You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #47: I have read it and I do understand [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
FLDCVADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-19-09 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #43
47. I have read it and I do understand
Poor women didn't have federal abortion funding before and they won't have it now. Sucked for the past 30+ years and will suck now. But not a whit of difference.

Doesn't ban abortion.
Doesn't ban insurance coverage for abortion.
Maitains the status quo on federal funding for abortion.

But to hear some people on DU, you would think it was the end of the world, that abortion funding that exsited is going to disappear.

Totally untrue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -Here's the language of the abortion amendment that won Nelson's vote on HCR WilliamPitt  Dec-19-09 09:47 AM   #0 
  - Oh man.  debbierlus   Dec-19-09 09:49 AM   #1 
  - No.  Jackpine Radical   Dec-19-09 12:03 PM   #33 
  - One paragraph may save us all from this fuck  DainBramaged   Dec-19-09 09:51 AM   #2 
  - Saves nothing.  clear eye   Dec-19-09 09:55 AM   #3 
  - Oh for chrissake it does not mean that at all  sandnsea   Dec-19-09 10:09 AM   #11 
  - The only Federal law it specitfically upholds is to allow providers  clear eye   Dec-19-09 10:19 AM   #15 
  - Actually, I'm not sure current law makes a health exception...  bain_sidhe   Dec-19-09 11:10 AM   #23 
  - "Partial Birth" is one late term procedure  sandnsea   Dec-19-09 03:35 PM   #38 
  - No they don't care about a woman's health.  madfloridian   Dec-19-09 11:42 AM   #28 
  - You are right madfloridian, and sandnsea is wrong.  Matt Shapiro   Dec-19-09 08:46 PM   #49 
  - Yep, but the misguided outrage has always missed the obvious.  tonysam   Dec-19-09 11:45 AM   #29 
  - sandnsea, thank you for being the voice of reason in this  FLDCVADem   Dec-19-09 03:39 PM   #39 
     - You've got a really phucked up definitition of reason...  joeybee12   Dec-19-09 04:54 PM   #43 
        - I have read it and I do understand  FLDCVADem   Dec-19-09 06:45 PM   #47 
  - Delete  Thickasabrick   Dec-19-09 12:02 PM   #31 
  - Except, I'd need to re-read it, but I believe that the law  JDPriestly   Dec-19-09 06:07 PM   #45 
  - If it goes to Obama's desk intact, a signing statement may offer saving grace  SheWhoMustBeObeyed   Dec-19-09 09:57 AM   #4 
  - Yeah, right.  Hatchling   Dec-19-09 10:05 AM   #6 
  - translation:  SoCalDem   Dec-19-09 09:59 AM   #5 
  - And that's different from now  FLDCVADem   Dec-19-09 03:41 PM   #40 
  - Medical students are not the ones who do illegal abortions.  JDPriestly   Dec-19-09 06:05 PM   #44 
  - Damn them.  pleah   Dec-19-09 10:06 AM   #7 
  - Pissed me off so much I almost un'recced.  Hatchling   Dec-19-09 10:06 AM   #8 
  - An abortion rider. Duh.  sandnsea   Dec-19-09 10:07 AM   #9 
  - This assault on women's rights....  Neecy   Dec-19-09 10:08 AM   #10 
  - Why is this even still an issue? We need to stop them..  AuntPatsy   Dec-19-09 10:10 AM   #12 
  - Kill this bill...  hayu_lol   Dec-19-09 10:16 AM   #14 
  - I don't think so.  earthside   Dec-19-09 10:13 AM   #13 
  - the other part of the double whammy is the part where  Lerkfish   Dec-19-09 10:21 AM   #16 
     - Yeah, I was curious about that  malakai2   Dec-19-09 10:46 AM   #19 
  - Shared. - Thanks . . . I guess.  patrice   Dec-19-09 10:31 AM   #17 
  - if (3) says it has no effect on Federal Civil Rights Law, why does it  tomm2thumbs   Dec-19-09 10:43 AM   #18 
  - supreme court?  greymattermom   Dec-19-09 11:04 AM   #20 
  - pfffft  SoCalDem   Dec-19-09 11:06 AM   #21 
  - Wait, the headline says "NO DISCRIMINATION ON BASIS OF PROVISION OF ABORTION"  bain_sidhe   Dec-19-09 11:07 AM   #22 
  - Don't ever have a baby in a hospital that does not do abortions  JDPriestly   Dec-19-09 06:08 PM   #46 
  - fuck the lot of them.  branders seine   Dec-19-09 11:12 AM   #24 
  - At the same time...  jmowreader   Dec-19-09 11:28 AM   #25 
  - And THAT proves that they are motived by religious zealotry  PeaceNikki   Dec-19-09 11:31 AM   #26 
  - Of course not they need chattel for the war machine  Generator   Dec-19-09 11:40 AM   #27 
     - Gee...thanks for your appraisal of the military  jmowreader   Dec-19-09 12:00 PM   #30 
     - Deleted message  Name removed   Dec-19-09 12:04 PM   #34 
        - Wrong n/t  FLDCVADem   Dec-19-09 03:43 PM   #41 
  - K&R.....Kill the Bill nt  Thickasabrick   Dec-19-09 12:03 PM   #32 
  - Nelson needs a swift kick in the nuts!!!  Odin2005   Dec-19-09 12:28 PM   #35 
  - he`ll get wonderful tax payer insurance to fix them.....  madrchsod   Dec-19-09 12:42 PM   #37 
  - what it amounts to...  madrchsod   Dec-19-09 12:40 PM   #36 
  - These motherfuckers really view women as animals, don't they?  omega minimo   Dec-19-09 03:48 PM   #42 
  - This is not just about abortion, it is about a new national health care for all ...,  CRH   Dec-19-09 07:42 PM   #48 
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC