Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Pro-abortion proponants admit that oral contraceptives cause abortions!

Abortion Proposal Sets Condition on Aid

This draft of a proposed rule (note, not even an actual policy, just the draft!) has the pro-abortion crowd all up in arms.
(More below the cut)

Under the draft of a proposed rule, hospitals, clinics, researchers and medical schools would have to sign “written certifications” as a prerequisite to getting money under any program run by the Department of Health and Human Services.

Such certification would also be required of state and local governments, forbidden to discriminate, in areas like grant-making, against hospitals and other institutions that have policies against providing abortion.

So, in order to get FEDERAL grants and such, you must be an institution that doesn't provide abortions. Not saying that they will be shut down, or anything else, just that they won't get FEDERAL money. That's fine by me. If YOU want to support abortion, go ahead and give money to such organizations. I think that should be the case in a multitude of other instances as well (even ones *I* agree with!).

Here's how the Federal government would define abortion in this rule-

The proposal defines abortion as follows: “any of the various procedures — including the prescription, dispensing and administration of any drug or the performance of any procedure or any other action — that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation.”

It gets really interesting though when you get to some of the pro-abortion folks' own words here-

Mary Jane Gallagher, president of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, which represents providers, said, “The proposed definition of abortion is so broad that it would cover many types of birth control, including oral contraceptives and emergency contraception.”

No more denying it...THEY admit that oral contraceptives and EC cause abortions!

I know that the pro-abortion crowd is moaning over the fact that this may make contraceptives less available to low income women. Seeing how Planned Parenthood manages to make MILLIONS of dollars in profit every year with almost no Federal money at all, I think that other health providers should be able to follow their model and get by without my tax dollars as well. Unfortunately, the pro-abortion lobby being the monolith that it is, I doubt this rule change will ever get beyond 'draft' status.

But no matter what happens with this proposed rule change, we now have the pro-abortion folks on record as calling oral contraception and 'emergency contraception' abortions.



At July 23, 2008 3:07 AM, Blogger Alicia said...

Thanks for drawing my attention to this. I especially liked the way you put this:

>If YOU want to support abortion, go ahead and give money to such organizations. I think that should be the case in a multitude of other instances as well (even ones *I* agree with!).

I think the law is a good idea. And yeah. I'm just one person, but I support it, with my vote and my prayers. I do think that philosophy could apply to other things as well (i.e. just because there are causes that I believe are good, it doesn't mean they should get federal funding), but I think it's especially important with an issue like abortion. I wish none of my tax dollars helped the cause.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home