Trump executive order cracks down on abortion funding
53 replies, posted
"Back alley/coat hanger abortions are part of my plan to make America great again!" :hammered:
[t]http://images.gr-assets.com/books/1473094781l/38447.jpg[/t]
Oh boy, I can't wait for reality to eclipse [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Handmaid%27s_Tale"]fiction[/URL]. :downs:
[sp]Religious extremists hijack the federal government and take women's rights back to the bronze age[/sp]
[QUOTE=hippowombat;51716019]"Back alley/coat hanger abortions are part of my plan to make America great again!" :hammered:[/QUOTE]
"Just ban coat hangers!"
I wonder what the "Don't worry, Trump isn't going to do anything, given him a chance, stop being melodramatic" people think about this.
It's a ban on informing international countries (ie Mexico) about abortions. The title (and OP's snippet) is sensationalised to fuck. It's drawing money away from FOREIGN funding, not local: though it doesn't set a good precedent for future moves it's not closing down planned parenthoods (yet).
[QUOTE=AbioFlesh;51716071]I wonder what the "Don't worry, Trump isn't going to do anything, given him a chance, stop being melodramatic" people think about this.[/QUOTE]
They think, "oh good, he finally banned the heinous genocide of unborn miracles of God's creation, with absolutely no room for unintended consequences whatsoever."
Do people still wanna argue that the woman's march was protest over nothing?
[QUOTE=AbioFlesh;51716071]I wonder what the "Don't worry, Trump isn't going to do anything, given him a chance, stop being melodramatic" people think about this.[/QUOTE]
*isn't going to do anything that negatively impacts [I]them[/I].
Honestly it boggles the mind to think that the people in support of this see abortion purely as a means to terminate unwanted pregnancies on a whim (not saying there aren't people out there who do that sort of thing, but you're not going to stop those sorts of people, legislation or otherwise), and not for the instances where the pregnancy would cause severe medical complications if it were allowed to proceed.
[QUOTE=WhichStrider;51715702]"wants to stand up for all Americans" he says as he cracks down on the options of the mothers. What a joke.[/QUOTE]
By "all Americans" he means his Cult of Personality. To him, everyone else isn't a real American.
[sp]devil's advocate alert[/sp] I can understand the reasoning behind this. The [del]jury[/del] Congress is still out on the whole abortion issue, so why do we want tax funds going towards promoting it in other nations? By that logic, why not go the whole nine yards and restrict [I]any[/I] tax-assisted family planning services overseas? Where's the benefit to American taxpayers there?
The way it's presented though is just silly. I know it makes me sound heartless, but I hate it when our representatives talk about "the unborn" like they have full Constitutional rights. It just doesn't sit well with me when there's nothing on the books.
[QUOTE=Chonch;51716692][sp]devil's advocate alert[/sp] I can understand the reasoning behind this. The [del]jury[/del] Congress is still out on the whole abortion issue, so why do we want tax funds going towards promoting it in other nations? By that logic, why not go the whole nine yards and restrict [I]any[/I] tax-assisted family planning services overseas? Where's the benefit to American taxpayers there?
The way it's presented though is just silly. I know it makes me sound heartless, but I hate it when our representatives talk about "the unborn" like they have full Constitutional rights. It just doesn't sit well with me when there's nothing on the books.[/QUOTE]
In what sense is the jury still out on abortion? How is what a woman does with her body subject to debate?
I doubt that they're "promoting" it like it's some fantastic new procedure, it's a last resort for when all else fails and a common sense measure that lets women decide on whether they want to pursue parenthood. Educating other nations on the first steps of mature parenthood is admirable, not condemnable.
[QUOTE]Where's the benefit to American taxpayers there?[/QUOTE]
Oh. There it is. Tell me, do you [I]really[/I] think that what Republicans were thinking about when they instated this cut was how many pennies on the dollar it would save taxpayers?
[QUOTE=Duck M.;51716731]In what sense is the jury still out on abortion? How is what a woman does with her body subject to debate?
I doubt that they're "promoting" it like it's some fantastic new procedure, it's a last resort for when all else fails and a common sense measure that lets women decide on whether they want to pursue parenthood. Educating other nations on the first steps of mature parenthood is admirable, not condemnable.[/QUOTE]
I mean we haven't got a clear [B]legislative [/B]mandate on whether the government should be involved in it or not. There's a whole slew of people--voting citizens--out there who don't believe in abortion. [URL="http://www.pewforum.org/2017/01/11/public-opinion-on-abortion-2/"]Some forty percent of women are part of that.[/URL] I'm just suggesting we should hold off on the extralegislative stuff until Congress passes a clear, uncomplicated view on the matter.
[QUOTE=Duck M.;51716731]Oh. There it is. Tell me, do you [I]really[/I] think that what Republicans were thinking about when they instated this cut was how many pennies on the dollar it would save taxpayers?[/QUOTE]
Of course not, but that doesn't mean it isn't a factor. When you are responsible for someone else's money, it's a matter of principle how you spend it no matter how little it might be.
[QUOTE=Chonch;51716692]Where's the benefit to American taxpayers there?[/QUOTE]
ABORTION $900.
CHILD SUPPORT $300/ MONTH.
BABY PAID OFF IN 3 MONTHS.
KILL BABY TO SAVE TAX PAYER MONEY.
ECONOMY BOT ANALYSIS COMPLETE.
BEEP BOOP.
[QUOTE=Chonch;51716774]I mean we haven't got a clear legislative mandate on whether the government should be involved in it or not.[/QUOTE]
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade[/url]
[QUOTE]The Court ruled 7–2 that a right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion, but that this right must be balanced against the state's interests in regulating abortions: protecting women's health and protecting the potentiality of human life.[1] Arguing that these state interests became stronger over the course of a pregnancy, the Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the third trimester of pregnancy.
Later, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), the Court rejected Roe's trimester framework while affirming its central holding that a woman has a right to abortion until fetal viability.[2] The Roe decision defined "viable" as "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid."[3] Justices in Casey acknowledged that viability may occur at 23 or 24 weeks, or sometimes even earlier, in light of medical advances.[4][/QUOTE]
Facebook on my page was full of people supporting this, I tried to reason with them and give them medical journals etc on what happens with the fetuses since they were saying they were tossed away and others were murdered and put on display. Gave them a couple scientific journals, the direct definition or murder and got blocked.
I also think I have cancer from reading their comments now.
How can people be so ignorant
The massive misinformation campaign by certain groups has made abortion into a controversial topic despite it really not being one.
An early fetus is literally a clump of largely undifferentiated cells. It has more in common with a tumor then a human being. The only reason you could even consider being against abortion is if you believe in the human soul, and that the soul forms at conception for some reason.
But even using that logic the government still has no reasoning to ban abortion. The government is supposed to be secular, concepts such as the existence of a soul should not factor into their legislation (unless you can prove the existence of the soul).
Every one of us better start calling our reps immediately. This shit is seriously bad news.
snip misread
[QUOTE=Kyle902;51717469]The massive misinformation campaign by certain groups has made abortion into a controversial topic despite it really not being one.
An early fetus is literally a clump of largely undifferentiated cells. It has more in common with a tumor then a human being. The only reason you could even consider being against abortion is if you believe in the human soul, and that the soul forms at conception for some reason.
But even using that logic the government still has no reasoning to ban abortion. The government is supposed to be secular, concepts such as the existence of a soul should not factor into their legislation (unless you can prove the existence of the soul).[/QUOTE]
The way I see it, even a fetus later in the pregnancy term, while it may have rudimentary functioning organs, is still not human. It has no ability to learn or process information, no ability to form memory until it is born.
I don't think a single poster so far has read the article, or even the snippet in the OP. I think Morgen purposely changed the title from the article's title to confuse people as well. The original title is "Trump executive order reverses foreign abortion policy" which is much more clear on what the Mexico City Policy is. This quote from the snippet sums it up:
[quote]The policy requires non-governmental organisations receiving federal funding to agree to "neither perform nor actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations".[/quote]
[QUOTE=LTJGPliskin;51715952]I'd actually call my rep if he wasn't Chris Collins, the biggest fucking Trump supporter in the House.
I hate my fucking city.[/QUOTE]
do it anyway. calls from constituents are one of the few things that actually get across to politicians, especially in certain demographics.
Every time shit like this comes through the pipes, it's made very clear that the objective of these bills and orders is to subjugate women and punish them for existing.
People are literally going to die because of this.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.