We Want Our Taxes to Pay for Abortion


15 April 2010

Statement to War Tax Resisters:

I am so sorry that I cannot be here in person to accept this generous contribution on behalf of the Network for Reproductive Options. This donation is more meaningful this year than you can imagine. As I watched the debate over health care reform, particularly the way that abortion was used as a political tool to attempt to derail reform, I was increasingly incensed by the insistence of anti-abortion politicians that abortion should not be paid for with tax-payer money.

There is no other issue or item that is singled out the way abortion and birth control are singled out to allow tax payers a say in how their tax money is spent. Those of us who are opposed to nuclear weapons, nuclear energy, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the funding for schools for torture like the School of the Americas – we are not given options to withhold our taxes from these things. In fact, if you are opposed, for reasons of conscience or morality, to paying for bombs, wars, abstinence-until-marriage sex education, or any other of the multitudes of things that the federal government pays for, your only recourse is illegal: to withhold your taxes for as long as you can as these brave and honorable people do. Unless what you are opposed to is the right of women to control their own bodies and determine the course of their own lives.

Federal spending on abortion has been restricted for more than 30 years because of the Hyde Amendment. It is not just low-income women who qualify for public assistance who can’t get their abortions covered. Women who work for the federal government, women in the military or who are married to men in the military, Native American women who use the Indian Health Service: all of these women must pay for abortion out of their own pockets.

By restricting federal dollars in the new health care exchanges, many women with private insurance are likely to lose their abortion coverage now. This donation has never been so meaningful, or so needed. Last year, NRO gave more than $55,000 to Oregon women to help pay for an abortion appointment. This year, it is proving even more challenging to keep up with the need. It means more to me than you can know to have this ‘tax’ money to help women pay for abortions. On behalf of our board, our hotline volunteers and all the women we serve, thank you. In the words of one woman who called our hotline last week: “thank you, thank you, I just can’t thank you enough.”

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

To schedule an interview with contact director of communications Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

  • concernedmom

    But I strongly disagree. Elective abortions are, obviously, a private decision of a woman to terminate her own child’s life, & thus should be paid for with PRIVATE funds. By asking taxpayers to ante up for elective abortions, it is as if we are unwilling accomplices for snuffing out an innocent pre-born human being. You may argue all you want about the unfairness of taxes for fighting a war, or medicare/medicaid wasteful spending, for example, but the last I checked, this doesn’t justify the slaughter of innocent unborn children if they are so unfortunate to be in the wrong womb. The way you gush over a donation to perpetuate this destruction of pre-born children is truly nausiating, too. So glad there are beginning to be signs of a turning of the tide all over this country, to depict abortion for what it really is: playing God with a human life.

    • thelightshinesinthedarkness

      I agree with you ConcernedMom and I want to thank you for being strong enough to stand up for the preborn. God bless you!

  • prochoicegoth

    And if a woman can’t afford the abortion? Would you rather her do it herself and die of an infection?

  • saltyc

    http://bowlathon.nnaf.org/

     

    National Network of Abortion Funds is fundraising, help women who can’t pay for their abortions do so! I’m volunteering right now, and by the end of the day I will help 5 women get abortions who otherwise might not be able to pay for them. Not just that, I also help reassure them, I provide truth and facts and reflect back to them how powerful and responsible they are. The gratitude and voicemeail messages I get later just to thank me for being honest and level with them are reward enough for me.

     

    What is truly nauseating is that my tax dollars go to fund CPC’s like where ConcernedMom works, the staff at which who are so zealous and blind in their irrationality they will stop at nothing to get women to stay pregnant when they didn’t want to be, including lying, tricking, manipulating, and instilling fear, confusion, shame and guilt in their “clients.” They give them unnecessary ultrasounds, make them watch hideous videos without asking if they want to see them, so on. You can tell by her posts, this is not someone who will have reasonable discussions or ever question her own monomaniacal illusions. She’s only concerned about one thing: pregnant women who don’t want to be pregnant. Like they’re a huge menace to poor innocent “preborn” (as if birth is a foregone conclusion) who somehow stumbled into a hostile environment of “the wrong womb.” See the insanity? Maybe there should be a video game where you save tiny preborn people, or even a village of preborns, from hordes of selfish hysterical women on the horizon threatening to zap them with aspiration tubes because they wandered into a wrong womb zone. I call it “Dumb Shit.”

    • thelightshinesinthedarkness

      If the women were provided with ALL the facts about abortion, I believe that they would be far less likely to have them (abortions). The women who thanked you could have felt better that they didn’t have to face the responsibility of having a baby yet, but ultimately, once they realize that they killed their own children, they will carry a lot of regret with them throughout their lives. Unfortunately, women who choose abortion learn the hard way. Abortion is more of a slavery that some women go through. It is tragic how society has led them to believe that it is okay. It is sad that you have been “tricked” into the belief that abortions are good for women. I hope that in the future you will do more research about abortion, instead of verbally attacking someone who doesn’t believe what you do. ConcernedMom seems to be one of the many people who are concerned about the well-being of ALL human life. In reaction to your comment below:

      “What is truly nauseating is that my tax dollars go to fund CPC’s like where ConcernedMom works, the staff at which who are so zealous and blind in their irrationality they will stop at nothing to get women to stay pregnant when they didn’t want to be, including lying, tricking, manipulating, and instilling fear, confusion, shame and guilt in their “clients.” They give them unnecessary ultrasounds, make them watch hideous videos without asking if they want to see them, so on.”

       

      Here, you are spreading gossip based on your own pre-conceived notions about pregnancy centers that don’t provide abortions. Where is your evidence that pregnancy centers (that don’t provide abortions) display this type of behavior? Have you ever been to a place that discourages abortion. If there are pregnancy centers that lie, trick, and manipulate women, then those centers have gone astray from how they should be.True pregnancy centers counsel women with the TRUTH about abortion and their intention is to protect not only the pre-born child, but ALSO the mother. They don’t manipulate, but instead educate and encourage the women to have the baby or provide a family the wonderful gift of a child through adoption. The ultrasounds are necessary, so that a woman knows that a baby is in her womb, and not some lie about “a blob of tissue”. If the woman is still going to have an abortion, no matter how unfortunate that is, she will know what she is really doing. I doubt people at such centers make the women “watch hideous videos…”. You might want to research such places instead of spreading any false rumors. Places like Total Life Care Centers are geared to help women understand the truth about abortion, how a baby develops in the womb, and to provide the women with free pregnancy tests, ultrasounds, and baby items (like bottles, diapers, cribs, clothing, etc.). Check it out http://www.totallifecare.org/

  • elyzabeth

    “So glad there are beginning to be signs of a turning of the tide all over this country, to depict abortion for what it really is: playing God with a human life.”

     

    When a female’s body decides that pregnancy would not be in her best interest because of she is under too much stress, has too little nutrition, is sick, or a host of other factors, it spontaneously aborts or miscarries the pregnancy.  If you believe that God designed human physiology in his/her image or to further his/her agenda or with a plan or however you choose to phrase it, then you must acknowledge that s/he created “natural abortions” to protect the health of the mother and her current or future children.

     

    Biology has not caught up with our modern lives, and has no mechanism for accounting for non-physical contraindications to pregnancy (ei financial, educational, don’t want 14 kids, etc).  Therefore, when you say that humans are “playing God” by choosing which fetuses to abort, you are implying that God alone is the Great Abortionist responsible with zapping the fetuses, and since s/he is God–it is perfectly okay and all part of his/her plan.  It’s God’s plan that so many of those ZBEFs die, but that’s okay as long as human choice plays absolutely no role, right?

  • elyzabeth

    “By asking taxpayers to ante up for elective abortions, it is as if we are unwilling accomplices for snuffing out an innocent pre-born human being.”

     

    By asking us taxpayers to ante up for war, it is as if we are unwilling accomplices for snuffing out an innocent Iraqi/ Afghani / civilian human being.

  • ahunt

    When a female’s body decides that pregnancy would not be in her best interest because of she is under too much stress, has too little nutrition, is sick, or a host of other factors, it spontaneously aborts or miscarries the pregnancy.  If you believe that God designed human physiology in his/her image or to further his/her agenda or with a plan or however you choose to phrase it, then you must acknowledge that s/he created “natural abortions” to protect the health of the mother and her current or future children.

     

    Indeed…this question has been asked time and again on these boards, and there has never, ever been a response from an anti-choicer. I know this to be the case because I keep asking.

     

    So one more time…if spontaneous abortion is a naturally occuring bodily response to pregnancy “bad timing,” then why may not the brain directing the body make an actual determination based on the same natural principle of maternal health and future fertility, as well as promoting the well-being of existing offspring?

  • ack

    Considering that we also can’t redirect tax money that pays for war we disagree with to women who wish to continue a pregnancy but can’t afford it, your point is moot. We’re all directly and indirectly involved in abortions on a daily basis.

  • saltyc

    Yes, they don’t have an answer except that passively letting nature take its course is always better than taking charge and risking being to blame. Only god can make important life choices for us.

     

    Here’s a link to a paper on “the Scourge” which disproves “The Claim” (that full moral status begins at conception) by showing that they don’t really care about the 200 million “human deaths” each year that occur from spontaneous abortion (the Scourge):

     http://www.amirrorclear.net/academic/papers/scourge.pdf

    A true believer in the Claim should be deeply interested in the terrifying Conclusion and should act to alert others to the existence of this Scourge.We might expect something like the call to arms following the publication of

    Animal Liberation (1975). However, there has been no such call from the proponents of the Claim. Even if they had an objection to the argument, it would be of grave importance to make sure that this objection really works and that the argument does not go through. It could not be enough to merely reach personal satisfaction on the matter, for with 200 million lives per year at stake, it would surely be a matter for heated discussion in the journals or in the Church. This marked lack of curiosity about what is claimed to be of immense importance suggests that even now, few people really believe that full moral status begins at conception.

     

    If an embryo is a human being with full moral status, then we would have to do more to rescue all these humans who “die” from conception forth. There should be more funding going here than for cancer, since 3/4 of all human deaths each year are from spontaneous abortion.

    And what would that accomplish? Maybe we’d get a pill that made 100% sure that all zygotes become fetuses and are born, and parents should start giving it to their daughters as soon as they start ovulating, even if she didn’t know she might be pregnant, to make damn sure that no girls or women are complicit in negligent homicide. And if such a pill exists, it would be withholding a known cure to refuse to take it.

     

    They don’t have an answer because they really just want to control women, to make someone else’s sacrifice pay for their own self importance.

  • concernedmom

    I luv how you anti lifers spin your justification to use taxpayer money to pay for abortions. So, since our taxes are used to pay soldiers to defend us from people who want to destroy this country, it should follow that taxpayers are obligated to pay for anyone’s elective abortion that requests it? Such a slippery slope, this reasoning you give. And as far as the question raised re: the incidence of natural miscarriages, that also justifies the volluntary abortion of a baby?? I don’t think its up to me to judge my Creator as to the occasions that babies are stillborn/miscarry. My only concern is the unborn who suffer being sucked brutally from the womb by the one person who should cherish & protect him. Candy coat it any way you want. And taxpayers DO NOT want to participate in a private woman’s decision to terminate her child. There are better ways to provide for an unwanted child than killing him before he is born. Of course, a mother would have to give birth first (gasp!) which by the sound of people here, must be a fate au tragique. (sorry, for the faux French)

  • saltyc

    Really? You don’t care about the 200 million spontaneous abortions a year because it was god’s doing? Do you feel the same way about other involuntary causes of death? Just let nature take its course because it was God’s will and so forth?

  • julie-watkins

    Candy coat it any way you want, some taxpayers DO NOT want to participate in the killing of children (& adults) & destroying the infrastructure of foreign nations to make profits for Big Business.

  • elyzabeth

    Yeah, those pregnant women shot in Afghanistan were trying to destroy the country, so thank god my tax payer dollars subsidized it.

     

    http://www.legalinfo.com/legal-news/u-s-admits-killing-afghan-women-during-special-ops-raid.html

     

    I’m meeting you in the middle because I don’t think you would care about civilian deaths unless they happened to be pregnant.  Not that you speak on behalf of all anti-choicers, but even if all you care about are ZBEFs, how come these issues are never* addressed? 

     

    *A minority of anti-choicers are in fact, pro-life (ei against war, capital punishment, starvation, AIDS, etc) and kudos to them for at least being consistent–but that isn’t the subset of beliefs that I’m addressing.

     

  • squirrely-girl

    I can genuinely appreciate your passion for your beliefs. But they are just that… YOUR beliefs. Fact is, people pay taxes that fund all kinds of things they may or may not agree with… and there are a whole lot of things “taxpayers DO NOT want to participate in.” People without children fund public schools. People with revoked driver’s licenses and non-drivers pay for roads. Pacifists fund the military. Litterers fund conservation efforts. Drug users fund the “war on drugs.” Feminists fund crisis pregnancy centers and abstinence only sex education. :( Get the idea here?

     

    If you get bored sometime, take a look at what procedures Medicaid and Medicare DO fund. Honestly, I’m offended that my tax dollars pay overweight and obese people to get gastric bypass. I’m offended that my money pays to treat the effects of smoking. Why should I pay for glasses or contacts… MY eyes are fine. If I don’t “believe” in chronic pain disorders or migraines why should my money pay for that? I’m offended my money pays for treatment of STDs/STIs (not really, but making a point). Heck, if you listened to one representative (whose name eludes me) during the health care debates, why should we cover pregnancy if it doesn’t apply to men? For that matter, I’m offended that my money pays for prescriptions for Viagra but NOT medications related to women’s reproductive health. Get the idea here? If you look hard enough you WILL find something to bitch about. Promise. 

     

    It would be super awesome if we lived in a country where we could pick and choose what our individual tax dollars funded, but truth is, people would only fund the issues that personally benefited them or those they care about. And people who paid more in taxes would get better funded programs (this is already an issue in some states with regard to education funding from property taxes). We live in a representative democracy and as such, we fund EVERYTHING in the fairest way possible (at least we *try*). You get to vote for your elected representatives and you can certainly lobby on behalf of your beliefs, but other than that, I think you’ll be waiting awhile if you’re wanting to fund only issues YOU believe in. 

     

    And with regard to “leaving it up to the Creator” – I just have to ask – Do you leave EVERYTHING medical up to the Creator or just this one thing? Do you admonish surgeries to correct congenital defects or treatments for diseases or injuries? I mean, God MADE them that way, who are we to question?! Do you support fertility treatments for those who can’t get pregnant easily on their own? I mean, maybe God didn’t WANT them to produce. Do you support treatment for reproductive cancers? I mean, those are “baby making” parts and off-limits, so maybe God meant for them to die painful deaths. Do you HONESTLY believe that the good Lord gave us brains and told us to use them EXCEPT with regard to this SINGLE issue? Really? Really?! It’s totally fine with me if that’s what you believe (yay for the 1st Amendment!), but I PERSONALLY think it’s an incredibly ignorant way of looking at issues of reproduction and health. Beyond the idea that the Bible makes no sincere mention of the concept, I think treating the uterus as some kind of Pandora’s Box is… well… ignorant. 

     

    Again, hold whatever beliefs you so choose, but recognize they’re YOUR beliefs. Last time I checked, your beliefs are no more important, special, morally righteous, or valuable to society than the beliefs of any other individual or group. And NOBODY’s beliefs are so great as to earn them the right to impose their will on others. And it’s MY opinion that God would agree with ME :)

  • bj-survivor

    is in and I have contributed. :)

  • bj-survivor

    I love how you forced-gestation terrorist-enablers spin your justifications for denying women’s rights to make their own medical decisions, to decide what happens to their very own bodies. And I love how you claim to be “pro-life” but practically dance with glee when one of yours guns down a doctor, and how the vast majority of you are so gung-ho for war and the death penalty.

     

    In any event, do you even pay attention to the news? It came out long, long ago that the reason for attacking Iraq – i.e. weapons of mass destruction – was completely fabricated. Of course, Cheney and the Bush Administration continued to dissemble by always saying “9/11″ with “Iraq” and you dupes fell for it, but the truth is that Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. There was not one single Iraqi in the group of terrorists who destroyed the World Trade Center. In fact, the majority of them were from Saudi Arabia, as is Osama bin Laden. By all rights, it should have been Saudi Arabia we attacked. Attacking Iraq for 9/11 is equivalent to if we had attacked Korea for Pearl Harbor.

  • mechashiva

    Hi, CM. Ready to get your ass handed to you again?

     

    Here are the reasons why we should overturn the Hyde Amendement and the anti-abortion restictions in the new health care plan:

     

    1. It isn’t fair. It is discriminatory against veterans and the economically disadvantaged. A lot of people don’t think of this, but it isn’t “just” poor people who are negatively impacted by making abortion inaccessible to those with federal health insurance coverage. Our servicewomen at home and overseas are unable to either obtain an abortion at a military facility or use their medical benefits to pay for it in a private clinic. This means that if a servicewoman becomes pregnant and (for whatever reason) wishes to terminate the pregnancy, she must often obtain leave and travel back to America for the procedure, leaving her unit short. She must do this all on her own dime, and very often she must inform her chain of command of her specific reasons, which she may be reticent to do. There are many negative stereotypes about female soldiers who become pregnant, and she may risk her career if she is unable to keep it quiet. I saw several Soldiers from Iraq, Marines, and Sailors stationed in Southeast Asia who had to deal with these problems at the abortion clinic where I worked.

     

    What does it say about how much we value our veterans’ service when they do not have the same level of access to abortion (and privacy in their decision-making) as the civilians they protect despite the legality of abortion? They do not have the option of purchasing health insurance that covers abortion. They are completely at the mercy of federal law, and that is true of our working class as well. Personally, I think that our veterans should have the same or better access to all medical services that civilians do (or as best can be provided to them, depending on where they are deployed). I also think that veterans should be given the same respect and right to privacy in medical decision-making, particularly with regards to reproductive health.

     

     

    2. It isn’t right. When abortion access is a matter of financial resources rather than legality, it trivializes such decisions by making abortion into a commodity rather than a right. In a sense, it also places a definite monetary value on human life. Personally, I would prefer if this were a decision that was made entirely based on ethics rather than the ability to cover medical costs. Ability to pay should not be influential when it comes to life-and-death decisions. In case you are wondering if I feel this way about other medical decisions as well, the answer is yes.

     

    The majority of money spent on healthcare in this country goes toward end-of-life services (whether in an emergency situation or slow deterioration over time). These costs actually place an enormous drain on our national budget, and it could be argued that the country would be better off if these non-life-saving (and therefore elective, if you are going by criteria set for abortion) treatments were not covered by federal dollars. However, that would make deciding how much longer a person is going to live into a question of affordability, placing a dollar value on human life (turning life into a commodity), and that is something our culture rebels against in all circumstances. Or so we say, and I am an idealist who thinks we should try and back up what we say with policies that reinforce human dignity rather than human “value.”

     

    3. Additionally, I’ll throw in my usual schtik about taxes and their purpose. The purpose of a tax is to pay for something that benefits the country on a whole. Often things that are good for an entire population are things that individuals might disagree with. (Or perhaps we disagree and think that something we pay taxes on is actually bad for the nation.) When deciding whether or not to use tax money for something, it is important to make sure it is actually beneficial, or at worst debateable.

     

    Examples: We should not be paying taxes to pay for abstinence-only sex education because it is harmful to the country. We should/should not be using tax money to pay for end-of-life care, because keeping human life “priceless” is more/less important to our culture than the impact of paying so much money these services. We should/should not be using tax money to pay for abortion because it is/isn’t important for all American women (including the poor and our veterans, I just don’t get tired of emphasizing that one) to have equal opportunity to exercise our legally-defined right to terminate a pregnancy.

     

    Abortion is one of those “debatable, at worst” things that we could use taxes for. It does not cause population decline, in fact it helps keep our population growth sustainable. It does not impact maternal health one way or another, statistically. It is relatively inexpensive for the federal government, but often more expensive than those who need it can afford (even with discounts and sliding-scale cost). And then of course there are the endless arguments about personhood, nociception, and so on.

  • crowepps

    What does it say about how much we value our veterans’ service when they do not have the same level of access to abortion (and privacy in their decision-making) as the civilians they protect despite the legality of abortion?

    In addition, it has a serious impact on the WIVES of servicemen whose pregnancies have complications as well.  I’ve posted this link before, but it’s well worth rereading:

     

    When she learned that she was carrying a baby with almost no brain and no chance of survival, a devastated young Navy wife from Everett pleaded with a federal court in Seattle to force her military medical program to pay for an abortion.

     

    “I could not imagine going through five more months of pregnancy, knowing that the baby will never survive or have any kind of life whatsoever,” the woman, then 19, told a federal judge in August 2002. “I understand that even if the baby is born alive, it will probably die after it takes a few breaths. I am really terrified of the prospect of giving birth, then watching the baby die.”

     

    She won her case and had the abortion. But more than two years later, the federal government continues to fight her, trying to get the woman and her sailor husband to pay back the $3,000 the procedure cost and trying to cast in stone a ban on government-funded abortions.

    In its appeal, the government said that “although anencephaly is ultimately fatal,” some anencephalic babies have lasted a few months, and in one noted case more than two years. “Although anencephalic infants are ‘permanently unconscious,’ they ‘maintain a heartbeat and respiration without medical assistance,’ ” the government argued, quoting from medical journals.

    http://www.seattlepi.com/local/217156_janedoe23.html

  • mechashiva

    Ah yes, I had forgotten about dependents of servicemembers. These laws would also effect veterans’ minor daughters.

  • offred

    if spontaneous abortion is a naturally occuring bodily response to pregnancy “bad timing,” then why may not the brain directing the body make an actual determination based on the same natural principle of maternal health and future fertility

     

    I consider myself pro-choice (of the “safe, legal and *rare*” variety), but it’s not difficult to know how anti-abortioners would answer your question:

     

    It’s the difference between Grandma dying of natural causes vs murdering her (even if it’s for her own and everyone else’s good).

     

    For someone who’s anti-abortion, one is a tragedy, the other is a crime.

  • ahunt

    It’s the difference between Grandma dying of natural causes vs murdering her (even if it’s for her own and everyone else’s good).

     

    I get the response but the cases are not analogous. Spontaneous abortion, in this sense, is the body defending itself. Why may not the thinking person also come to this conclusion…and terminate the pregnancy for same natural “reasons?”

  • saltyc

    Re: the analogy letting someone die vs murdering, really the real reason they care more about induced abortion than spontaneous abortion is that it’s always better, especially for a woman, to passively accept whatever happens to her body rather than risking taking responsibility and therefore being guilty.

    Funny because the bible is full of stories of heroic people who went against the tide and took charge of their own fate for themselves. Tamar, for instance, was destined to  be childless but she disguised herself as a prostitute in order to become impregnanted by her father-in-law, defying holy law. Yet she was able to secure for herself and her offspring part of the wealth of Judah.

    I think if they want to make an analogy to the difference between non-homicide death (which quite a lot of resources go to preventing) and murder, they would first have to prove that they really believe that embryos are people with full moral status, which judging from their lack of interest in what actually happens during development, they really don’t.

  • bj-survivor

    it was Judah who was defying holy law by not ensuring that Tamar was married to one of his other sons or to himself. What’s also interesting to note about Tamar’s story is that it was only when she produced incontrovertible proof that her father-in-law, Judah, was the sperm donor that she was able to save herself and her fetuses from certain annihilation. Yet forced-birthers claim that Yahweh values each and every precious blastocyst, zygote, and embryo. That said, never underestimate religious forced-birther’s ability to abnegate reality, logic, or even scripture.

  • ahunt

    they would first have to prove that they really believe that embryos are people with full moral status, which judging from their lack of interest in what actually happens during development, they really don’t.

     

    The recent Utah legislation uproar is a case in point, Salty. The governor of Utah had to assured that the bill did not criminalize women who ski and suffer miscarriages.

     

    The logical ramifications of  “embryo as citizen” is the stopper…savvy pro-lifers know that opening that can of worms will result in unprecedented social backlash. Why else do mainstream anti-choice organizations oppose…for example…the Colorado initiative?

  • saltyc

    Sure Judah admitted to being in the worng, but Tamar was also breaking the law by acting as a prostitute and also stealing his seal. She took a big risk in an extremely patriarchal world. She showed a lot of cunning, self- interest and refusal to passively accept her unwanted fate, which was a trait of many characters in Genesis.

  • julie-watkins

    I am bookmarking this.

  • grayduck

    “There is no other issue or item that is singled out the way abortion and birth control are singled out to allow tax payers a say in how their tax money is spent.”

     

    What are you talking about? Every government expenditure is subject to taxpayer say in how the money is spent.

     

    “Those of us who are opposed to nuclear weapons, nuclear energy, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the funding for schools for torture like the School of the Americas – we are not given options to withhold our taxes from these things.”

     

    You are conflating two issues. The opposition to tax money being used for abortion is not about individuals withholding taxes, it is about whether government resources should be used to promote abortion. You have just as much right to argue against using government funds for nuclear weapons and so forth as anyone does to oppose using government money to promote abortion.

     

    “…if you are opposed, for reasons of conscience or morality, to paying for bombs, wars, abstinence-until-marriage sex education, or any other of the multitudes of things that the federal government pays for, your only recourse is illegal: to withhold your taxes for as long as you can as these brave and honorable people do. Unless what you are opposed to is the right of women to control their own bodies and determine the course of their own lives.”

     

    Not true. Opponents of abortion cannot withhold taxes just because some of it is going to abortion. That has been happening here in Minnesota for more than a decade. While the government pares back funds for health care for the poor, it is funding baby-killing so that rapists need not pay for the abortions of the women they impregnate. While bridges collapse, the government is paying for the abortions of women who are obtaining the abortions to cover up adulterous affairs. Our taxes, whether we like those uses of our tax dollars or not, goes to fund such abortions.

     

    “Women who work for the federal government, women in the military or who are married to men in the military, Native American women who use the Indian Health Service: all of these women must pay for abortion out of their own pockets.”

     

    Why is it so bad that some taxpayers are not forced to pay for the abortions of people who have illegal sexual intercourse like rape, incest, prostitution, adultery, or fornication?

  • sgtg8tes

    Not just that, I also help reassure them, I provide truth and facts and reflect back to them how powerful and responsible they are.

    I just have to say how responsible was it to get pregnant in the first place?  I’m not saying that women should not have the choice to obtain an abortion if that is what they so desire but I don’t believe that we should be forced to cover it.  We now pay thousands of dollars to obtain abortions when simply being responsible and using some sort of contraceptive device would have prevented the pregnancy in the first place.  Now, I’m not talking about failed contraception(for all of you that were going to jump down my throat with the what ifs) or rape or any of those extenuating circumstances.  Women have the right to choose they just have to pay for their choices.  We all do.  Well, the responsible ones do, anyway. 

    I, myself, am undergoing fertility treatment. No one is offering to pay for that. What kind of garbage is that? I have insurance but it only covers diagnosing your fertility issue. Now, if you want treatment well that’s tough luck you have to pay for it on your own dime. I said ok fine I will cover the medication, the procedure all of that stuff my insurance doesn’t cover but then when they told me that all the stuff my insurance does cover i.e. ultrasounds and blood work would not be covered because it was part of the treatment that sent me through the roof. At any rate, sorry I got on a rant there, I do think that a woman should be able to obtain an abortion if she chooses, the repercussions are something she will have to deal with but I don’t necessarily believe that people outside the situation should have to pay for it. Insurance is a bitch. They pay for what they want to pay for.  Elective stuff is usually not covered. Like me or hate me I don’t want to pay for your irresponsible mistakes. Just like you don’t want to pay for me to be able to become pregnant.

  • prochoiceferret

    If the women were provided with ALL the facts about abortion, I believe that they would be far less likely to have them (abortions).

    I’m sure you have a lot of faith in that position.

    The women who thanked you could have felt better that they didn’t have to face the responsibility of having a baby yet, but ultimately, once they realize that they killed their own children, they will carry a lot of regret with them throughout their lives.

    Some might. Most don’t. And if we’re going worry about things that people may end up regretting later, abortion’s going to have to take a back seat to marriage.

    Unfortunately, women who choose abortion learn the hard way. Abortion is more of a slavery that some women go through. It is tragic how society has led them to believe that it is okay. It is sad that you have been “tricked” into the belief that abortions are good for women.

    Yes, women are too dumb to know what’s best for them. Abortions for no one! They’ll thank us later!

    I hope that in the future you will do more research about abortion, instead of verbally attacking someone who doesn’t believe what you do.

    Funny, that’s exactly what I was going to say to you.

    ConcernedMom seems to be one of the many people who are concerned about the well-being of ALL human life.

    Except for the human lives that are pregnant, and don’t wish to be. Then, ConcernedMom thinks that they are evil and wrong for wanting an abortion, and it’s okay to force them to remain pregnant against their wills.

    Here, you are spreading gossip based on your own pre-conceived notions about pregnancy centers that don’t provide abortions. Where is your evidence that pregnancy centers (that don’t provide abortions) display this type of behavior?

    You may want to start at a site like this.

    If there are pregnancy centers that lie, trick, and manipulate women, then those centers have gone astray from how they should be.

    And I’m sure you’ll protest against them with some of the vigor you reserve for abortion clinics, because you care about the women… right?

    True pregnancy centers counsel women with the TRUTH about abortion and their intention is to protect not only the pre-born child, but ALSO the mother. They don’t manipulate, but instead educate and encourage the women to have the baby or provide a family the wonderful gift of a child through adoption.

    Boy, you’re gonna be disappointed with how crisis pregnancy centers operate in the real world.

    The ultrasounds are necessary, so that a woman knows that a baby is in her womb, and not some lie about “a blob of tissue”.

    When it’s the size of a kidney bean, and still has gill slits, it’s a lot closer to being a “blob of tissue” than a “baby.”

    If the woman is still going to have an abortion, no matter how unfortunate that is, she will know what she is really doing.

    Nice of you to at least allow that possibility… but then, anti-choicers have done their damndest to ensure that this “fully informed” woman won’t even have a clinic to go to at that point.

    I doubt people at such centers make the women “watch hideous videos…”.

    Soooo disappointed….

    You might want to research such places instead of spreading any false rumors.

    Good advice, but we already took it a long time ago.