HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » I don't mind Joe's stance...

Thu Jun 6, 2019, 08:47 AM

 

I don't mind Joe's stance on the Hyde amendment even though I would like to see it rescinded.

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Yonnie3 (a host of the General Discussion forum).

It's his position that choice and Roe v Wade is fine. He just doesn't want Federal dollars used to pay for abortions. The Hyde amendment does allow for that in the case of rape, incest or danger to the life of the mother. He is entitled to that opinion so long as he abides by the settled law of Roe v Wade. It's an opinion or value he holds. I just do not believe that he would actively pursue removing "choice" from the law. Every candidate is going to hold a position with which some of us will not agree. Here we go again with the purity test on everything. The greatest challenge for us to be pure about is to remove Trump from office.

8 replies, 552 views

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 8 replies Author Time Post
Reply I don't mind Joe's stance on the Hyde amendment even though I would like to see it rescinded. (Original post)
sarabelle Jun 2019 OP
Thekaspervote Jun 2019 #1
Freddie Jun 2019 #2
Zoonart Jun 2019 #3
ProudMNDemocrat Jun 2019 #4
OregonBlue Jun 2019 #5
still_one Jun 2019 #6
Hoyt Jun 2019 #7
Yonnie3 Jun 2019 #8

Response to sarabelle (Original post)

Thu Jun 6, 2019, 09:02 AM

1. Thank you!! There are other threads about the same that do "issue" personal purity tests

That will not put dotard out of office.

Looking back, President Obama did things we all disliked or felt were wrong, myself included. Ask yourself, would you go back and change your vote? Put his feet to the fire?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarabelle (Original post)

Thu Jun 6, 2019, 09:03 AM

2. Agree

I don’t like the Hyde amendment either but a lot of pro-choice people are fine with it. I wish we could go back to “safe legal and rare” - as in rarely needed due to contraception and education. I am 100% pro-choice but any step we take to the “left” is just going to inflame things more.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarabelle (Original post)

Thu Jun 6, 2019, 09:05 AM

3. I have been actively involved in the Choice movement for forty years and

I have spoken with many hundreds of voters about this issue. Most voters that favor choice in EVERY instance are also NOT in favor of the government paying for abortions. They feel... Okay... your choice... your dollars. There are many other means of funding we can adopt in order to make sure there is a dollar pool to help those women who can't afford to pay for the procedure.

I can live with that if it keeps my body free of men's laws. Also... when the Government gets involved in paying for ANYTHING... that's when the strings attached to federal dollars become intrusive to the process.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarabelle (Original post)

Thu Jun 6, 2019, 09:17 AM

4. I am fine with Joe's position as well.

Which is why I make an annual Donation to Planned Parenthood so that women can get abortions at a reduced cost as well as Birth Control they need, etc.

If we all Donated to PP on an annual basis, the Hyde Amendment would not be needed.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudMNDemocrat (Reply #4)

Thu Jun 6, 2019, 09:26 AM

5. My thoughts exactly. I have a very religious family on my dad's side

who are morally opposed. They don't want their dollars paying for abortion. I donate to PP so they can't claim they do.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarabelle (Original post)

Thu Jun 6, 2019, 09:48 AM

6. It is telling poor women under Medicaid that if they are carrying a fetus with a birth defect,

termination of that pregnancy won't be covered by Medicaid. There more reasons then just rape, incest, or the life of the mother.

Of course people with means do not have to worry about this. This is directly against poor women

There are also other Democratic candidates running who are for the repeal of the Hyde Amendments. In fact I would say most if not all of the remaining candidates would be for its repeal. From what I am seeing, Joe is the odd man out on this.

This is an issue about discriminating against poor women, many who are minorities. It isn't an issue of if it will affect his poll numbers or not, it is what the right thing to do is.

If this was about segregation, would that be "acceptable"?

Because this is about segregation

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarabelle (Original post)

Thu Jun 6, 2019, 10:06 AM

7. In reality, not much chance of changing Hyde Amendment. It's been in place since 1976

(with some loosening from the original prohibition over the years).

Don't think we need that debate again under the current political climate, where even Roe v Wade is in jeopardy.

As suggested above, donations to Planned Parenthood, or similar groups, have worked for 40+ years and should be encouraged and promoted. It would be a different issue if that option were not available.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarabelle (Original post)

Thu Jun 6, 2019, 10:32 AM

8. Locking after a review by hosts

Per the announcement on Feb 20, 2019 by site administrators, all discussion of the Democratic Primaries and candidates belongs in the Democratic Primaries Forum. Please re-post there if you like.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink