Comments on: And the Catholic Bishops Endorse! A Special Thank-You To Planned Parenthood and NARAL

By: rjrnab

rjrnab — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 13:34:31 +0000

The Church needs to take care of its flock, not the population of the United Snakes. It’s almost like someone who knows nothing about war, or international relations, (Hilary Clinton comes to mind) being made Sec. of State, just to keep her out of the national scene. The Catholic Church never’s kept up with it’s own internal politics, and ethics. Its grasp of the abortion issue is one of the only issues left it can make a fuss about with Evangelicals, which they must fear. When JFK didn’t really give a shit about abortion, those Knights of Columbus started blowing the horn, and getting the church involved in national politics. Stupak’s add-on was like Congress voting again about burning the flag, or having in dog we trust on our coinage-useless; Rally’n the Amway moms with the Palin stickers on their Cadilac Esq’s. They’re keep’n the po people down.

By: bayofarizona

bayofarizona — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:27:08 +0000

I doubt anyone is still reading this now, but I wanted to make 2 points.

One, I am sick of the bashing of young women.

There is a sizable gender gap in abortion attitudes among the youngest generation of Americans. Women age 18-24 oppose further limits on abortion access by a wide margin (63%-34%). But young men are divided over the issue: 50% oppose more abortion restrictions, while 45% are in favor. In this regard, this youngest group of men stand apart not only from women within their cohort, but also from men age 25 and older. Aside from this gap between men and women under age 25, there are virtually no gender gaps in overall abortion attitudes among older cohorts.

Young women do understand. Every single abortion post blames young women for not understanding blah blah. Not true.

I also have never heard how an abortion ban would work. What if a woman said she was going to get an abortion anyway? How would that be stopped? Handcuff her to a hospital bed and force her legs open?

How about put her in prison, like they do in Mexico?

I wish every ‘pro-life’ person was forced to go on the record about that.

By: Knoxville

Knoxville — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:05:10 +0000

In practice this law isn’t enforced against them.

Thanks! Your explanation helped a lot. In light of your last point, Elliott’s question/assertion @ 3 makes a lot more sense.

By: PJEvans

PJEvans — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 22:13:19 +0000

And I say let them lose. That’s not the kind of church the world needs: authoritarian, male-oriented, cold-hearted, and cruel to those who most need help.

By: PJEvans

PJEvans — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 22:09:57 +0000

Add to that, I know a woman who lost a child during birth – it was alive, and died while she was in labor. That has to be the worst thing that can happen.

Too bad this troll has never actually learned anything about pregnancy, miscarriage, or the history of the church. The whole ‘life begins at conception’ bit is modern bad theology. Aquinas wasn’t that stupid.

By: OldFatGuy

OldFatGuy — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:58:41 +0000

Yeah, I’m sorry too, I’m in a foul mood and will leave after this post.

But you said:

but I am surprised that taxpayer financing for abortion could be a deal-breaker for healthcare.

I’m surprised you said that, given that it was the BISHOPS (of whom I suppose you support) that seemed to imply it was a dealbreaker. In other words, they were unwilling to support healthcare without the amendment. So it sounds to me like you’re surprised at your own side too.

Good day.

By: wmd1961

wmd1961 — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:27:59 +0000

Non profits typically will set up two branches – a political branch and a tax exempt branch:

EG
Political (does lobbying, informs members on specific legislation, etc)
ACLU, NORML, Sierra Club

and
Tax exempt (501 c(3)) (Education, Advocacy. less than 5% political activity)
ACLU Foundation, NORML Foundation, Sierra Club Foundation.

I’m on the board of a moribund 501 (c) 3 organization that did cannabis relegalization advocacy work in Southern Indiana.

Churches are tax exempt under 501 (c) 3 and may not engage in campaign activity by law. In practice this law isn’t enforced against them.

By: aardvark

aardvark — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:24:43 +0000

25 years ago I was on the board of the local Planned Parenthood. I quit in frustration over being ignored in my contention the Right was organizing and Roe v. could be overturned and that we needed to be preparing for that battle. The other board members thought that was a ridiculous idea.

By: Knoxville

Knoxville — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:06:47 +0000

That helped a lot. Thank you!

By: dakine01

dakine01 — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:01:40 +0000

Yes it changes the status quo. Yes it reduces the availability of services. Yes it restricts the ability to obtain an abortion through currently existing health plans going forward.

His amendment, Stupak noted, is in fact more restrictive than the language he had previously agreed to include in the bill. The pro-choice crowd, demanding the right to vote their consciences, Stupak said, overplayed their hand and look to be handing him a bigger victory. Stupak’s amendment is extremely restrictive — any individual or any business that gets any subsidy or tax credit — which will be most people in the country — will not be able to purchase a health care plan that covers abortion, even with their own money. They can, however, buy supplemental coverage from a separate plan. Stupak’s amendment would represent the most significant rollback of reproductive rights in decades.

Is it even Constitutional?

“It may not be. I don’t know,” Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) told HuffPost. “But we’re certainly not looking to resolve this in the courts.” They may not be, but someone, somewhere, might be.

via HuffPo