
13,186 posts, read 14,972,499 times
Reputation: 4555
Your #4 is wrong as well. As long as the State requires that both men and women recieve medical info before any surgery detailing possible outcomes, that's fine.

But you can't just require women to sit through your propoganda on this one procedure...Nice try though.
 
Old 11-17-2008, 09:47 PM
 
13,186 posts, read 14,972,499 times
Reputation: 4555
Quote:
Originally Posted by bchris02 View Post
When the "health" of the mother is at risk...which basically can mean anything.

Yes that is true I did not see that. And Obama supported an amendement to this adding "physical health", rather than just "health" in general which could include mental health. Thus limiting the procedure. Now here is one point I might concede. Maybe the term should be 'grave or profound physical health"?
Not just "physical health".
 
Old 11-17-2008, 09:51 PM
 
13,186 posts, read 14,972,499 times
Reputation: 4555
#5 There is no evidence of this. Only if the law specifically singled out abortion could it be struck down.
 
Old 11-17-2008, 09:59 PM
 
13,186 posts, read 14,972,499 times
Reputation: 4555
#6 A scare tactic.

I see what your doing here. You're taking the most extreme reading of the law and applying it in ways that are highly unlikely to ever happen.

So this means anyone can perform a legal abortion?...Sure.
 
Old 11-17-2008, 10:30 PM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,377,437 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronK View Post
Regardless of your views on abortion, I find this bill to be downright disturbing. Obama supports it.


I am not looking for a direct abortion debate, but more or less a debate on the specifics of such a bill.
Strawman alert!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:40 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top