Now that a pro-abortion Democrat is about to take over the presidency, abortionists are waiting to get their piece of the federal pie. They’ve submitted a 55-page plan outlining their list of demands:
The plan was signed by groups which include the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, NARAL Pro-Choice America, and International Planned Parenthood Federation of America. It was also signed by a group which calls itself “Catholics for Choice.”
Writing in the plan, abortion advocates call for the abolition of restrictions on taxpayer funding for abortions:
“The President’s budget should strike language restricting abortion funding for (i) Medicaid-eligible women and Medicare beneficiaries (Hyde amendment); (ii) federal employees and their dependents (FEHB program); (iii) residents of the District of Columbia; (iv) Peace Corps volunteers; (v) Native-American women; and (vi) women in federal prisons.”
It asks that funding be restored to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), whose funding was rescinded under the Bush administration after private and governmental investigations revealed that the program cooperated with China’s coercive population control programs.
The abortion advocates’ plan calls for an increase in the budget of the Title X Family Planning Program to $700 million, reportedly a 133 percent increase, while providing $1 billion for international “family planning” programs.
If Obama does go along with this plan (and there really is no reason to think he won’t), he will have broken his promise to reduce the number of abortions. No one can argue effectively that when you pay for abortions, they decrease. I wonder how the pro-life Obaminites will react to the news that he’s removing the restrictions to federal funding of abortions? We they try to rationalize it away? Or will they just ignore it?
(via)
posted December 17, 2008 at 8:26 am
You’re too reactionary, Michele. Don’t be too hasty to judge just because Obama supports Roe v Wade. After all Bill Clinton also did, but still didn’t allow federal funds to subsidize abortions.
And besides, if younger people are educated more these days, and know the pitfalls of having too early a pregnancy, the less they will have unwanted pregnancies, and with that less chances of considering an abortion.
I mean, didn’t you hear the underlying context that Newt Gingrich said in reply to RNC just earlier?
posted December 17, 2008 at 8:57 am
Perhaps Bill Clinton did not using federal money for abortions. Jan 20 is a new day and a new Presidency.
I am VERY against using any more federal funds for abortion!!!
Let’s get Roe v Wade overturned!
posted December 17, 2008 at 12:04 pm
“Don’t be too hasty to judge just because Obama supports Roe v Wade. After all Bill Clinton also did, but still didn’t allow federal funds to subsidize abortions.”
Tim, you really must be joking. As Obama will do next month, Clinton, on his first day of his presidency, overturned the limits Reagan and Bush put in place preventing taxpayer funding of groups that promote or perform abortions in other nations. He funded the UNFPA, which supports China’s forced-abortion population control policy. Obama will do the same.
More on this secret 55-page memo at http://www.lifenews.com/nat4658.html
posted December 17, 2008 at 6:56 pm
Tim…Rove v Wade?
ummm….Obama made a campaign promise to expand funding for and overturn state limitations on abortion.
The United States has elected a truly “pro-abortion” candidate (Biden or Clinton would have been “pro-choice” – there is no abortion that I can find that Obama would not support, right up to and including abortion his own grandchildren if his daughter “make a mistake”.
posted December 17, 2008 at 8:09 pm
I don’t have the liberal Catholic talking points yet, but “Catholics for Choice” is so obviously an oxymoron.
I was more surprised, in fact, to see the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists heading the charge.
posted January 23, 2009 at 8:17 am
49,5514,703 And the counter is still running! That is current number of abortins performed in America since Roe vs. Wade.
I emailed the President this morning to ask how much money he plans to use outside of the country to promote abortions.
I wish Fox News would start asking that question also, since there is such focus on our current economic crisis.
Thank you for great thoughts about this issue! Glad to have found your web page!
Keep up the good work.
Victoria
posted January 23, 2009 at 8:22 am
How can the President justify abortion funding for out of the country clinics when our current economic crisis is so stupendously huge!?
Thanks for the great information.
Victoira
posted January 24, 2009 at 10:14 am
I was so saddened to hear that Obama’s first tactic to reducing abortion was to re-implement funding for non-United States citizenry abortion. With a federal deficit of $16 trillion, we have no obligation nor right to fund what is an obamanation to others.