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

Skip to comments.

Bush Signs Largest Family Planning Bill In U.S. History
Covenant News ^ | 1/11/02

Posted on 01/11/2002 6:31:43 AM PST by truthandlife

On Thursday, January 10, 2002, the White House reported President Bush signed the ominous $15.4 billion foreign appropriations bill, H.R. 2506, for fiscal-year 2002. The bill authorizes $446.5 million U.S. tax dollars to be given to other countries for abortion-family planning activities throughout the world. The abortion-family planning funds approved by Bush represents an increase of $21.5 million over last year for international family planning. Also on Thursday, Bush signed the labor, education and health spending bill, and a defense spending bill that was widely reported by The Associated Press (Bush Signs Defense Spending Bill).


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: catholiclist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 321-326 next last
To: Boxsford
Between homeschooling my two children, being a homemaker and a wife--I wouldn't call my question ignorant. I don't have the time like to look into everything that is going on. If you can't answer a question without insulting me, then don't bother answering a question of mine

I apologize, I shouldn't have called you ignorant, but here is your statement I itlaicized,

Didn't Congress (the Republican's) take away foreign funding for family planning just a few years ago? What is with Bush implementing this funding again!!!!

I should have stated that Tommy Daschle now controls the Senate. Daschle(or an ally) probably put increased funding and the Bush admin. since it can't line item veto the funding, probably came up to the conclusion that it was not worth spending political capital on and since Bush has already put through the Executive order(described in reply #27) that it would be no big deal.

But as you can see a reletively little known media outlet glommed on to it and forgot all about Bush's exectutive order and reported something that was erroneous.

Again I hope you will accept my apology for my impatience.

81 posted on 01/11/2002 8:48:57 AM PST by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Askel5
Will do.

Thank you.

82 posted on 01/11/2002 8:50:08 AM PST by cicero's_son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
And the Bible says, "Thou shalt not kill." [the unborn babies]
83 posted on 01/11/2002 8:51:59 AM PST by Salvation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Well, I ain't apologizing for suggesting that you might be "fatuous". So there.
84 posted on 01/11/2002 8:52:12 AM PST by LaBelleDameSansMerci
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Jefferson Adams
Recession/Depression yet we have money to do this.BTW Bush is left of the Dems!

Yup, the beat goes on.......think the sheep will still believe the Polls?

85 posted on 01/11/2002 8:55:06 AM PST by horsewhispersc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
The bill authorizes $446.5 million U.S. tax dollars to be given to other countries for abortion-family planning activities throughout the world

If money (which, like it or not is going to the foreign nations anyway) goes to family planning but not to abortion, I don't mind it.

You don't mind almost half a billion of OUR tax dollars going overseas?

So you don't mind the meddling in the affairs of other countries at the most basic family level?

How about if another country were to "give" a bunch money to our gov. to plan YOUR family!

Two questions:

How does this bit of appropriations ($446,500,000 "family planning") fit with conservatism and it's ideals? and,

What is the bit of the Constitution that allows this?

86 posted on 01/11/2002 8:59:37 AM PST by fod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
"why did he sign this bill with this garbage in it? "

Because he is a REPUBLICRAT and that means that in real terms there is not a whit's difference between the Republicans and the Democrats. They are just battling to see who gets to spend the money and wield the power. Neither of them support conservative principles.

87 posted on 01/11/2002 9:01:03 AM PST by tberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
HAHAHAHAHAH

yes indeed, a gw executive order will be respected by our overseas welfare recipients!

why doesn't he just sign an EO that forbids terrorism AND abortion.

there, that should do it!

now, lets cut federal spending.

88 posted on 01/11/2002 9:01:27 AM PST by WhiteGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Askel5
If you are implying that we would be better off with gwhore, you are insane. I would rather win a few battles than lose them all. Do you REALLY believe that 4-8 more years of clintoon/gwhore would result in a stronger nation? All real conservatives have never looked at Bush as much more than a president to wage a holding campaign for a few years.

You can argue that we could have voted for a real conservative but in the real world, that would have only succeeded in electing gwhore.

89 posted on 01/11/2002 9:01:51 AM PST by Blood of Tyrants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
This article is full of crap and is totally baseless. Here is the text of the bill HR 2506.

And let me quote from the bill:

That none of the funds made available under this heading may be used to pay for the performance of abortion as a method of family planning or to motivate or coerce any person to practice abortions

90 posted on 01/11/2002 9:02:30 AM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
What I really admire about the global elite is how they always manage to seize the Orwellian iniative, in this case by christening a population control initiative as "family planning."
91 posted on 01/11/2002 9:02:49 AM PST by cicero's_son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fod
Uh-huh, and I bet you trust this is the case.

read the text I just quoted above form the bill...

92 posted on 01/11/2002 9:03:17 AM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: tberry
Read reponse #90.
93 posted on 01/11/2002 9:04:01 AM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
Silly,

do you really believe this?

I thought I was gullable

94 posted on 01/11/2002 9:04:16 AM PST by WhiteGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Vladiator
Read post #90....this article is total crap.
95 posted on 01/11/2002 9:05:02 AM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: homeschool mama
Until we have full disclosure on the details of this bill we shouldn't assume we'll be funding international abortion.

It's like giving $446.5 million to McDonalds and telling it the money can only be used for shakes and fries. Somehow, I think its hamburger business will still benefit.

96 posted on 01/11/2002 9:05:40 AM PST by IM2Phat4U
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
And what monies have been allocated to policing that requirement?

It is impossible to prevent some of this funding from being used for abortions, surgical or chemical. Furthermore, by providing all of the funding for the "non-abortifacient" methods of family planning, we make it all the easier for International Planned Parenthood and their monied allies to pick up where we left off.

97 posted on 01/11/2002 9:06:23 AM PST by cicero's_son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: IM2Phat4U
You beat me to it.

We'll get the fries. International Planned Parenthood et alia will get the burgers.

98 posted on 01/11/2002 9:07:19 AM PST by cicero's_son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: WhiteGuy
I thought I was gullable

I am not gullable at all, but the spin put on the posted article is 100% bullcrap.

99 posted on 01/11/2002 9:07:47 AM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
actually, the better question is whether any of our tax monies should be sent overseas for any reason, and what is the portion of the Constitution that authorizes it...
100 posted on 01/11/2002 9:08:16 AM PST by fod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 321-326 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