Democrat Rep: ending taxpayer abortion funding an imposition of ‘religious beliefs’

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/democrat-rep-ending-taxpayer-abortion-funding-an-imposition-of-reli ^ | 5/4/11 | Kathleen Gilbert

[pogo101]

Yup.

http://www.godlessprolifers.org/, for example.

[rightly_dividing]

Gee....Hmmm....... Thanks!

[Salvation]

Thanks for picking up this story. I looked earlier and didn’t see it.

Now if we can just convince the Senate to defund PlannedParenthood too.

[FreeKeys]

WRONG! Forcing us to pay for abortions is forcing us to deny our religious beliefs!

Exactly.

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." – Thomas Jefferson, 1779.

[musicman]

Less Than $16k To Go!!
Just A Reminder
Please Don't Forget
To Donate To FR

[marstegreg]

Brilliant! Thank you!!!

[chimera]

How about the government stay neutral on personal issues and let the individual decide for themselves what he believes is right?

You can believe what you want. The purpose of laws in a civilized society is to restrain harmful acts, especially those that injure others. Where the pro-abortion argument fails most crucially is on two points. First, it ignores the scientific truth that a unique, individuated human life begins at conception. Second, it ignores a founding principle of this Republic, which is that we are created equal, endowed by our Creator with unalienable rights, including, among others, the right to life. As they address those issues (the reality of human life at conception based on scientific evidence and the concept that you have unalienable rights), laws protecting the life of the unborn are imminently defensible, religious arguments or not.

[marstegreg]

As they address those issues (the reality of human life at conception based on scientific evidence and the concept that you have unalienable rights), laws protecting the life of the unborn are imminently defensible, religious arguments or not.

I know. I feel the same but we can’t change it all at once. It is the law and we must deal with it methodically. First and foremost is the funding, making all of us participate in the practice whether we support it or not is the first step. That needs to change, now. Making it completely illegal is going to be a much bigger hurdle. Let us not forget that there is another side to this debate and they will fight us every step of the way. In the meantime, We just keep chipping away....and chipping away

[chimera]

I understand. My point was that the ‘Rat Congressperson was using the old bait-and-switch, tried-and-true ‘Rat method of changing the subject and casting the debate in religious terms, using the focus group-tested phrase “imposing beliefs on others”. A typical variation is using the focus group-tested phrase “shoving your beliefs down our throats”. It is an appeal to an emotional image when in fact a very logical argument can be made for the pro-life position without invoking “religious” beliefs, but simply invoking scientific truth (life begins at conception) and the foundational principles of our Republic (unalienable rights). IOW, the premise of this pro-abortion politician is specious and fatally flawed.

[marstegreg]

I see things changing. People are beginning to see the incredible filth eminating from Washington. More and more of us are waking up every day. Take Heart....it will happen, just not tomorrow. :)