Posted on 12/09/2009 11:23:13 AM PST by Federalist Patriot
Here is video of Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein it is "morally correct" for pro-life taxpayers to be forced to pay for abortions. She said people are asked to pay for many things they don't agree with, and abortion should be no exception.
That's easy for someone who does not value the life of the unborn to say. But if you believe the unborn are living human beings, you don't want to pay for the destruction of an innocent human life. There's nothing "moral" or "correct" about it. . . . (VIDEO)
(Excerpt) Read more at freedomslighthouse.com ...
You cannot compel me to fund your brand of sec(x)ular humanist theism.
I’ll go to prison before I pay for an abortion.
Hey DiFi, kiss my hairy white arse.
Diane. What do you know about Morals. You represent San Francisco.
Don’t you just love liberal tolerance!
They push EVIL on you and expect you to be HAPPY to PAY FOR IT while YOU SHUN it - ABORTION.
It isn’t “tolerance”. It is legislating (a)morality. Fuding the theology of secular humanism.
It is as illegal as when they claim we must have socialized medicine because it is “the Christian” thing to do. They cannot force all American taxpayers to fund programs in the name of their particular religious beliefs.
Let me see, I recall she is anti death penalty for murders, child rapist and terrorists but killing a baby including late term kill them on the way out is ok???????
I recall another “historic” leader who said Jews weren’t human. He was even Time Magazine’s “man of the Year” twice.
You are missing the point. You already have.
Hey DiFi!
There is NOTHING “morally correct” about abortion!
NOTHING!
I am starting to climb on the Mike Church bandwagon: that we are under represented.
“The only constitutional rule relating to the size of the House says: “The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand.” Congress regularly increased the size of the House to account for population growth until it fixed the number of voting House members at 435 in 1911.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives
That was nearly 100 years ago, I think we need more congress-critters. They would have a heck of a time getting anything passed and it would cost lobbyist a fortune to line all those pockets.
We could have a flat tax and fire the IRS thugs to cover more representation. Add term limits, too..help up the cost on those lobbyist. I just want ANYTHING to slow down the crazy chit we have happening now!
Add
Love the logic.
That’s like saying it’s morally correct to pay for killing people with names that begin with the letter A.
You might not like it .... you might think it’s wrong, but hey, other people have to pay for stuff they don’t agree with too ... so you shouldn’t complain about paying for the killing of people with names that begin with the letter A.
It all evens out.
What blatant evil.
If Feinstein - in contradiction of the Hyde Amendment - is saying that it is "moral" to deny pro-life taxpayers the right to choose not to pay for other peoples' abortions, then she is not only a hypocrite, but she is also NOT pro-choice! And she needs to be called on it!
The main purpose of the Hyde Amendment was to protect the pro-life community's right to choose not to pay for abortion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyde_Amendment
I'm with the person who said that it would be "moral" to force Feinstein's (and Boxer's) a$$(e$) out of office when she(they) comes up for re-election.
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.