Obama reverses abortion funding policy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PhillyPhan
  • Start date Start date
P

PhillyPhan

Guest
Please read this carefully before you answer, I really want to learn about why this has been done! At first, When I read this headline, I felt my heart sink. I don't want my Government offering money to organizations who delve out abortions to third world countries and provide abortion education. My question to the YA community is this: Is there a good reason (or reasons) for Obama reversing the policy we had under Bush regarding abortion funding?Thanks to everyone who answered. I get it. I don't agree with abortion for myself. However, I have not lived in a way where I could not feed my babies either, or been raped and become pregnant, or anything like that. Like one of the answerers said, ALL options should be available to humans in need of resources. Thanks again to everyone for your answers.
 
Reagan started it in 1983. Clinton reversed it in 1993. Bush put it back in 2001. It's a political ping-pong ball.
 
He is not "funding international abortions."He is funding groups that do abortions, or provide info on abortions; but not JUST that.They provide family counseling, teen counseling, abstinence education, birth control methods, adoption information (and sometimes adoption placements), and ALL info on abortion (including the emotional ramifications of going with that as the choice).They do far more than JUST abortions, and they don't encourage abortions. They simply provide info, ALL info, on the subject. And I do agree with Obama doing that. Because education is the key to ending abortion. No one aborts a wanted pregnancy, so education can help them avoid unwanted pregnancies. These places provide information on how to avoid an unwanted pregnancy; so the girl can make sure that she only gets pregnant when she actually wants to be.And if she accidentally gets pregnant anyway, she is provided the help she needs (even if the family won't or can't stand by her) in hopes that it will be enough to convince her to have the baby.
 
Of course there is a good reason for this. Women are now given more opportunities to have an abortion. Money is now going to be sent to abortion faculties.
 
It's being reported falsely in a lot of the press. It isn't funding FOR abortion. It's funding for widely recognized health organizations that were denied funding under the Bush administration because they accepted abortion as a viable option in some cases.So it isn't money directly for abortion. It's money for health organizations that aren't against abortion.
 
The president is going to reverse many of the former prezidents policies. Get used to it. Life goes on, we suffered for eight years in the dark, at last there is light at the end of that dark tunnel
 
Bush reversed Clinton's policy, which was a policy put in place by Reagan and reversed by Clinton.Not a big deal.
 
Educating people, no matter where they are from that you can avoid pregnancy by using condoms is the only intelligent program and that is what the funding will do.
 
i think its wrong but people shouldnt be surprised...Obama was for abortion during the run for president he told Evryone!
 
1. Safety2. Availability 3. Professionally skilled staffs4. Increased care and services offered.These are generalizations that include a ton of important components to make abortions and garnering information on sex in general safe and accessible. It's the woman's right to choose and she should be able to pick a place based on reputation -- not price.
 
Countries need abortions badly. They'll be a lot better off. Just look at what's happening to places like China and India. And all those rapes in Africa. ProLife can't understand that because we dont have those problems here in America. Who gives a damn about dead embryos? We barely give a damn about starving suffering children in overpopulated 3rd world countries.
 
Sure. How many of those unwanted babies are you, personally, willing to adopt?If your answer was less than "several hundred," then it isn't going to be enough, even if every pro-lifer in the country matches your pledge. Until we can get birth control and comprehensive sex education out there, abortion is the least bad choice for limiting the number of children born to a life of starvation, abuse, and poverty.Notice I didn't say a GOOD choice - just the least bad one.
 
Because Bush was a religious fundamentalist. He also banned funding to any organization that advocated condom use. Basically, the only family planning organizations operating in Africa that got funding from Bush were those advocating abstinence only. Many of those also handed out food and then held a revival immediately after.The implications was not lost on those receiving aid - convert or starve.Obama is changing this practice. Why do you have a problem with that?
 
The two Bush's and Reagan are the only administrations who put a block on these funds. Nixon, Ford, Carter, Clinton and now Obama believe that the rest of the developing world has the right to know that abortion may also be an alternative.
 
hi, you have to consider the source (liberals). politics is all about money only. they have no moral values. to them MONEY is king! to them abortion is not murder.
 
there is other presidents that reversed it , its only a big deal now because he is black and whites are trying to find any little piece they can find to make him look bad...even though every other president has lied and done much more worse.whether he supports or doesn't support, there will be plenty of people who will always oppose his decision.
 
The reason is that he believes that it is a woman's right to choose and be informed of her choices. He probably also believes that women have the right to an education and not to be weighed down with innumerable children that they cannot feed or care for. He may also believe that organizations that help people globally shouldn't have to be gagged if they want funding and should offer women all of the choices at their disposal not just what some others believe is right for them. Basically he believes that a woman has rights. If you don't believe that then that is your right but don't inflict your beliefs on others.
 
there are no good reasons for this. It is not the United States job to be helping other countries handle their own business and I can't believe people voted for a candidate who wants to do just that.about not "inflicting" our beliefs on others...that is what the President is doing funding programs to tell people about something that he believes in. It is absolutely ridiculous.
 
There really isn't a good reason as to why he is doing this. Another law that pro abortion people are trying to get passed and may go through states that partial birth abortion (the baby is delivered feet first so it is technically not "born" yet and scissors are inserted into the baby's head and it's brain is taken out so it is born dead) will be legal throughout the United States and all OB/GYN's will have to be able to perform an abortion even if it goes against their moral beliefs, religious beliefs, or general opinions.How sick is that?
 
Back
Top