U.S. House passes "Protect Life Act"

[Quantum Windbag]

the cold hard facts of the matter are that most women don't want a bunch of men deciding what they can decide. Face it...abortion is legal and it's the law of the land. Only Republican bible thumpers believe they can tell a woman what they can or cannot do to or with their bodies.

What the Republicans do make's soooo much sense. They consider a wad of cum life but then when somebody loses it and kills an adult human being they can't wait to put them to death. I guess I'm just a little weird but that sounds like a major dose of bullshit to me.

That doesn't even mention nuts like George Bush saying he prayed for weeks and god told him to invade Iraq. Thousands of our young men and women killed and crippled while hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis died and millions fled their homes to
Syria and Jordon. Did any of you people ever think for a minute that you should develop a little consistency into your "Rock Solid Faith?"

The cold hard facts is that this bill will not affect a woman's choice in any way.

Do you think Obama prayed before he decided to go after a group of people in Africa who has never attacked the US? Did you ever think that it is incredibly easy to see the things in others that most upset you about yourself?

I've never heard of president Obama saying he prayed about anything. I do remember when his microphone was left on accidently and he said, "During Hard Times People Cling To Ther Religion And Their Guns."

What does that have to do with him sending troops into the Congo?

 

[Photonic]

It's funny to watch those who know so little about medicine act as if they do.

Like you?

Actually, that would be you. First of all, indentured servitude is no longer legal in the USA. Just so you know. Secondly, one cannot "kick someone out" of medicine for malpractice. One can sue someone for malpractice, but it is the AMA and state licensing board who will kick someone out of medicine, if they so decide. Thirdly, there is no such thing as malpractice for refusal to perform an elective procedure.

Now you know.

Refusing to perform a procedure on a personal bias even though it will kill the patient is justifiably illegal. They certainly can get kicked out as a result of malpractice.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I agree. No public money for abortions.

Ok ... but that's not what this is about. Allow me to quote the important part.

prohibits women from buying health insurance plans that cover abortion under the Affordable Care Act

Meaning, a woman could have zero intentions of ever having an abortion, but she would still not be allowed to buy a plan she wants, because of what the plan offers.

Anti-choice is taking on a whole new meaning.

You should know better than to take anything Hufflepuff Post says at face value. Shame on you.

 

[Lakhota]

Praising 'Let Women Die' Bill, GOP Rep Says 'Nobody Has Ever Fought More For The Rights Of Woman Than I Have' | ThinkProgress

 

[Cecilie1200]

I agree. No public money for abortions.

Ok ... but that's not what this is about. Allow me to quote the important part.

prohibits women from buying health insurance plans that cover abortion under the Affordable Care Act

Meaning, a woman could have zero intentions of ever having an abortion, but she would still not be allowed to buy a plan she wants, because of what the plan offers.

Anti-choice is taking on a whole new meaning.

So says the HuffPo, but that's not what the bill says:

3/17/2011--Reported to House amended, Part I. Protect Life Act - Amends the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) to prohibit federal funds from being to used to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion services. (Currently, federal funds cannot be used for abortion services and plans receiving federal funds must keep federal funds segregated from any funds for abortion services.) Requires any qualified health benefit plan offered through an Exchange that includes coverage for abortions to also offer a qualified health benefit plan through the Exchange that is identical in every respect except that it does not cover abortions. Prohibits a federal agency or program and any state or local government that receives federal financial assistance under PPACA from requiring any health plan created or regulated under PPACA to discriminate against any institutional or individual health care entity based on the entity's refusal to undergo training in the performance of induced abortions, require or provide such training, or refer for such training. Creates a cause of action for any violations of the abortion provisions of PPACA. Gives federal courts jurisdiction to prevent and redress actual or threatened violations of such provisions by issuing any form of legal or equitable relief, including injunctions and orders preventing the disbursement of all or a portion of federal financial assistance until the prohibited conduct has ceased. Gives standing to institute an action to affected health care entities and the Attorney General. Requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to designate the Director of the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to receive and investigate complaints alleging a violation of PPACA abortion provisions. Requires the Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to ensure that no multistate qualified health plan offered in an Exchange provides coverage of abortion services.​

HR 358: Protect Life Act, Summary

I bolded the pertinent part.

It looks like the HuffPo is telling porkie pies.

Tons of them. They babble on about "a woman's own money", but the bill only deals with FEDERAL money, not anyone's personal funds.

 

[Cecilie1200]

it won't get past the senate. it's another wingnut bill out of the House. and even if it got through the senate, the president would veto it. there aren't enough votes to override.

so ultimately, i wouldn't worry about it. more idiocy from the "small government" people.

not to mention it's unconstitutional, but there ya go.

True.

Still, a shocking display of arrogance and ignorance – and as noted having noting to do with creating jobs or addressing the Nation’s other more pressing problems. Indeed, this wasn’t even a ‘problem’ at all.

I love this whole idea of "the House is only allowed to pass legislation on things I care about". Perhaps while you're "noting" that the House has the gall to care about things you haven't expressly given them permission to, you could note that this is far from the only piece of legislation they've worked on.

I'm sure you think it's "shocking" for the House Republicans to fulfill their promises to their base, but that's only because you aren't their base, and you're shockingly arrogant and ignorant enough to think your personal priorities are the ONLY priorities.

I'd love to know how it's "Unconstitutional" to direct where federal money can and can't go. Last time I checked, that was kind of Congress's job.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If you want to know the terrible thing they did today, the horrible act you call hypocritical.....this terrible act the House GOP members have done to prevent what is pictured at this link.....go ahead and view it and tell me what's so terrible about what they did: Partial-Birth Abortion Illustrations

Thank you for posting a link, rather than trying to post the pictures.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Perhaps you missed this part:

"and makes it legal for hospitals to deny abortions to pregnant women with life-threatening conditions. "

Read first - post fauxtrage second....

Huh? The bill makes it LEGAL for a hospital to deny an abortion to a women with a life-threatening condition?

Yes. There are many hospitals owned an operated by the Church.

It is strictly against Roman Catholic doctrine to do abortions. The government has no business telling someone they have to do something completely against their religion. And, the Catholic Church will close down a hospital before they will do abortions.

So, which option is better for society?

Actually, I believe many Catholic hospitals will perform abortions in life-threatening circumstances, or refer you to someone who will.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The House Tea-Tards are Stuck on Stupid. It's like anti-abortion Groundhog Day.

You must be a male.

At two months you feel the stirring. At three months I have no idea but all of a sudden they start to rock.

At 4 months you are talking party time because the soul that is in you starts really going for it.

Trust me by 9 months they are doing dances to Madonna/Queen/ and freaking Elton John. Holy toledo. You try to keep a plate on your belly at 9 months and we are talking the kid inside you is kicking it off.

And trust me. You can't wait to deliver.

I always liked when they moved from one side of your abdomen to the other, so your belly is sticking out at an angle. Or when they push a hand or foot against your abdominal wall and then drag it along in a line.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I always find it interesting that anti-choice zealots never express any concern for the mother. In fact, RARELY is the word "mother" ever mentioned in their rabid rants.

We tend to reserve our concern for the person who's going to come out of the whole thing dead. You know, the baby? The word NEVER heard in the left's rabid rants?

And it's obscene to refer to someone who would kill her own child as a "mother". Perhaps that's why you don't hear it much.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If you want to know the terrible thing they did today, the horrible act you call hypocritical.....this terrible act the House GOP members have done to prevent what is pictured at this link.....go ahead and view it and tell me what's so terrible about what they did: Partial-Birth Abortion Illustrations

That’s just it: they didn’t do anything, no abortions will be ‘stopped,’ Federal funding for abortion has been prohibited since 1976. And forcing a woman experiencing an emergency with regard to her pregnancy to go to another hospital exposes her to needless risk.

Bullshit. They stopped a sleazy accounting-trick loophole. I thought you lefties were all about plugging loopholes, or is that only when successful people want to keep their money?

As things stand now, federal money must be kept "segregated" by the health plan from abortion, but only a fool or an idealogue (or both) would believe that giving someone money for one thing, which frees up other money for something else, isn't equivalent to financially supporting the something else. This puts a stop to that practice. It also puts a stop to you lefties enslaving people to your personal agenda and forcing them to act against their own beliefs and principles because you've decided that you know right from wrong better than they do.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You must be a male.

At two months you feel the stirring. At three months I have no idea but all of a sudden they start to rock.

At 4 months you are talking party time because the soul that is in you starts really going for it.

Trust me by 9 months they are doing dances to Madonna/Queen/ and freaking Elton John. Holy toledo. You try to keep a plate on your belly at 9 months and we are talking the kid inside you is kicking it off.

And trust me. You can't wait to deliver.

she's female. as am i.

and thanks for the descriptions... totally and completely unnecessary and irrelevant to the unconstitutional trash proposed by the rightwingnut loons in the House.

now i wish all you pretend 'small government' types would keep government out of women's bodies and out of the bedroom.

Read the bill, not the HuffPo's interpretation of the bill, then let us all know what is unconstitutional about it.

Please. The only thing the left scum knows about the Constitution is how well it works as toilet paper.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Please. The only thing the left scum knows about the Constitution is how well it works as toilet paper.

‘Left scum.’ Perhaps you could replace the childish insults with case law in support of your positions.

 

[Si modo]

Huh? The bill makes it LEGAL for a hospital to deny an abortion to a women with a life-threatening condition?

Yes. There are many hospitals owned an operated by the Church.

It is strictly against Roman Catholic doctrine to do abortions. The government has no business telling someone they have to do something completely against their religion. And, the Catholic Church will close down a hospital before they will do abortions.

So, which option is better for society?

Actually, I believe many Catholic hospitals will perform abortions in life-threatening circumstances, or refer you to someone who will.

Actually, their policy is that they will not stand by and let the mother die. However, aborting the baby is a last resort. In those cases, they rationalize it as not an abortion at that point, and rather it is an unfortunate result of medical procedures done to save the mother.

Plus, folks forget that physicians have another authority by which they are bound, and Catholic hospitals are well aware of that. If an abortion IS done in an emergency situation, it automatically goes to review after the fact.


I posted the information earlier, but the droolers prefer to look like fools to the thinking population. (Not you. )

 

[Cecilie1200]

By Laura Bassett

WASHINGTON -- After an emotional floor debate, the House of Representatives on Thursday passed the so-called Protect Life Act, which prohibits women from buying health insurance plans that cover abortion under the Affordable Care Act and makes it legal for hospitals to deny abortions to pregnant women with life-threatening conditions.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), a proponent of the bill, told voters last week that its purpose is "to ensure that no taxpayer dollars flow to health care plans that cover abortion and no health care worker has to participate in abortions against their will."

In fact, the Affordable Care Act already keeps public dollars separate from the private insurance payments that cover abortion. A federal judge ruled in August that the anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony List had to stop making the claim on its website that "Obamacare" subsidizes abortions because the assertion is false.

Protect Life Act Passes House: Congress Passes Controversial Anti-Abortion Bill

I see the right is still focused like a laser on job creation

Senate Republican jobs bill urges tax reform and cuts - chicagotribune.com

Apparently, unlike you, the House Republicans can multitask.

Must suck to be as uninformed as you are.

 

[Cecilie1200]

By Laura Bassett

WASHINGTON -- After an emotional floor debate, the House of Representatives on Thursday passed the so-called Protect Life Act, which prohibits women from buying health insurance plans that cover abortion under the Affordable Care Act and makes it legal for hospitals to deny abortions to pregnant women with life-threatening conditions.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), a proponent of the bill, told voters last week that its purpose is "to ensure that no taxpayer dollars flow to health care plans that cover abortion and no health care worker has to participate in abortions against their will."

In fact, the Affordable Care Act already keeps public dollars separate from the private insurance payments that cover abortion. A federal judge ruled in August that the anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony List had to stop making the claim on its website that "Obamacare" subsidizes abortions because the assertion is false.

Protect Life Act Passes House: Congress Passes Controversial Anti-Abortion Bill

Look at that, federal government grabbing more power, and denying states more rights. Another mandate from our rulers to the east.

Every day is another trajedy for freedom.

Since when is the allocating and directing of FEDERAL money a "states right" issue, or a power that is somehow new and alien to Congress, for which they must "grab"? Where was I when the Constitution was amended to take the power of the federal purse out of Congress's hands?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Sorry. I just realized that in one of my earlier posts regarding House legislative work concerning jobs, I linked to a Senate bill instead. My mistake; I was distracted.

Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

There's a link involving bills in both houses regarding jobs.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Please. The only thing the left scum knows about the Constitution is how well it works as toilet paper.

‘Left scum.’ Perhaps you could replace the childish insults with case law in support of your positions.

Your idiocy has been on trial?

 

[Lakhota]

Wasn't it George W. Bush who said the Constitution is just goddamn piece of paper?

 

[Si modo]

Wasn't it George W. Bush who said the Constitution is just goddamn piece of paper?

No. But you are a moron, so that's why you posted something moronic.

Q: Did President Bush call the Constitution a "goddamned piece of paper"?

A: Extremely unlikely. The Web site that reported those words has a history of quoting phony sources and retracting bogus stories.

FULL QUESTION

Is it true that President Bush called the Constitution a "goddamned piece of paper?" He has never denied it, and it appears that there were several witnesses.

FULL ANSWER

The report that Bush "screamed" those words at Republican congressional leaders in November 2005 is unsubstantiated, to put it charitably.

We judge that the odds that the report is accurate hover near zero. It comes from Capitol Hill Blue, a Web site that has a history of relying on phony sources, retracting stories and apologizing to its readers.

Update, Feb. 21, 2011: The author of the Capitol Hill Blue story has now withdrawn it. Doug​

FactCheck.org