Comments on: Senate Approves Ban On Public Funding For Abortions

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 22:57:27 +0000

If abortion IS murder, it should not be allowed. You don’t allow murder for convenience or to reduce risk or because the father was a rapist or a family member.

If abortion is NOT murder, it should not be hindered. Every pregnancy involves some risk of death to the pregnant woman. If she doesn’t want to take that risk and is not murdering anyone, that’s her business alone.

If there is doubt in anyone’s mind, he or she should not be forced to pay for it whether it is allowed or not.

As it stands now, women have the right to decide for themselves but others don’t have to take part in their decision. You might say they are allowed to be conscientious objectors. Those who believe in it are still free to contribute to the action, then live and die with the consequences.

David for certainty

By: DW

DW — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 14:32:59 +0000

Making abortion inaccessible to the most needy is cruel and heartless. No woman intentionally gets pregnant so she can have an abortion. This is real life and accidents happen, women and even young girls are raped, and find themselves in a losing situation. Sometimes abortion is the only way out of the situation. By not allowing or putting severe restrictions on the option of having the abortion means denying the woman the opportunity to move on with her life and hopefully have a better one. Not having the abortion means her life may be hell forever and that of the child as well. Until all fertilized embryos can be safely removed and replanted somewhere wanted, it should be up to the woman who finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy to proceed how she chooses!!

By: molino jim

molino jim — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 01:24:24 +0000

CAROLYN: I GUESS YOU ARE RIGHT–WE COULD ALWAYS GO BACK TO THE GOOD OLD DAYS AND USED A WIRE COAT HANGER IN AN ALLEYWAY. I FEEL THERE ARE ONLY THREE PEOPLE WHO CAN MAKE A VERY HARD DECISION LIKE THIS–A WOMANS DOCTOR, THE WOMAN AND HER GOD , HOW EVER SHE VIEWS GOD. IT’S EASY TO JUDGE, BUT I HAVE SEEN GIRLS 12/13 YOA WHO WERE GOING TO HAVE A BABY AND THE FAMILY KICKS THEM OUT. THIS IS TRULY A LOSE-LOSE SITUATION. THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE WHO ARE WILLING TO ADOPT A CHILD, SO THE CHILD ENDS UP IN FOSTER CARE THAT IS SOME TIMES GOOD/SOME TIMES BAD. SO MANY TIMES THE “MOTHERS” BECOME STREET WALKERS JUST TO LIVE. MANY TIMES THE SIMPLE ANSWER TO A PROBLEM IS NOT SO SIMPLE.

By: really

really — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:15:22 +0000

to Carolyn regarding: “They should not have made any exceptions. No tax dollars should be used to murder unborn babies.”

So, if you, your daughter or mother was RAPED, WOULD DIE if you went thru with the pregnancy, or if the fetus was already dead, you wouldn’t want insurance to pay coverage for your HEALTH?!

I think if you pay for health insurance, your HEALTH should be INSURED! REGARDLESS of what particular health problem it may be. Make sense to anyone else?

By: Carolyn Bramblett

Carolyn Bramblett — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 10:46:45 +0000

They should not have made any exceptions. No tax dollars should be used to murder unborn babies.

By: huh

huh — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 06:31:31 +0000

I could see not funding random abortions, makes sense. But if its a medical issue and the health of the mother is involved. Then I think it should be ok