Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Democrat Bart Stupak Accuses Pro-Life Groups of 'Politicizing' Abortion Issue to Undermine Health
cns news ^ | 7/15/10 | Susan Jones, Senior Editor

Posted on 07/15/2010 9:30:53 AM PDT by Nachum

(CNSNews.com) - Several Democrats say pro-life conservatives have it wrong: They say the $160 million taxpayer dollars going to fund Pennsylvania's new high-risk insurance pool will not fund abortion, except in cases of rape or incest, or where the "life of the woman would be endangered."

As CNSNews.com reported on Wednesday, pro-life conservatives and Republicans have reacted furiously to a report that the Obama administration has approved funding for Pennsylvania’s new high-risk insurance pool, which would directly pay for abortions.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2killbabies; 4thecommongood; accuses; babykiller; bart; democrat; stupak
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 07/15/2010 9:30:56 AM PDT by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Shameless.


2 posted on 07/15/2010 9:31:59 AM PDT by Carley (For those who fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

The guilt of being a baby-killer is getting to him.
You made your bed Stupak, now suck it!


3 posted on 07/15/2010 9:32:56 AM PDT by wilco200 (11/4/08 - The Day America Jumped the Shark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wilco200

“It won’t, except” it does!


4 posted on 07/15/2010 9:35:10 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
They say the $160 million taxpayer dollars going to fund Pennsylvania's new high-risk insurance pool will not fund abortion, except in cases of rape or incest, or where the "life of the woman would be endangered."

Translation: Obamacare will not pay women to have their children slaughtered unless they say "pretty-please".

5 posted on 07/15/2010 9:36:04 AM PDT by avg_freeper (Gunga galunga. Gunga, gunga galunga)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

What could possibly be more “political” than forcing people to subsidize with their own money, an act that they genuinely believe to be murder? It really does not get any more “political” than that, not to mention sinful and tyrannical.


6 posted on 07/15/2010 9:36:07 AM PDT by andy58-in-nh (America does not need to be organized: it needs to be liberated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
here the "life of the woman would be endangered."

Which can mean most anything some doctor decides it means, if mental and psychological conditions are covered.

7 posted on 07/15/2010 9:38:58 AM PDT by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

This a truly phony scumbag. The dance he did last March makes me want to puke. It is HE who gives pro lifers a bad name because the baby killers point to him and see a victory. I personally sent this punk thirty silver dimes and I damned glad I did.


8 posted on 07/15/2010 9:43:33 AM PDT by jmaroneps37 (Conservatism is truth. Liberalism is lies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

More evidence that there is no such thing as a “pro-Life” Democrat.


9 posted on 07/15/2010 9:50:00 AM PDT by Opinionated Blowhard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmaroneps37

“This a truly phony scumbag”

Exactly the words I was thinking. Bart has been a phoney on the issue all along. He used the issue all along to garner votes. Now that he has been exposed for what he is he is not going to run again. Phoney.


10 posted on 07/15/2010 9:54:27 AM PDT by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Several Democrats say pro-life conservatives have it wrong: They say the $160 million taxpayer dollars going to fund Pennsylvania's new high-risk insurance pool will not fund abortion, except in cases of rape or incest, or where the "life of the woman would be endangered."

Which is Newspeak for "abortion on demand."

11 posted on 07/15/2010 10:02:57 AM PDT by Mr Ramsbotham (Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

He’s more vile than Nancy Pelosi- and that’s saying something.


12 posted on 07/15/2010 10:03:57 AM PDT by Qbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

The difference between LAW, which applies to everyone and everywhere, and EXECUTIVE ORDER, which applies to whatever the executive wants it to apply to with whatever exceptions and changes he deems appropriate.

This is why we do things through legislatures, Congressman Stupak. You decided to cede your lawmaking power to an executive, a mistake every time with the same result every time: tyranny.


13 posted on 07/15/2010 10:04:43 AM PDT by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
I can see Bart Stupak standing in that BURNING LAKE OF FIRE crying out, "But I really didn't know!" I bet satan gets a really big laugh out of that one.
14 posted on 07/15/2010 10:08:06 AM PDT by Hoodat (.For the weapons of our warfare are mighty in God for pulling down strongholds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
The Democrats get to say, "There's no money for abortions in this bill!", because the phrase they use is "Women's Health".

Of course Mr. Stupak is obviously unaware that it was his party that declared, "The personal is political". Its all so exhausting.

15 posted on 07/15/2010 10:08:24 AM PDT by Deb (Beat him, strip him and bring him to my tent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Will88

Actually this federally paid for High Riks pool, which will be administered by PA then has to follow PA’s rules on abortion.
Read this, from PA’s laws on abortion
“In determining in accordance with subsection
(a) or (b) whether an abortion is necessary, a physician’s best
clinical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors
(physical, emotional, psychological, familial and the woman’s
age) relevant to the well-being of the woman.. No abortion which
is sought solely because of the sex of the unborn child shall be
deemed a necessary abortion’

from 18 Pa.C.C.S. § 3204-3206 and 35 P.S. §§10101, 10103-10105.

so ONE doc can make the decision for pretty flimsy reasons.
Bart Stupak is stupid and wrong


16 posted on 07/15/2010 11:39:01 AM PDT by RWGinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Undermine health? Nothing undermines a person’s health worse than killing them.


17 posted on 07/15/2010 11:49:27 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan (Now can we forget about that old rum-runner Joe Kennedy and his progeny of philandering drunks?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWGinger
Bart Stupak is stupid and wrong

I can't decide if Stupak was just a useful idiot who actually believed Obama, or if his maneuvers were designed to help pass Obamacare from the first by gathering the so-called pro-life Dims together to control what they did.

The closest, toughest vote on Obamacare in the House was the first vote, where all Stupak's gang voted for it, with the pretense of standing up for the pro-life position before any final vote. - Of course, they eventually sold out for Obama's worthless executive order.

18 posted on 07/15/2010 11:50:03 AM PDT by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Will88

either way Stupak is stupid.
as is MSM who are parroting the WH by saying the Penn and Now nM high risk pools do not allow abortion, beyond the scope allowed for on medicaid.
Which is a pure lie

that Rep from SC was correct. I hope he gets relected


19 posted on 07/15/2010 11:56:34 AM PDT by RWGinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

OK, so which Republican is running against Bart Stupak this November?


20 posted on 07/15/2010 3:09:50 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson