Abortion Measure Passes, Then Fails, in House.

[elleng]

Source: AP/NYT

An anti-abortion amendment to a sweeping health overhaul bill was voted down in a House committee late Thursday -- a dramatic reversal just hours after the measure initially was approved.


Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/07/30/us/politics/AP-US-Health-Overhaul-Abortion.html

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. Waxman is a force to be contended with!

Good for him.

And for the two Congressmen who voted NO.

Whew.

K&R

[ccharles000]

2. k/r

[ccharles000]

3. k/r

[barbtries]

4. i should hope so.

what the hell. let us move forward.

[Blandocyte]

5. Givin' this the R

It's so nice to see religious issues and legal issues being separated. They can exist side by side-- let's not try to make one into the other!

[iamjoy]

6. What This Shows...

Is how precarious our reproductive rights are.

[ripper409]

7. Amazing

the fact that no one cares how religion has permeated our federal government is astonishing, creating laws based on the words of god, and not a doctor, or common sense, will drive this country to become the ultimate antithesis of its founding. I love how the bible thumpers claim to be upholding the views of our founding fathers when they were atheists.

[stlsaxman]

20. Good post and welcome to DU! But i have an honest question...

Did the amendment actually contain the "words of god"? if biblical quotes were put into the bill, they're getting pretty damned bold... yikes!

Or was yours a general statement and not referring to this particular legislation? I looked for wording but didn't find it in the article.

[Fedja]

40. He was generalizing.

Now.. not even having seen the amendment, how do I know that?

Because the Bible in no way shape or form ever takes a position on abortion. It's not even word of God, it's worse. It's the word of old white guys who don't like women very much.

[RaleighNCDUer]

55. the word of old white guys who don't like women very much

who CLAIM to speak for god.

[Titanothere]

30. Correction: The Founding Fathers weren't aethiests

Not sure where you got that from.

Religious Affiliation of U.S. Founding Fathers
# of Founding Fathers | % of Founding Fathers
Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%
Quaker 7 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 3.7%
Lutheran 5 3.1%
Catholic 3 1.9%
Huguenot 3 1.9%
Unitarian 3 1.9%
Methodist 2 1.2%
Calvinist 1 0.6%
TOTAL 204

[ElboRuum]

42. Most were, actually...

At the time, NO ONE was an atheist. To be so was to risk extreme persecution. Even in the days of the Enlightenment, agnosticism/atheism was generally considered to be beyond the pale of polite society. Many of the Founding Fathers were best described, and often self-described as Deists, which is about as close to agnosticism and atheism as you could get during the time period, essentially meaning the belief in some sort of organizing force in the universe but being extremely circumspect as to not put a name on it. You have to remember that at the time, the full flower of the Enlightenment, the educated men of Western societies were putting their "faith" in science and the arts, most were dabblers in science and the arts as well, the most notable of which was Benjamin Franklin. While some wanted religious language placed in the Constitution and in the Declaration of Independence and also wanted no mention of church/state separation, the fact that such phrases as "are endowed by God with certain inalienable rights" got morphed into the less specific "are endowed by their Creator" indicates clearly the Deist/secular influence in these debates.

The fact is that whatever faith they claimed to be is not adequate to describe what these men believed.

[JDPriestly]

57. Have you actually read Jefferson and Adams' letters on religion?

They hated the Catholic church and superstition. Jefferson was pretty definitely a deist. Have you read the Jefferson Bible? Or at least seen a copy? It's fascinating.

You can't just read a list of the official religious affiliations of the Founding Fathers and know what side they were on. Whether the Founding Fathers were Christian depends on which Founding Fathers you are talking about and how you define Christianity. Patrick Henry was a traditional Christian. But many of the other Founding Fathers fell along a spectrum much further from traditional Christianity and in several cases from the Christianity we know today.

And Benjamin Franklin liked one preacher for a period of time but was simply not very interested in religion most of his life.

One great story is that, at the time of Franklin, people believed and preachers taught that God punished people by causing lightening to strike their houses. As a result, in general, people did not want to put out fires in houses if the fires were caused by lightening. Franklin's famous experiment with the kite and the lightening, his work with electricity, put the lie to that foolish superstition. Franklin was then instrumental in starting a volunteer fire department in Philadelphia. A most unChristian thing to do if you believed that the lightening was the instrument of God. The Founding Fathers lived in a time of transition between a religion of darkness, ignorance and superstition and the tempering of belief with knowledge and understanding of the natural world through scientific study.

Christianity has changed a lot over the past 300 years or so. The Enlightenment changed the whole world. Christian or not, the Founding Fathers, all of them, were men of the Enlightenment. The truths of Science were becoming known and placed in doubt many of the core beliefs of the Christianity of the day. So, hard to say whether they were "Christian." Again, depends on how you define Christianity.

Check me out. J.D. Priestly

[GillesDeleuze]

73. jefferson, adams, franklin

... at most spiritual were deists, at their most atheist, spinozans.

[Strong Atheist]

38. Welcome to DU!

:toast:

[KakistocracyHater]

82. Deists not atheists, Nature's Deity

*"he government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion<...>" - Thomas Jefferson

"The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity." - John Adams, Signer of The Constitution

"If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians thought persecution extremely wrong in the Pagans, but practiced it on one another. The first Protestants of the Church of England blamed persecution in the Romish church, but practiced it upon the Puritans. These found it wrong in the Bishops, but fell into the same practice themselves both here and in New England." - Ben Franklin

[high density]

8. It's about time we use procedure to our advantage

The Repukes weren't afraid to do it when they were in charge.

[comtec]

9. HOW THE FLYING FUCK DID THIS HAPPEN!??!!?

I mean... to have even fucking PASSED?!?!?!?!

I swear every day I hear one of these insane stories I look in my pants and thank GOD(dess?) that I'm a boy!

this is beyond fucking insane!!!

I fear for my niece's future rights! =[

[Initech]

63. The pukes tried to pull a fast one.

I swear the pro-lifers are getting scarier and scarier by the day. Hell I remember watching the CNN coverage of the pro-life protest at Obama's Notre Dame commencement. These people are sick motherfuckers and the vast majority of them sounded like serial killers (apologies to Dexter).

[LisaM]

65. Don't dignify by calling them pro-lifers

That's THEIR language. Call them what they are, anti-abortion women haters.

[Jim Sagle]

66. Forced birthers.

[Hepburn]

68. Forced birth anti-choicers....NOT pro-life. n/t

[Initech]

69. Oh yeah that's right. They're not pro life. They're just evil dipshits.

I like what Bill Hicks said - "If you're so committed to this pro-life idea, don't block abortion clinics. Instead lock arms and block cemetaries."

[Posteritatis]

76. You think congressmen read the legislation before they vote on it? (nt)

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sutz12]

10. That's a thin margin for the 21st Century..

The Re-cons would repeal the enlightenment if they could.

Thank God and Henry Waxman for protecting the reproductive rights of my American sisters.

[President Decider]

11. Something told me 2 weeks ago the issue of "Abortion" was at the center of this feet dragging

PASS HEALTH CARE REFORM NOW!

I knew these cancerous idealogical evangelicals had to be involved in this somehow!

[Scout]

12. good n/t

[Window]

13. Boyfriend knows his stuff! Way to go Waxman!

:dem:

[Carl Skan]

14. Say what you want but this is playing into the hands

of those against the bill passing at all. Now, it's going to be sold as federal funding of abortions which is MUCH easier to get people riled up over.

[customerserviceguy]

15. Agreed

If there is not a list of exclusions, then the bill will be attacked as providing "free" medical marijuana, boob jobs, sex-change operations, etc.

[Carl Skan]

17. Not sure if you were being sarcastic

but you don't spend time around pro life people if you think that's a valid comparison.

[customerserviceguy]

81. No, it's not sarcasm, and it's not a direct comparison

It's just a short list of things that you can find at least a sizable minority of people NOT wanting to pay for. There are many more, and I suspect we're bound to hear them discussed in the halls of Congress before the President has a bill to sign.

[mac56]

16. settle down, there

Those who are against the passing of this bill are going to find some reason to get riled up about it, regardless. Most people in this country are in favor of at least some abortion rights. And if the RW hasn't moved to outlaw it by now, they aren't ever going to do it. For just the reason you wrote: it's useful ammunition for them to fire up their base.

[Carl Skan]

18. There's a HUGE difference between outlawing it and funding it.

[mac56]

19. just the same

If they had wanted this to be gone, it would all have been gone by now. They don't.

[Carl Skan]

21. No reason to hijack the thread

but passing laws is useless in the face of the Supreme Court. They are making (well, were making under Bush) their push through court appointments.

And yes, this will become THE issue regarding health care reform over the next week. It's relatively hard to get a group of Christians to stand up against health care for the poor. Throw in the fact that they'll now be paying for abortions when they pay their taxes and you'll have a hard time getting them to sit down.

The kind of people this gets riled up are the reason blue dogs exist in the first place.

[defendandprotect]

35. So all of your thinking is based on compromise due to fear . . . ???

[defendandprotect]

24. Why wouldn't you fund abortion -- especially for poor women?

[Carl Skan]

26. If you want an abortion debate

please go find somebody else to play that never ending game with.

[defendandprotect]

31. Excuse me . . . but when you suggest women's reproductive rights should be

denied in our health care program, then YOU are suggesting the need for debate!

[Carl Skan]

34. Excuse me...but where did anybody suggest

outlawing abortion?

[defendandprotect]

37. "Outlawing abortion" . . . ??? You are against "FUNDING" it . .. correct?

Only YOU have mentioned "outlawing abortion" . . .

What you seem to be against is "funding abortion" . . .
that is the basis of my questions to you --

[Carl Skan]

39. And again...

"There's a HUGE difference between outlawing it and funding it."

If you are not honest enough to acknowledge that fact, I'm not sure why you would expect me to reply.

Nobody is voting on denying women reproductive rights, you are the one that brought up that red herring. The vote was on the government subsidizing abortions.

[Strong Atheist]

41. Belated Welcome to DU!

:toast:

[defendandprotect]

45. When you fail to "subsidize" abortions for poor women, you are denying them that right!!

That was the emphasis I made three posts back which you're still not getting.

Every other nation funds abortion as a medical procedure.

Why shouldn't we?

And why shouldn't Americans be prepared to defend the right to reproductive freedom

for ALL -- rich and poor?

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[defendandprotect]

48. We certainly used to have programs for affordable housing . . .

welfare guarantees -- overturned by Clinton after 60 years -- used to provide
housing, as well.

We certainly helped the Middle-Class buy homes! Why not the poor?

If you recheck your posts ... you will note that the "leaps" have been made by you.

And the question remains . . . why shouldn't America fund Abortion just as every

other nation funds abortion?

Bye --

[katandmoon]

52. During the Clinton years, Federal employee policies WERE allowed to cover abortion

Clinton restored that coverage following the Reagan/Bush I years. Bush II immediately rescinded it.

Obama has not restored it as far as I have been able to discover. (If you are a federally employed woman who gets pregnant and doesn't want to be, you must pay for your abortion yourself. If of course you get pregnant and DO want to be, the rest of us WILL help you pay for THAT.)

But from early 1992 - early 2000, the health insurance plans which Federal employees chose among, either when they were first hired or during the "open season" every November, WERE allowed to cover abortion.

And I don't recall that ever even being an issue. Of course the internet didn't really exist in 1992 and I didn't move in anti-choice circles.

[kestrel91316]

60. Wow. You just compared unwanted pregnancy/abortion with

buying a home.

Words fail me.

[Hepburn]

70. Aren't you in the wrong place?

You seem to belong here:

www.freerepublic.com

[bain_sidhe]

54. Why is it only anti-choicers...

...who get to say how their tax dollars can be used? There are all kinds of things I am really, really morally opposed to, and don't want my tax dollars to fund - and I suspect there are many who agree with my "preferences," at least as many as there are anti-choicers - but somehow, laws never take *MY* moral concerns into consideration when deciding what can and can't be funded with tax dollars.

What makes their "moral concerns" so special?

[mopinko]

27. the hyde amendment remains in force. no federal money for abortion.

period. settled law. until it is repealed. it won't be covered in the plan.

[defendandprotect]

32. It needs to be repealed and we need to move into the 20th century . . .

free from what the founders intended -- free from religious entanglements in government affairs!

Free from religious restrictions on non-members --

[mopinko]

75. true dat, however

that is the settled law of the land right now.

[Warren Stupidity]

78. applies to medicaid.

it is not 'settled law', it is a simple legislative act that applies specifically to medicaid funding from the federal government. The only thing settled about it is that the USSC has not found it to be unconstitutional. Other programs have their own restrictions. There is nothing to prevent new legislation for existing or new programs from implementing similar restrictions, or from not implementing similar restrictions, or from completely undoing existing restrictions, such as the hideous hyde amendment to the medicaid funding bill.

[defendandprotect]

33. When poor women can't get abortions because they can't afford them . . .

that's the same as not having the right to an abortion --

[kestrel91316]

61. Uh, show me the real world difference.

[GodlessBiker]

36. Not for poor women. It's pretty much the same thing.

[defendandprotect]

23. Pretty much every nation funds abortion as a medical procedure . . .

why should we be different ---

If you're not willing to stand up for women's rights, what are you standing up for?

[valerief]

43. We have abstinence instead. That's really working well for us.

:sarcasm:

[defendandprotect]

46. And, poor women on Medicaid get a generic form of the pill which is less effective--!!!

Was just reading that the other day in a new book - "Abortion & Life" by
Jennifer Baumgarden.

they came to realize that many of the poor women who get the less effective
generic versions are the ones seeking abortions!!!

[valerief]

64. This country is an embarrassment to humanity. nt

[Warren Stupidity]

74. another vote for tossing women under the bus!

say what you want, but I think your opinion of this is crap.

[wicket]

22. Excellent

[defendandprotect]

25. Thank you, Senator Waxman for standing up for reproductive freedom -- !!!

[Odin2005]

28. K&R

[xchrom]

29. a great big thank you to henry waxman

and a great big fuck you to those of you who let it get this close.

[pleah]

44. K&R

[cadmium]

49. excellent outcome and a great illustration of

how things work in these negotiations. Very Close!

[derby378]

50. Does this mean there's a lot more conservatism among House Dems than previously thought?

:shrug:

[Eyerish]

51. K&R

Thank You Henry!

[KansDem]

53. It's good to hear that the Constitution as trumped the whims of anti-choicers...

Even if it's just a "goddamn piece of paper."

[heliarc]

56. Fuck Yeah!

Feels good to win again every once and a while. Damn it feels good. It's easily been 13 years since they've given us anything to work with. Right on!

[David__77]

58. Good. These points can be negotiated later.

Give nothing now.

[plantwomyn]

59. Waxman voted for the amendment the first go round!

http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090730/hr3200_pitts_1_rc.pdf

[ehrnst]

62. So much for EITHER abortion funding OR public plan option...

Just had to gloat to those that said we'd be sacrificing health reform for all if we insisted on basic health services for women....

[Sarah Ibarruri]

67. You know what scares me?

The fact that Democrats have to kowtow to so many right wing religious whackos in religious whacko states, or they won't be elected. THAT is what scares me. Religious people terrify me, particularly those in Islam, and those in this country.

[winyanstaz]

71. Its past time due to clean the house.....

We have people in there that refused to impeach Bush.

[Warren Stupidity]

72. women are still important to the democratic party? who knew?

Sometimes we actually get some good news.

[earth mom]

77. FYI-a FUNDIE was put in charge of the National Institutes of Health because Obama

wanted to appease the jesus freaks.

Those whack jobs NEVER EVER quit. :puke:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8562062

From the article in the above link:

As director of the National Institutes of Health, Collins will have a different role from his position as a scientist. He will head the most important and well-funded scientific organization on the planet. Over the next 14 months, NIH will spend $4 billion on research at its Bethesda, Maryland campus, while distributing $37 billion in research grants throughout the United States and around the world.

Harvard experimental psychologist Steven Pinker wrote, “I have serious misgivings about Francis Collins being appointed director of NIH. It’s not that I think that there should be a religious litmus test for public science administrators, or that being a devout Christian is a disqualification. But in Collins’s case, it is not a matter of private belief, but public advocacy. The director of NIH is not just a bureaucrat who tends the money pipeline ... He or she is also a public face of science, someone who commands one of the major bully pulpits for science in the country. The director testifies before Congress, sets priorities, selects speakers and panelists, and is in many regards a symbol for biomedical research in the US and the world. In that regard, many of Collins’s advocacy statements are deeply disturbing.”

<snip>

Whatever the particular religious views of the nominee to head the NIH, however, the political significance of his selection by Obama is obvious. As in every significant area of policymaking—the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the bailout of Wall Street, the assault on democratic rights and social benefits—the Democratic administration of Barack Obama is continuing and deepening the right-wing course of its Republican predecessor.

[MasonJar]

79. Bravo!

[MasonJar]

80. Bravo!

[Name removed]

83. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.