Trump signs bill targeting funding for abortion providers

Granule

Firebrand
President Trump on Thursday signed a bill to nix an Obama-era rule that blocked states from defunding healthcare providers for political reasons.

The bill, which Democrats say is really an effort to defund Planned Parenthood, passed the Senate last month after Vice President Pence had to cast a tie-breaking vote.

Trump signed the measure behind closed doors in the Oval Office without media present.


http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...ion-providers/ar-BBzOkTN?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp


Thank you, Mr. President! :)
 
Amidst the constant flow of bile flowing from the filth pile that is the democrat party, it's VERY good to see that the President is keeping steady.
 
President Trump on Thursday signed a bill to nix an Obama-era rule that blocked states from defunding healthcare providers for political reasons.

The bill, which Democrats say is really an effort to defund Planned Parenthood, passed the Senate last month after Vice President Pence had to cast a tie-breaking vote.

Trump signed the measure behind closed doors in the Oval Office without media present.


http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...ion-providers/ar-BBzOkTN?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp


Thank you, Mr. President! :)
Seeing as the majority of abortions are performed on ethnic minorities, I really don't see why right wing evangelists care so much.

Sent from my iPhone 10S
 
Seeing as the majority of abortions are performed on ethnic minorities, I really don't see why right wing evangelists care so much.

Sent from my iPhone 10S

its a lot like teachers unions. If you support them you are essentially making organizations that support democrats stronger, same with PBS, you essentially allow federal funding for something that would employ almost exclusively liberals. Planned parenthood would follow the same logic.

If the democrats want open war with trump then resources are fair game.
 
Seeing as the majority of abortions are performed on ethnic minorities, I really don't see why right wing evangelists care so much.

Sent from my iPhone 10S
Because abortion is murder, and we're opposed to murder. If a life has to be taken, let God take it (or allow it), WITHOUT our help.
 
Not even to save the life of the woman or if she has been raped?

Sent from my iPhone 10S
That's a very rare scenario, but if and when that does occur, every effort should be made to save both lives.

It's not the baby's fault that his/her dad is a complete shitbag loser.
 
Not even to save the life of the woman or if she has been raped?

Sent from my iPhone 10S

Since you claim to be a man of science show me the statistics on

1) number of rapes that lead to pregnancy
2) how many abortions are 100% necessary to save the mothers life

I see these two examples bandied about as if they are the trump card by which all abortions are justifiable. It is a specious argument at best
 
Since you claim to be a man of science show me the statistics on

1) number of rapes that lead to pregnancy
2) how many abortions are 100% necessary to save the mothers life

I see these two examples bandied about as if they are the trump card by which all abortions are justifiable. It is a specious argument at best

Not sure who you are going to believe, Todd Akins or the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology? Probably the former as it suits your argument better.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8765248

As to abortions, you'll have to define necessary for me. I would love for there to be very few and would insist that the upper limit would be confined to the first trimester except for life threatening situations. An interesting statistic for you, 91% of all abortions carried out by the NHS happen before 12 weeks and are chemical rather than surgical, can't speak for the US though.

Sent from my iPhone 10S
 
Last edited:
Since you claim to be a man of science show me the statistics on

1) number of rapes that lead to pregnancy
2) how many abortions are 100% necessary to save the mothers life

I see these two examples bandied about as if they are the trump card by which all abortions are justifiable. It is a specious argument at best

Those two examples are regularly used and portrayed in a manner as if they're the reason a vast majority of abortions are done.

The state of Florida records a reason for every abortion that occurs within its borders each year. In 2015, there were 71,740 abortions in Florida. This table lists each reason and the percentage of abortions that occurred because of it.

Percentage Reason
.001% The pregnancy resulted from an incestuous relationship
.065% The woman's life was endangered by the pregnancy
.085% The woman was raped
.288% The woman's physical health was threatened by the pregnancy
.294% The woman's psychological health was threatened by the pregnancy
.666% There was a serious fetal abnormality
6.268% The woman aborted for social or economic reasons
92.330% No reason (elective)

Source: http://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics

In other words, 1.4% in Florida were done for the reasons the lefties try to make out as a much higher number.
 
Not sure who you are going to believe, Todd Akins or the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology? Probably the former as it suits your argument better.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8765248

As to abortions, you'll have to define necessary for me. I would love for there to be very few and would insist that the upper limit would be confined to the first trimester except for life threatening situations. An interesting statistic for you, 91% of all abortions carried out by the NHS happen before 12 weeks and are chemical rather than surgical, can't speak for the US though.

Sent from my iPhone 10S


Chemical or surgical makes absolutely no difference. That's like saying someone murdered using a gun is less dead than someone murdered using a knife.
 
Not sure who you are going to believe, Todd Akins or the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology? Probably the former as it suits your argument better.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8765248

As to abortions, you'll have to define necessary for me. I would love for there to be very few and would insist that the upper limit would be confined to the first trimester except for life threatening situations. An interesting statistic for you, 91% of all abortions carried out by the NHS happen before 12 weeks and are chemical rather than surgical, can't speak for the US though.

Sent from my iPhone 10S

I have seen 3% but I can work with 5%

As a compromise for our abortion friends, I have offered this. Abortion legal only in instance of rape and truly life threatening situations

Amazingly abortion fans don't like that compromise. You know where neither of us gets everything we want

Why do you think that is?
 
I have seen 3% but I can work with 5%

As a compromise for our abortion friends, I have offered this. Abortion legal only in instance of rape and truly life threatening situations

Amazingly abortion fans don't like that compromise. You know where neither of us gets everything we want

Why do you think that is?
I would like that as well, but I think it ultimately up to women not men.

Sent from my iPhone 10S
 
Chemical or surgical makes absolutely no difference. That's like saying someone murdered using a gun is less dead than someone murdered using a knife.
A foetus at twelve weeks is about two inches long and weigh one ounce, just thought you'd like to know that.

Sent from my iPhone 10S
 
A foetus at twelve weeks is about two inches long and weigh one ounce, just thought you'd like to know that.

Sent from my iPhone 10S

a very tiny living human being, who's heart is beating and who's brain has already begun to function......probably at a level higher than many adult liberals......
 
Back
Top