White House Knew Obamacare Abortion Funding "Ban" a Sham

[juliee]

White House Knew Obamacare Abortion Funding “Ban” a Sham

Efforts by the watchdog group Judicial Watch to demand that Justice Elena Kagan recuse herself when the Affordable Care Act (Health Care Reform) is brought before the Supreme Court later this year resulted in the release of emails between Kagan (back when she was Solicitor General) and a top Department of Justice official.

They unsurprisingly, confirm what pro-lifers have been saying all along about the phony agreement which Democrats have claimed prevented health care reform from creating new abortion funding streams.

lifenews.com/2011/11/15/white-house-knew-obamacare-abortion-funding-ban-a-sham/

 

[CMatt25]

Unless the source actually interviewed Larry Tribe to learn what he meant by the terms “magic” and “on sterioids”, I don’t see how it proves a thing. Tribe could have meant the executive order produced extraordinary results by getting such a monumental bill passed and of course the signing ceremony was going to be hugely covered.

 

[estesbob]

White House Knew Obamacare Abortion Funding “Ban” a Sham

Efforts by the watchdog group Judicial Watch to demand that Justice Elena Kagan recuse herself when the Affordable Care Act (Health Care Reform) is brought before the Supreme Court later this year resulted in the release of emails between Kagan (back when she was Solicitor General) and a top Department of Justice official.

They unsurprisingly, confirm what pro-lifers have been saying all along about the phony agreement which Democrats have claimed prevented health care reform from creating new abortion funding streams.

lifenews.com/2011/11/15/white-house-knew-obamacare-abortion-funding-ban-a-sham/

So did the alleged pro-life democrats who voted for it.

 

[JimG]

The best protection against abortion funding in the healthcare law would have been passage of the Stupak Amendment. The USCCB supported the proposed bill IF accompanied by the Stupak Amendment.

Then, remarkably, at the last moment, Stupak and the pro-life Democrats caved in, withdrawing the amendment. And the USCCB immediately withdrew its approval. They were rather naive to think that this administration would allow a pro-life amendment to the healthcare bill.

 

[estesbob]

The best protection against abortion funding in the healthcare law would have been passage of the Stupak Amendment. The USCCB supported the proposed bill IF accompanied by the Stupak Amendment.

Then, remarkably, at the last moment, Stupak and the pro-life Democrats caved in, withdrawing the amendment. And the USCCB immediately withdrew its approval. They were rather naive to think that this administration would allow a pro-life amendment to the healthcare bill.

Killing once and for all the myth of the pro-life democrat congressman

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Killing once and for all the myth of the pro-life democrat congressman

I have hope that there is one somewhere…

I also have hope that the Republican party will be able to do something about abortions this next election.

 

[LisaA]

White House Knew Obamacare Abortion Funding “Ban” a Sham

Efforts by the watchdog group Judicial Watch to demand that Justice Elena Kagan recuse herself when the Affordable Care Act (Health Care Reform) is brought before the Supreme Court later this year resulted in the release of emails between Kagan (back when she was Solicitor General) and a top Department of Justice official.

They unsurprisingly, confirm what pro-lifers have been saying all along about the phony agreement which Democrats have claimed prevented health care reform from creating new abortion funding streams.

lifenews.com/2011/11/15/white-house-knew-obamacare-abortion-funding-ban-a-sham/

This is not a surprise although I wonder at the wisdom of putting such statements in an email. At any rate, everyone knew that the “executive order” was a sham to give cover to Stupak and his group. Much arm twisting going on and Stupak thought the public was too stupid to see through it.

I hope they are successful in removing Kagen from the Supreme Court with respect to Obamacare. She is clearly biased. All you have to do is read Roe v Wade and you see how an idealogue can create rights out of breaded air.

Lisa A

 

[LisaA]

I have hope that there is one somewhere…

I also have hope that the Republican party will be able to do something about abortions this next election.

The best thing they can do is elect a President who appoints justices who want to uphold rather than re-write the Constitution. The power and influence of the Supreme Court is overwhelming. I was so delighted with Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, two great accomplishments of the Bush Administration. Compare the quality of those legal minds with the two appointed by Obama…Sotomeyer and Kagen. Clearly the “best man for the job” was not a criteria but rather the politics of gender and interest groups. I hope and pray that Obama doesn’t have the opportunity to elect another justice as our hope of restricting abortion will be dashed. Obama and his appointees (not just the Supreme Court but such as Karen Sebelius) are so strongly pro-abortion that we have no hope if they are still in power.

Lisa A

 

[Captain_America]

What did Father Jenkins, prez at Notre Dame do? talk to his buddy Barack?

 

[Ridgerunner]

I have hope that there is one somewhere…

In searching, carry a VERY big flashlight. You’ll need it.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

In searching, carry a VERY big flashlight. You’ll need it.

I’ll get a team to help me search.

 

[Ridgerunner]

The best protection against abortion funding in the healthcare law would have been passage of the Stupak Amendment. The USCCB supported the proposed bill IF accompanied by the Stupak Amendment.

Then, remarkably, at the last moment, Stupak and the pro-life Democrats caved in, withdrawing the amendment. And the USCCB immediately withdrew its approval. They were rather naive to think that this administration would allow a pro-life amendment to the healthcare bill.

No. Not really.

The Stupak amendment would not have done it. The executive has so much power under Obamcare that it can do nearly anything. There would have still been ways of doing it, and we just saw one. The Stupak Amendment prohibited spending federal money on abortion (except in case of rape, incest or physical or mental conditions threatening death, thus rendering it toothless anyway). But it did not prohibit mandating that insurance companies to provide a “full range of reproductive services”, or that they not have deductibles for those services. That would not have involved spending federal funds. Remember? There is the (bogus) “executive order” supposedly preventing funding of abortions, but this administration did it indirectly anyway, by ordering insurance carriers to do it. So, the Stupak amendment would not have prevented it either.

If the USCCB (an essentially liberal, lay organization) didn’t know that, then all of their analysts should have been fired.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Killing once and for all the myth of the pro-life democrat congressman

Can anybody name a pro life Democrat who is truly pro life, who does’t support abortion, embryonic stem cell research or contraception?

 

[LisaA]

QUOTE=_Abyssinia;8583280]Can anybody name a pro life Democrat who is truly pro life, who does’t support abortion, embryonic stem cell research or contraception?



As I said, an endangered species. Very sad as there Democrat politicians in the past who had traditional values. I think the entire party has been given over to the sexual libertines. I remember several years ago a supposedly pro-life Dem was not even allowed to speak at the party’s Convention. Sad because there is no real diversity of thought in that party, at least at the higher levels. All pro abortion, pro identity politics (gender, race, sexual practice).

Lisa

 

[Darryl1958]

Killing once and for all the myth of the pro-life democrat congressman

That is so true. With Stupak, Democrat Catholics could at least run on the pretense that their party had enough pro-life tendencies to justify voting that way last election cycle.

After Stupak caved, any such pretense died with that ignoble betrayal. Democrat Catholics have had no pro-life arguments since. Not that they are any less Democrat, but they just don’t much participate in these kind of arguments anymore.

 

[gnjsdad]

Can anybody name a pro life Democrat who is truly pro life, who does’t support abortion, embryonic stem cell research or contraception?

As if there are NO Republican legislators who support abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and contraception.

This is, or ought to be, so far from a partisan concern, it’s not funny. The fact that it is being made a partisan issue shows just how ineffectual the pro life movement in America is.

Pro life advocacy groups appear satisfied with Republican lip service.

At the same time, these same groups are so far tied to the Republican party, with its morally problematic economic agenda, that their chances for outreach to pro life Democratic voters are severely limited.

The obvious way to sway the Democratic party away from its pro abortion stance (which I assume is what everyone here REALLY wants) is not to stridently accuse its leaders as “baby killers” (really effective rhetoric ) or to deride voters who vote Democrat as somehow morally lacking or “mythical” (“there’s no such thing as a pro life Democrat” we are told.) but to strategically move away from the Republican party and the morally problematic aspects of its agenda, and to become a non-partisan group or voting bloc whose votes should be up for grabs each and every election.

If there’s one thing the past 38 years have made abundantly clear, it’s that both major political parties have come to terms with abortion on demand. It’s something, alas, that seems here to stay. The evil has become too embedded in the culture for politics to make a difference.

 

[iamrefreshed]

As if there are NO Republican legislators who support abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and contraception.

This is, or ought to be, so far from a partisan concern, it’s not funny. The fact that it is being made a partisan issue shows just how ineffectual the pro life movement in America is.

Pro life advocacy groups appear satisfied with Republican lip service.

At the same time, these same groups are so far tied to the Republican party, with its morally problematic economic agenda, that their chances for outreach to pro life Democratic voters are severely limited.

The obvious way to sway the Democratic party away from its pro abortion stance (which I assume is what everyone here REALLY wants) is not to stridently accuse its leaders as “baby killers” (really effective rhetoric ) or to deride voters who vote Democrat as somehow morally lacking or “mythical” (“there’s no such thing as a pro life Democrat” we are told.) but to strategically move away from the Republican party and the morally problematic aspects of its agenda, and to become a non-partisan group or voting bloc whose votes should be up for grabs each and every election.

If there’s one thing the past 38 years have made abundantly clear, it’s that both major political parties have come to terms with abortion on demand. It’s something, alas, that seems here to stay. The evil has become too embedded in the culture for politics to make a difference.

So say Democrats who have to justify their votes to continue the bloodshed.

 

[estesbob]

As if there are NO Republican legislators who support abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and contraception.

This is, or ought to be, so far from a partisan concern, it’s not funny. The fact that it is being made a partisan issue shows just how ineffectual the pro life movement in America is.

Pro life advocacy groups appear satisfied with Republican lip service.

At the same time, these same groups are so far tied to the Republican party, with its morally problematic economic agenda, that their chances for outreach to pro life Democratic voters are severely limited.

The obvious way to sway the Democratic party away from its pro abortion stance (which I assume is what everyone here REALLY wants) is not to stridently accuse its leaders as “baby killers” (really effective rhetoric ) or to deride voters who vote Democrat as somehow morally lacking or “mythical” (“there’s no such thing as a pro life Democrat” we are told.) but to strategically move away from the Republican party and the morally problematic aspects of its agenda, and to become a non-partisan group or voting bloc whose votes should be up for grabs each and every election.

If there’s one thing the past 38 years have made abundantly clear, it’s that both major political parties have come to terms with abortion on demand. It’s something, alas, that seems here to stay. The evil has become too embedded in the culture for politics to make a difference.

Perfect example of the mental gymnastics Archbishop Chaput states are the bedrock of the pro-choice Catholics political beliefs.

 

[LisaA]

As if there are NO Republican legislators who support abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and contraception.

This is, or ought to be, so far from a partisan concern, it’s not funny. The fact that it is being made a partisan issue shows just how ineffectual the pro life movement in America is.

Pro life advocacy groups appear satisfied with Republican lip service.

At the same time, these same groups are so far tied to the Republican party, with its morally problematic economic agenda, that their chances for outreach to pro life Democratic voters are severely limited.

The obvious way to sway the Democratic party away from its pro abortion stance (which I assume is what everyone here REALLY wants) is not to stridently accuse its leaders as “baby killers” (really effective rhetoric ) or to deride voters who vote Democrat as somehow morally lacking or “mythical” (“there’s no such thing as a pro life Democrat” we are told.) but to strategically move away from the Republican party and the morally problematic aspects of its agenda, and to become a non-partisan group or voting bloc whose votes should be up for grabs each and every election.

If there’s one thing the past 38 years have made abundantly clear, it’s that both major political parties have come to terms with abortion on demand. It’s something, alas, that seems here to stay. The evil has become too embedded in the culture for politics to make a difference.

Wow, disagree with virtually everything you’ve said here. Perhaps there are some pro abortion Republicans but the party platform is and has been distinctly pro-life for many years. Republicans fought for and finally obtained some restrictions on late term abortions that had been vetoed by Clinton. Republicans have led the fight to defund Planned Parenthood.

Do not know what you mean by Republican’s morrally problematic agenda…you mean we don’t want the government to confiscate our money to pass out favors to their supporters? You’re right about that one but I don’t see any moral problem with lending to Ceasar what is Ceasar’s and to God what is God’s. I earn my money and I support many charities as do far more Conservatives than Liberals. There is a huge difference between feeding the hungry, clothing the naked and allowing the government to pick and choose what to do with our tax dollars. Taxation is NOT charity and as Catholics, that is what is expected of us.

Do not know any respected Republican congressmen calling any Democrats “baby killers.” Can you please inform me of same?

Do not agree that the pro-life movement has been ineffective. Please note the change in the public’s perception and attitude. Many polls indicate that the majority of Americans are against abortion except in extreme and limited cases. More encouraging is that the young people are more pro-life than their parents’ generation.

I agree we haven’t been able to overturn Roe but that doesn’t mean we give up. I think there are many encouraging signs and much hope that this evil will be eradicated in my lifetime.

Lisa A

 

[estesbob]

As if there are NO Republican legislators who support abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and contraception.

This is, or ought to be, so far from a partisan concern, it’s not funny. The fact that it is being made a partisan issue shows just how ineffectual the pro life movement in America is.

Pro life advocacy groups appear satisfied with Republican lip service.

At the same time, these same groups are so far tied to the Republican party, with its morally problematic economic agenda, that their chances for outreach to pro life Democratic voters are severely limited.

The obvious way to sway the Democratic party away from its pro abortion stance (which I assume is what everyone here REALLY wants) is not to stridently accuse its leaders as “baby killers” (really effective rhetoric ) or to deride voters who vote Democrat as somehow morally lacking or “mythical” (“there’s no such thing as a pro life Democrat” we are told.) but to strategically move away from the Republican party and the morally problematic aspects of its agenda, and to become a non-partisan group or voting bloc whose votes should be up for grabs each and every election.

If there’s one thing the past 38 years have made abundantly clear, it’s that both major political parties have come to terms with abortion on demand. It’s something, alas, that seems here to stay. The evil has become too embedded in the culture for politics to make a difference.

*Obviously, we have other important issues facing us this fall: the economy, the war in Iraq, immigration justice. But we can’t build a healthy society while ignoring the routine and very profitable legalized homicide that goes on every day against America’s unborn children. The right to life is foundational. Every other right depends on it. Efforts to reduce abortions, or to create alternatives to abortion, or to foster an environment where more women will choose to keep their unborn child, can have great merit–but not if they serve to cover over or distract from the brutality and fundamental injustice of abortion itself. We should remember that one of the crucial things that set early Christians apart from the pagan culture around them was their rejection of abortion and infanticide. Yet for thirty-five years I’ve watched prominent “pro-choice” Catholics justify themselves with the kind of moral and verbal gymnastics that should qualify as an Olympic event. All they’ve really done is capitulate to Roe v. Wade.

Archbishop Charles Chaput*