Skip to main content

House Passes Bill to Completely Ban Taxpayer Funding of Abortions

 

The House today approved legislation that will put in place a complete ban on taxpayer funding of abortions that ensures abortions are not directly funded in any federal governmental program or department.

 

The legislation combines several policies that must be enacted every year in Congressional battles and puts them into law where they will not be in jeopardy of being overturned every time Congress changes hands from pro-life lawmakers to those who support abortions.

 

The House voted 242-179 for the bill with 239 Republicans and three Democrats voting to ban taxpayer funding of abortions under HR7 while 178 Democrats and one Republican voted against it. [ROLL CALL at end of story.]

 

Congressman Tom price said during the debate: “This legislation prohibits taxpayer funding of elective abortions, no matter where in the federal system that might occur. This is a position supported by the majority of Americans in a bipartisan manner. We have a responsibility, through our government, to protect the most vulnerable among us, not the least of whom are the unborn. This bill is an important step in the right direction.”

 

The bill has been around a few years but has only been approved in the House thanks to a pro-abortion Senate. The House voted 227-188 for the bill in 2014 and, on May 4, 2011, the House passed HR 3, the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, on a 251-175 vote with Republicans voting 235-0 for the bill and Democrats voting 175-16 against it.

 

Now that Republicans have taken over the Senate from pro-abortion Democrats, the bill is finally expected to receive a vote in the upper chamber.

 

the finish

 

http://www.lifenews.com/2015/0...ding-of-abortions-2/

 

 

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by Bestworking:

Stop funding their abortions and they might have to start using that free b/c we pay for.

_________________

You assume that these people are intelligent and utilize foresight.  What you will end up with is a much more expensive problem and a much higher crime rate. 

====================================

Oh no, I have never thought they were intelligent or utilized foresight or any kind of responsibility. But, if momma, and somehow baby daddy, has to pay for it out of their own pockets they might, might, think twice. And if they can be made to support their kids on their own, that would stop a whole lot of it too. Watch a few shows like Judge Judy/Judge Mathis if you think any of them have walking around sense. I don't know how they manage to get themselves down to the gimmethat offices, as freaking stupid as they are. I guess working the system is their only talent.

 

Last edited by Bestworking
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:
Originally Posted by Bestworking:

Stop funding their abortions and they might have to start using that free b/c we pay for.

_________________

You assume that these people are intelligent and utilize foresight.  What you will end up with is a much more expensive problem and a much higher crime rate. 

====================================

Oh no, I have never thought they were intelligent or utilized foresight or any kind of responsibility. But, if momma, and somehow baby daddy, has to pay for it out of their own pockets they might, might, think twice. And if they can be made to support their kids on their own, that would stop a whole lot of it too. Watch a few shows like Judge Judy/Judge Mathis if you think any of them have walking around sense. I don't know how they manage to get themselves down to the gimmethat offices, as freaking stupid as they are. I guess working the system is their only talent.

 

________________

But see, you are doing it here, too.  And how are you going to force them to support their own kids when their only source of income is the "gimmethat offices"?

But see, you are doing it here, too.  And how are you going to force them to support their own kids when their only source of income is the "gimmethat offices"?

=========================

Doing what here too? And I didn't say you could force them, I said stop paying them and they MIGHT think twice, and if they can be made to support their own kids. I think if you stop paying them for their irresponsible behavior they will have to stop it and find something else to do besides run down to the gimmethat offices with their hands stuck out. When did it become OK to be on the government dole not because you have to be, but because you can?

Originally Posted by Bestworking:

But see, you are doing it here, too.  And how are you going to force them to support their own kids when their only source of income is the "gimmethat offices"?

=========================

Doing what here too? And I didn't say you could force them, I said stop paying them and they MIGHT think twice, and if they can be made to support their own kids. I think if you stop paying them for their irresponsible behavior they will have to stop it and find something else to do besides run down to the gimmethat offices with their hands stuck out. When did it become OK to be on the government dole not because you have to be, but because you can?

_______________

I can read fine, so no need to repeat everything you said. 

 

But, you did it again, you are assuming that those people will use common sense, foresight, and exercise some sort of personal responsibility.  They won't.  And developing policy based on the idea that they might is a no-starter.

Last edited by CrustyMac
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:

Here is something for you to consider, Best:  Link

 

You only have to read the first paragraph to get the gist.  For some reason I can't copy it here, and I'm too lazy to type it over.

 

Which will cost the US taxpayer more in real $$$?  Abortion or the crime it prevents?

___________________________________________________________

I believe I have read that about abortion, but I believe more researchers give more credit to the aging boomers growing out of the thug age, growing prison populations from the increase in prisons along with stiffer sentences, and the worst of the crack era winding down:

http://www.cnn.com/US/9710/04/.../index.html?_s=PM:US

Originally Posted by Stanky:
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:

Here is something for you to consider, Best:  Link

 

You only have to read the first paragraph to get the gist.  For some reason I can't copy it here, and I'm too lazy to type it over.

 

Which will cost the US taxpayer more in real $$$?  Abortion or the crime it prevents?

___________________________________________________________

I believe I have read that about abortion, but I believe more researchers give more credit to the aging boomers growing out of the thug age, growing prison populations from the increase in prisons along with stiffer sentences, and the worst of the crack era winding down:

http://www.cnn.com/US/9710/04/.../index.html?_s=PM:US

_________________

You might be interested in this, then:  LINK

 

While I don't doubt the FBI's numbers, I don't trust their analysis.  Here is evidence of why.

Last edited by CrustyMac

The only simple counter argument I can see to the abortion study is that in the beginning mostly middle and upper class white teens and young adults had abortions while poorer mothers wanted the additional welfare money so I don't see where abortions impacted the 90's so much. It didn't impact the street culture raised unwanted child as much as the orphanage/adoption agency bound child.

 

  I believe in the 90's family caps appeared and poorer women increased the use of abortions. We should be seeing an impact now from the aborted unwanted children not raised in the street culture.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...AR2008092202831.html

Last edited by Stanky
Originally Posted by Bestworking:

I can read fine, so no need to repeat everything you said. 

 

------------------------

Whatever. I just don't happen to like being forced/blackmailed/coerced, or whatever else you want to call it, into paying for someone else's bad choices. Let them sink or swim on their own.

___

 House Republicans know that the legislation will not get through the Senate.  The bill is symbolic only, just like the numerous House bills to revoke the Affordable Care Act.

Originally Posted by Contendah:
Originally Posted by Bestworking:

I can read fine, so no need to repeat everything you said. 

 

------------------------

Whatever. I just don't happen to like being forced/blackmailed/coerced, or whatever else you want to call it, into paying for someone else's bad choices. Let them sink or swim on their own.

___

 House Republicans know that the legislation will not get through the Senate.  The bill is symbolic only, just like the numerous House bills to revoke the Affordable Care Act.

------------

 

I wonder how many can't afford that illegal non caring act..??

And the fine for not being able to afford it will double this 2015..  

 

Originally Posted by Bestworking:

I can read fine, so no need to repeat everything you said. 

 

------------------------

Whatever. I just don't happen to like being forced/blackmailed/coerced, or whatever else you want to call it, into paying for someone else's bad choices. Let them sink or swim on their own.

___________________

So, when one of their bad decisions is to have a child and not take care of it, you will do nothing for the child? 

What solution is in place? Throwing more money at it and putting more and more on the government dole that fewer and fewer are contributing to?  Eat cake? No, I will tell them to get off my back.  We raised and paid for our kids, and still have to pay for their college. I don't have any desire to raise yours that will be just as useless as you are while you lay your a** up and make more of them. Like I said, take your lazy *** down and get that free bc. Now, all of the bleeding hearts can make of that what they want, I don't care anymore. This PC crap has gotten us no where but in a mess we will never dig out of. "Give us your money, you worked for it but you shouldn't get to keep it. This one with the 10 kids by 10 different fathers that don't pay a dime in support needs it" says crusty.

I haven't said anything about "the government dole".

 

On the one hand you are against funding for abortions and birth control, while on the other you say, get down there and get your free birth control.

 

On the one hand you are against government funding for abortions and birth control, and on the other you are against having to deal with the problems such short-sightedness leads to.

 

As for the "parents" and progenitors, I'm all for Clinton's requirement to get a job for those wanting welfare. 

 

And Best, you aren't the only person that pays taxes.

Originally Posted by CrustyMac:

Here is something for you to consider, Best:  Link

 

You only have to read the first paragraph to get the gist.  For some reason I can't copy it here, and I'm too lazy to type it over.

 

Which will cost the US taxpayer more in real $$$?  Abortion or the crime it prevents?

______

 

 

I got that first paragraph rat cheer!

 

"We offer evidence that legalized abortion has contributed signiŽcantly to recent crime reductions. Crime began to fall roughly eighteen years after abortion legalization. The Žve states that allowed abortion in 1970 experienced declines earlier than the rest of the nation, which legalized in 1973 with Roe v. Wade. States with high abortion rates in the 1970s and 1980s experienced greater crime reductions in the 1990s. In high abortion states, only arrests of those born after abortion legalization fall relative to low abortion states. Legalized abortion appears to account for as much as 50 percent of the recent drop in crime."

Originally Posted by Contendah:
Originally Posted by CrustyMac:

Here is something for you to consider, Best:  Link

 

You only have to read the first paragraph to get the gist.  For some reason I can't copy it here, and I'm too lazy to type it over.

 

Which will cost the US taxpayer more in real $$$?  Abortion or the crime it prevents?

______

 

 

I got that first paragraph rat cheer!

 

"We offer evidence that legalized abortion has contributed signiŽcantly to recent crime reductions. Crime began to fall roughly eighteen years after abortion legalization. The Žve states that allowed abortion in 1970 experienced declines earlier than the rest of the nation, which legalized in 1973 with Roe v. Wade. States with high abortion rates in the 1970s and 1980s experienced greater crime reductions in the 1990s. In high abortion states, only arrests of those born after abortion legalization fall relative to low abortion states. Legalized abortion appears to account for as much as 50 percent of the recent drop in crime."

==================

Pure liberal thinking.

Pay us or we will breed even more criminals than we do now. Nothing wrong with that now is it?  And don't you dare mention the thousands of scams we're running on you or the child molesters PP supports. And, what has all your "got it right cheer" have to do with the millions they are still having that we are expected to support from cradle to grave? So, I am forced to repeat.

Whatever. I just don't happen to like being forced/blackmailed/coerced, or whatever else you want to call it, into paying for someone else's bad choices. Let them sink or swim on their own.

 

Last edited by Bestworking

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×