There is something to be said about Republicans and their never-change direction agenda that may be related to their “conservative” affliction. For the past five years one of the primary goals of Republicans they just cannot abandon is fulfilling the demands of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops to ban contraception use in America. It was not enough that the Papal-5 on the Supreme Court ruled that religious employers could restrict their employees’ use of birth control, so now Republicans have resorted to their annual attempt to eliminate the Title X program that provides family planning services, including contraceptives, to roughly 4.6 million impoverished women. As usual, since Republicans in the House control the nation’s purse strings, they are using the 2016 budget to eliminate all funding for Title X and finally end the program that has been one of their cherished goals since taking control of the House in 2011. ---------
Let's examine the first paragraph of your link to see if you even know just what kind of idiotic BS it is you are citing here. First, they state that the GOP is trying to ban contraception. Can you show me a single bill passed by republicans in either house that attempted to do so? How about one even voted upon that attempted to do so? Can't wait to see what you come up with. Second, the next sentence has TWO pieces of horse shit in it: *It was not enough that the Papal-5 on the Supreme Court ruled that religious employers could restrict their employees’ use of birth control, so now Republicans have resorted to their annual attempt to eliminate the Title X program that provides family planning services, including contraceptives, to roughly 4.6 million impoverished women.* The Hobby Lobby decision determined that religious employers couldn't be forced to provide or pay for contraception that Obamacare mandated. The fact is, some work by preventing implantation and that is considered a form of abortion for many people. The fact is, it's unconstitutional for the federal government to interfere in the right of US citizens' religious freedom. To state that the decision "ruled that religious employers could restrict their employees' use of birth control" is a BLATANT LIE. It then says that republicans have "resorted to their annual attempt to eliminate the Title X program". Again, can you show me a bill that was either passed or voted on that did this? Because I've read the bills and they SPECIFICALLY spelled out that between the county and public health clinics that are in the US to provide access to contraception, there are plenty of places women can obtain such services without having to rely on Planned Parenthood - which provides abortions. AGAIN, I think it's plainly idiotic for republicans to not want to fund anywhere else women want to go to avoid pregnancy or to terminate an unwanted one. But I do understand why they have been trying to strip PP of funding recently with all the disgusting evidence of them selling body parts. Let those GD Hollywood liberals fund Planed Parenthood. Or, we're continually hearing that liberals are far more educated, so let the PhDs fund it. But don't expect taxpayers who are strongly opposed to abortion (on religious grounds especially) to be forced to subsidize an organization that not only provides abortions, but sells body parts for cash as well. I don't view it as remotely "conservative" to think it makes sense for the government to force a woman who doesn't want to be a mother to be one, and then to force the taxpayers to spend the $250K it takes to get that child to age 18. In fact, it's anti-conservative. It's something religious groups or other groups can or should be working on - NOT legislators at any level. But to lie (or to cite sites that lie) about it is pathetic. On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 2:11:47 PM UTC-4, plainolamerican wrote: > > I like many conservative people aren't against contraception. > --- > Religious House Republicans Plan To Deny Contraception Access to ... > <http://www.politicususa.com/2015/06/20/religious-house-republicans-plan-deny-contraception-access-4-6-women.html> > www.politicususa.com/.../religious-house-*republicans*-plan-deny- > *contraception*-access... > <https://www.google.com/#> > > 1. > > <http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:66t7PUmehowJ:www.politicususa.com/2015/06/20/religious-house-republicans-plan-deny-contraception-access-4-6-women.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us> > 2. > > <https://www.google.com/search?biw=1517&bih=665&q=related:www.politicususa.com/2015/06/20/religious-house-republicans-plan-deny-contraception-access-4-6-women.html+republicans+against+contraception&tbo=1&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjQ1snU_r7OAhWGOCYKHapNC7QQHwggMAA> > > Jun 20, 2015 - Close-up of birth control pills in two plastic tablet > dispenser cases --- ... It is againstevangelical Republicans, a cabal of > religious right clergy, ... > Republicans look to end 'war on women' with fight over birth control ... > <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/11/republicans-women-over-the-counter-birth-control> > www.theguardian.com › US News › US Senate > The Guardian > Jun 11, 2015 - Republicans are promoting over-the-counter birth control to > try to fight back againsttheir image as a party waging a “war on women” – > but ... > The Republican War on Contraception | Mother Jones > <http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/republican-war-birth-control-contraception> > www.motherjones.com/.../02/*republican*-war-*birth-control*- > *contraception* > <https://www.google.com/#> > > 1. > > <http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:P4tn3kAFyB0J:www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/republican-war-birth-control-contraception+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us> > 2. > > <https://www.google.com/search?biw=1517&bih=665&q=related:www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/republican-war-birth-control-contraception+republicans+against+contraception&tbo=1&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjQ1snU_r7OAhWGOCYKHapNC7QQHwgsMAI> > > Mother Jones > Feb 9, 2012 - "Contraception is under attack in a way it really wasn't in > the past few ... TheRepublican presidential candidates also have come out > against ... > Senate Republicans return to controversial contraception posture ... > <http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/senate-republicans-return-controversial-contraception-posture> > www.msnbc.com/rachel.../senate-*republicans*-return-controversial- > *contraception*-post... > <https://www.google.com/#> > > 1. > > <http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:QVPa8fBo2qkJ:www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/senate-republicans-return-controversial-contraception-posture+&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us> > 2. > > <https://www.google.com/search?biw=1517&bih=665&q=related:www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/senate-republicans-return-controversial-contraception-posture+republicans+against+contraception&tbo=1&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjQ1snU_r7OAhWGOCYKHapNC7QQHwg0MAM> > > May 26, 2015 - Last fall, Cory Gardner's Republican Senate campaign in > Colorado found ... If anti-contraception employers don't want to cover birth > control as ... > Ted Cruz Pledges Support For Constitutional Amendment Banning ... > <http://www.forwardprogressives.com/ted-cruz-pledges-support-for-constitutional-amendment-banning-birth-control/> > > www.forwardprogressives.com/ted-cruz-pledges-support-for-constitutional-amendme. > .. > <https://www.google.com/#> > > 1. > > <http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:KtZbZ5mEuOAJ:www.forwardprogressives.com/ted-cruz-pledges-support-for-constitutional-amendment-banning-birth-control/+&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us> > 2. > > <https://www.google.com/search?biw=1517&bih=665&q=related:www.forwardprogressives.com/ted-cruz-pledges-support-for-constitutional-amendment-banning-birth-control/+republicans+against+contraception&tbo=1&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjQ1snU_r7OAhWGOCYKHapNC7QQHwg7MAQ> > > Aug 12, 2015 - Anti-choice extremists don't just want to ban abortion, > they want to take away birth control as well, and that's exactly what Ted > Cruz has pledged to do. ... Unlike some of the otherRepublican contenders, > Ted Cruz has a very ... > Politicians Anti Birth Control - Politicians Against Contraception > <http://www.cosmopolitan.com/health-fitness/advice/a4845/politicians-anti-birth-control/> > www.cosmopolitan.com/health-fitness/.../politicians-*anti*-*birth-control* > / > <https://www.google.com/#> > > 1. > > <http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:iIVktRRi4fQJ:www.cosmopolitan.com/health-fitness/advice/a4845/politicians-anti-birth-control/+&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us> > 2. > > <https://www.google.com/search?biw=1517&bih=665&q=related:www.cosmopolitan.com/health-fitness/advice/a4845/politicians-anti-birth-control/+republicans+against+contraception&tbo=1&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjQ1snU_r7OAhWGOCYKHapNC7QQHwhCMAU> > > Cosmopolitan > Sep 30, 2013 - When it comes to our uteri, Congress's Republicans seem > really confused: They want to restrict abortion on a national scale, but > they also don't ... > Republicans Birth Control - Huffington Post > <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/republicans-birth-control/> > www.huffingtonpost.com/news/*republicans*-*birth-control*/ > <https://www.google.com/#> > > 1. > > <http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ZNXTnseXUkwJ:www.huffingtonpost.com/news/republicans-birth-control/+&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us> > 2. > > <https://www.google.com/search?biw=1517&bih=665&q=related:www.huffingtonpost.com/news/republicans-birth-control/+republicans+against+contraception&tbo=1&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjQ1snU_r7OAhWGOCYKHapNC7QQHwhKMAY> > > The Huffington Post > Senate Dems Ready To 'Fight Back Hard' On Anti-Abortion Bill. > HuffingtonPost.com | Laura ... Read More: Cory Gardner Birth Control, > Republicans > Birth Control, ... > > On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 12:54:03 PM UTC-5, gtheist957 wrote: >> >> Plain ole I do you read any of these posts before you reply? I like many >> conservative people aren't against contraception. Once again you're being >> and this is a term I use quite often where you are concerned "disingenuous". >> >> On Aug 13, 2016 12:43 PM, "plainolamerican" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Let's say you are deemed a non viable bundle of cells due to some legal >>> justification say your now a burden on the state and you are picked up >>> taken to a room tied up and they shoot you in the back of the head. That is >>> the literal equivalent of an >>> abortion >>> --- >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 12:27:39 PM UTC-5, gtheist957 wrote: >>>> >>>> Brian does term pro choice as generic as it is ease your sensibilities >>>> . Let's say you are deemed a non viable bundle of cells due to some legal >>>> justification say your now a burden on the state and you are picked up >>>> taken to a room tied up and they shoot you in the back of the head. That >>>> is >>>> the literal equivalent of an >>>> abortion. Is that murder? >>>> >>>> On Aug 13, 2016 12:07 PM, "'Perplexed' via PoliticalForum" < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> When it comes to Planned Parenthood it's not about "choice", or they'd >>>>> offer adoption services, and they don't. It's about abortion and only >>>>> abortion when a pregnant woman goes there. >>>>> >>>>> As for your other question, I'm not remotely religious. I do, however, >>>>> have a background in healthcare and grasp that a fetus is not a tumor or >>>>> some sort of cancer - it's a human life. That is why I have no problem >>>>> whatsoever with limiting abortions to the first trimester - like most >>>>> civilized nations do. The pro-abortion democrats in America, however, >>>>> shriek to the high heavens when lawmakers try to legislate even that. >>>>> They >>>>> want the right to abort a baby up to and including the day it's freaking >>>>> due - and that, IMO, is murder once the fetus would be viable outside the >>>>> mother's womb. >>>>> >>>>> For me it's not religion. it's science. >>>>> >>>>> On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 12:39:45 PM UTC-4, brine wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I prefer the term Pro-Choice ... after all it IS a choice and no >>>>>> amount of hand wringing and finger pointing will change that ... if you >>>>>> have a deep religious objection to abortion, that is fine ... in that >>>>>> scenario, the person will be judged for their decision by god when she >>>>>> dies!!! Here's a question, if my religious beliefs are not the same as >>>>>> yours, why must I follow your religion's rules??? >>>>>> >>>>>> There is a clinic about a mile from my house that I pass on the >>>>>> weekends when i go to Wegmans ... there is a crowd of people prancing >>>>>> with >>>>>> crosses and sandwich boards denouncing the place, I see no adopted >>>>>> children >>>>>> along side them!!! >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 12:34 PM, 'Perplexed' via PoliticalForum < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I know, right? Even the nasty women at Planned Parenthood are too >>>>>>> cowardly to call themselves what they are - pro-abortion. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 10:50:11 AM UTC-4, fed up wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> They can't call it what it is or else it would expose their agenda >>>>>>>> which they know is morally reprehensible. They have to follow the >>>>>>>> typical >>>>>>>> liberal MO of obfuscate, inveigle and mislead. Remember their >>>>>>>> audience is >>>>>>>> the same one Gruber was talking about, those 47 percent of hopelessly >>>>>>>> stupid Americans that will fall for anything and vote for people like >>>>>>>> Obummer or the Hildebeast. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Droid* >>>>>>>> On Aug 13, 2016 10:39 AM, 'Perplexed' via PoliticalForum < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Then call it what it is - abortion freedom. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The phrase "reproductive freedom" implies one's right to reproduce. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 8:40:14 AM UTC-4, plainolamerican >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What? Are you claiming women in America have some sort of >>>>>>>> restriction on their right to reproduce? >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> no, on their ability to abort a fetus. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 21 Abortion Clinics Have Closed in Texas in Three Years Under Key >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> <http://www.lifenews.com/2016/06/24/21-abortion-clinics-have-closed-in-texas-in-three-years-under-key-pro-life-law/> >>>>>>>> www.lifenews.com/.../21-*abortion*-*clinics*-have-*closed* >>>>>>>> -in-texas-in-three... >>>>>>>> <https://www.google.com/#> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> <http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Wiqeefm2fHUJ:www.lifenews.com/2016/06/24/21-abortion-clinics-have-closed-in-texas-in-three-years-under-key-pro-life-law/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> LifeNews.com >>>>>>>> Jun 24, 2016 - Since a portion of the law went into effect, 21 >>>>>>>> abortion >>>>>>>> clinics closed in ... limits in the past, including the federal ban >>>>>>>> on partial-birth abortion. >>>>>>>> <div style="max-width:48em;colo >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
