The House adopted the NRLC-backed Stupak-Pitts Amendment, 240-194. The Stupak-Pitts Amendment removed two major pro-abortion components from H.R. 3962. Specifically: (1) the amendment would permanently prohibit the new federal government insurance program, the "public option," from paying for abortion, except to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest; and (2) the amendment would permanently prohibit the use of the new federal premium subsidies ("affordability credits") to purchase private insurance plans that cover abortion (except to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest). The amendment was sponsored by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mi.) and Joe Pitts (R-Pa.). It was supported by 176 Republicans and 64 Democrats. It was opposed by 194 Democrats. One Republican withheld his support by voting "present."
I am somewhat happy about this vote, but...what this means, if the public (statist) option goes through, is that many women may claim rape or incest in order to get federal funds. When the civil government promises to pay, many people lie to get it. Consider all the Medicare fraud going on! That means pro-life people will be paying for abortion that they do not agree with.
In fact, I do not think rape or incest justifies abortion, since a human being has been conceived, however wrongfully. You don't solve one problem (illicit, immoral intercourse) by another one (aborting an innocent human being made in God's image). I do not want my money going to pay for these abortions.
Pro-life people have some hard days ahead. It will be worse for the unborn.
I am somewhat happy about this vote, but...what this means, if the public (statist) option goes through, is that many women may claim rape or incest in order to get federal funds. When the civil government promises to pay, many people lie to get it. Consider all the Medicare fraud going on! That means pro-life people will be paying for abortion that they do not agree with.
In fact, I do not think rape or incest justifies abortion, since a human being has been conceived, however wrongfully. You don't solve one problem (illicit, immoral intercourse) by another one (aborting an innocent human being made in God's image). I do not want my money going to pay for these abortions.
Pro-life people have some hard days ahead. It will be worse for the unborn.
2 comments:
Excellent warning!
Are you familiar with this site?
Rebecca Kiessling's ministry and her story: Conceived in Rape are a very powerful antidote to the insane mantra of "except in cases of rape and incest".
http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/
The restrictions against tax payer funding of abortion contained in the Stupak amendment will be removed either by future Congressional negociations, lawsuits in the courts, or through the actions of Federal Agencies. One such agency, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission recently ruled that Catholic Institutions must provide contraceptives to its employees despite the objections of the Catholic Church. Failure to comply could bring charges of discrimination. With one party rule in Washington, pro-choicers will find a way to remove these restrictions in Stupak. Pro-life objections will receive no more consideration than Catholic objections did in the above mentioned case. This is not a good day for the pro-life movement.
Post a Comment