"Ewe hiding something under all that?"
Posted on 02/28/2006 6:36:43 PM PST by Aussie Dasher
US President George W. Bush signalled his opposition to a South Dakota abortion ban that forbids the procedure even in cases of rape or incest, saying he favors such exceptions.
But Bush declined to predict the outcome of any legal challenges to the legislation, which would make it illegal to terminate a pregnancy except in rare cases when it may be necessary to save the life of the mother.
"That, of course, is a state law, but my position has always been three exceptions: Rape, incest, and the life of the mother," the US president told ABC news in an interview.
Asked whether he would include "health" of the mother, Bush replied: "I said life of the mother, and health is a very vague term, but my position has been clear on that ever since I started running for office."
The bill, which recently gained final approval from South Dakota's House of Representatives, directly contradicts the precedent set in 1973 when the US Supreme Court ruled that bans on abortion violate a woman's constitutional right to privacy.
The bill grants no allowances for women who have been raped or are victims of incest. Doctors who perform abortion would be charged with a crime. It also prohibits the sale of emergency contraception and asserts that life begins at fertilization.
The governor of South Dakota has indicated he is likely to sign the bill.
A leading pro-choice advocacy group has already vowed to challenge the ban in federal court. But that seems to be exactly what many promoters of the legislation seek.
Advocates of the ban do not deny they aim much higher than South Dakota, a rural and socially conservative state, which even today has only one abortion clinic.
Instead, they are hoping the bill will offer a full frontal assault on legal abortions now that the balance of power in the Supreme Court appears to have shifted with the confirmation of conservative jurists John Roberts and Samuel Alito, both of whom are seen as pro-life.
If you choose to close your mind, that is your choice.
But it is nobody's choice to kill an innocent child. That is murder.
NRLC, National Right to Life Committee, Role in Defeat of South Dakota Legislative Effort to Ban Abortion and Challenge Roe v. Wade
Thomas More Law Center ^ | 3-31-04 | Richard Thompson
Congressman George H.W. "Rubbers" Bush co-wrote with one other republican and 2 democrats (bi-partisan) the original Title X funding bill in 1969.
President George H.W. "rubbers" Bush signed the Title X spending bill for 4 yrs. as well as his son George W. Bush during his administration.
Our "morals and values" republican congress has submitted Title X bills since they took over Congress in 1994.
This past year I think the appropriation is $235 million which will be spent on Planned Parenthood (the largest abortion provider in America) and other so-called family planning organizations.
In addition, this same congress and administration will pay the ACLU for some of their work too.
We need to make population and family planning household words. We need to take sensationalism out of this topic so that it can no longer be used by militants who have no real knowledge of the voluntary nature of the program but, rather are using it as a political steppingstone. If family planning is anything, it is a public health matter.
— Representative George H. W. Bush, 1969
Most important is that legislation be recognized as ... a health-care service mechanism and not a population control mechanism.
----Representative. George H.W. Bush, 1970
As we amended the Social Security Act in 1967, I was impressed by the sensible approach of Alan Guttmacher, the obstetrician who served as president of Planned Parenthood. It was ridiculous, he told the committee, to blame mothers on welfare for having too many children when the clinics and hospitals they used were absolutely prohibited from saying a word about birth control. So we took the lead in Congress in providing money and urging -- in fact requiring -- that in the United States family planning services be available for every woman, not just the private patient with her own gynecologist.
George Bush (Foreword to World Population Crisis by Phyllis Piotrow), 1973
The Title X Program
Title X has been key in helping millions of American women prevent unintended pregnancies and obtain reproductive health care for three decades.
Title X of the Public Health Service Act is America's family planning program. It was signed into law in 1970 by President Richard M. Nixon, who said:
"No American woman should be denied access to family planning assistance because of her economic condition. I believe, therefore, that we should establish as a national goal the provision of family planning services ... to all who want but cannot afford them."
Title X is the only federal program dedicated solely to funding family planning and related reproductive health care services. In 1999, it helped to support 61 percent of all family planning agencies (Finer, et al., 2002). Title X accounts for 26 percent of the revenue of agencies receiving Title X funds (AGI, 2005a).
Title X is a vital source of funding for family planning clinics throughout the nation.
All Title X grants are administered through state health departments or regional agencies that subcontract with local clinics. In 2001, approximately 4,400 clinics, located in nearly three-quarters (73 percent) of all counties, provided family planning services funded by Title X. Of the 4.7 million women served by these clinics, 43 percent received care at health departments, 33 percent received care at Planned Parenthood health centers, 13 percent received care at other independent community-based clinics, seven percent received care at hospitals, and four percent received care at community or migrant health centers (AGI, 2004; Frost, et al., 2004).
George W. Bush: Jan 2001 - Jan 2005 (R)
Fiscal Year; Total Title X Funds Appropriated
2004 $ 280,000,000
2003 $ 275,000,000
2002 $ 265,000,000
1) President Bush is funding surgical abortions via Medicaid (Title XIX) in the HHS Appropriations bills: [see bills below at http://thomas.loc.gov]
HR 3061 for FY 2002, signed by President Bush (PL 107-116) on Jan. 10, 2002
HR 2673 for FY 2004, signed by President Bush (PL 108-109) on Jan. 23, 2004
2) President Bush is funding chemical abortions via Medicaid (Title XIX) and the Title X birth/population control and Planned Parenthood funding program: [see bills below at http://thomas.loc.gov]
HR 3061 for FY 2002, signed by President Bush (PL 107-116) on 1/10/2002
HR 2673 for FY 2004, signed by President Bush (PL 108-109) on 1/23/2004
3) President Bush is funding the nation's largest perpetrators of child-murder-by-abortion, Planned Parenthood (report murdering over 200,000 unborn children annually by surgical abortion alone), through both Medicaid (Title XIX) and Title X, with OVER $50 MILLION per year through each program: [see bills below at http://thomas.loc.gov]
Included in HR 3061 for FY 2002, signed by President Bush (PL 107-116) on 1/10/2002
Included in HR 2673 for FY 2004, signed by President Bush (PL 108-109) on 1/23/2004
4) President Bush has increased the Title X funding levels over $26,000,000 more than the last Clinton budget:
The Title X funding level for FY 2001, the last Clinton-influenced budget, was a total of $254 million, of which over $58 million went to planned parenthood
In FY 2002, George W. Bush's first full budget year, the Title X birth/population control and Planned Parenthood funding authorization increased over 11,000,000, to $265 million (HR 3061 for FY 2002, signed by President Bush on 1/10/2002)
In FY 2004, George W. Bush's most recently completed full budget year, the Title X birth/population control and Planned Parenthood funding authorization increased even more to $280 million, over $26,000,000 ($26 million) more than Bill Clinton's last budget year! (HR 2673 for FY 2004, signed by President Bush on 1/23/2004)
and don't forget, the good ol' Republican Congress in some cases also funds the ACLU
and on the good side there is this:
Bush's Pro-Life Record as of May 18, 2004, by Fr. Peter West
See 'ya, Doc. Wait, don't forget your flaying knife.
some here are blowing smoke and would run right to the clinic, others are true to their word and beliefs and would indeed keep the child.
That's why in the case of rape, incest, or (real, not imagined) threats to the mothers life, I think a rational exception to the no abortion doctrine should be allowed.
But it is a dreadful dilema....and one I wouldn't wish it on any family.
In my perfect world, all pregnancies would be non-life threatning, and rapist and perverts would be shot on sight...
But I am a hopeless romantic..
Why would there be rapists and perverts in a perfect world?
Many words for such little concern.
LOL
for target practice?
good catch...hehe
No, just making himself clear.
At least half the base favors exceptions in the case of Rape and Incest. I'm undecided on those circumstances.
Getting it before the supreme court does not outlaw abortion. It simply removes abortion as a constitutional right. If ROE V. WADE is overturned some states will severaly limit abortions, others will not. At least the issue will be debated across the country and the chance to show it for what it really is will finally be a reality. Both sides will have to take their case to the people and convince them it is either right or wrong. I think we can win in an open and fair debate.
I am not "assuming" that having abortion kills an innocent child. But I think many are assuming that carrying the child worsens the trauma of the rape more than an abortion would.
I did not say the words you are trying to stuff in my mouth.
I said rape is justification for an abortion. As is health concerns for the mother.
(rim shot, please!
WHY is rape justification for killing an innocent child?
Uhhh, you were distracted by my false genius?
I keep it up front as camoflage (concealment) --- ((HIDING)) --- for my true genius.
Your underdeveloped brain could easily have been confused by that.
I've read hundreds of pro-abortion posts on this thread.
Once someone says abortion is okay, well, that's pro-abortion.
LOL . . . Thanks . . . . . LOLOLOLOLOL!
Thank you. I knew once you saw the thread, you'd be around adding some logic and facts to the discussion. And I'd like to thank your parents as well. :)
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.