Skip to comments.The Abortion Battle In The House
Posted on 04/11/2011 10:10:49 AM PDT by jenk
Dan Riehl points out that the leadership used the military in order to get the numbers on the budget.
Many Republicans wanted the military removed from the equation early on. That's also likely why Rep. Michele Bachmann is mentioning the issue and Kay Bailey Hutchinson is now sponsoring a bi-partisan bill in the Senate to remove military pay from future budget skirmishes. Many are furious with Boehner for exploiting servicemen and women and their families for a battle in DC, while so many are risking their lives overseas.
Tea Party-affiliated Republican Rep. Allen West of Florida is out with a statement in which he says he is "disgusted at the perception that Leaders in my own Party...are now using the men and women in uniform" to pass a short-term budget bill.
I'd like to point out that Boehner used the unborn as well.
The issue of abortion, a social issue, is sectioned off by the Republican Party as part of the views of the religious right. Unfortunately, and this has to change, the view of tea party sentiment is that it is only fiscal, and not social. That view is bogus. One of the first things Obama did as president was increase funding for abortions internationally. Stupak was ousted by the tea party for using abortion to pass Obamacare. And besides, the tea party is about upholding the Constitution, even if the past Supreme Court Justices did not. Abortion is a constitutional issue.
One of the main problems I have with the leadership is that they did not properly explain why the defunding of Planned Parenthood was so crucial. They allowed Slaughter and the rest to use the incidental purposes of Planned Parenthood to be repeated over and over again, and I know why. It is because many people in the Republican Party do not know, and therefore cannot articulate, that the reason legal abortion exists in America is because of Planned Parenthood.
Mark Levin's book, "Men In Black" lays it out very simply. There is no right to privacy under the constitution. Planned Parenthood brought the court case Poe v. Ullman, which layed the groundwork for the oft repeated mantra, "getting the government out of our bedrooms." Then Planned Parenthood brought "Griswold v. Connecticut, and the right to privacy became constitutional law." (pg. 57) Griswold was the executive director of Planned Parenthood in Connecticut. Then, in Roe v. Wade, the ground work laid by Planned Parenthood legalized murder of the unborn.
I'm willing to bet our leadership does not know this. But ignorance is only temporary.
Here's what really makes this all terrible. The left made a big deal about Republicans wanting to kill women, and it looked like the Republicans didn't have a coherent response to that. I have often said that legal abortion has killed 26 million women since '73. That's a good argument. Look, I'm just a seamstress in a small town, I came up with a doozy, why doesn't our leadership try? You have to state your case and continue to convince people. Saying, "Well that's just ridiculous," does nothing to further your cause, and does not explain your position in clear terms.
In the end, we settled for an up or down vote in the Senate, we all know that won't go anywhere, because the Senate is more squeamish about social issues than the House, and we have the ditzy twins from Maine who don't really think murdering innocents is all that bad.
At the end of the day, as part of their spin-making, the leadership continually pointed out that the budget deal was a successful one, since they did get some defunding of abortions. "The agreement includes a complete ban on local and federal funding of abortion in the District of Columbia, applying the pro-life principles of the Hyde Amendment (D.C. Hyde). "
Obamacare became an abortion issue because of my ex-representative Stupak. Now, the budget became an abortion issue. Obama signed the executive order that stopped federal funding of abortion in Obamacare, remember?
That Executive Order does not change the law of Obamacare, I know that. But would it have hurt if the leadership brought up this very memorable fight from last year? Unless we are supposed to believe that banning DC abortions is some sort of great start for America? Little nibble here, little nibble there, huh?
If Obamacare continues to be implemented, tell me again how this grand DC deal banning federal and local funds for abortion means anything in the cause for Life?
The leadership went to bat on funding the military and defunding abortion, two huge America-is-behind-you issues, and they came away with nothing after all the stress.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.