Obama birth control policy

GOP vows to reverse Obama birth control policy

By DONNA CASSATA

   The Associated Press

   WASHINGTON — Republicans vowed Wednesday to reverse President Barack Obama’s new policy on birth control, lambasting the rule that religious schools and hospitals must provide contraceptive coverage for their employees as an “unambiguous attack on religious freedom in our country.”

   The White House pushed back in the face of a political firestorm, arguing that Obama was sensitive to the objections and looking for a way to allay the concerns. Democratic women lawmakers put up a united front in defending the administration.

   “Women’s health care should not depend on who the boss is,” said Illinois Rep. Jan Schakowsky.

   The fight over the administration mandate escalated as House Speaker John Boehner accused the administration of violating First Amendment rights and undermining some of the country’s most vital institutions, such as Catholic charities, schools and hospitals. He demanded that Obama rescind the policy or else Congress will.

   “This attack by the federal government on religious freedom in our country cannot stand, and will not stand,” Boehner, a Catholic and Ohio Republican, said in a floor speech rare for the speaker.

   The contentious issue has roiled the presidential race and angered religious groups, especially Catholics, who say the requirement would force them to violate church teachings and long-held beliefs against contraception.

   It also has pushed social issues to the forefront in an election year that has been dominated by the economy. Abortion, contraception and any of the requirements of Obama’s health care overhaul law have the potential to galvanize the Republicans’ conservative base, critical to voter turnout in the presidential and congressional races


Come on folks.  This has nothing to do with religious freedom, it has to do with women's freedom.

Time to stand up, fight for the unborn

   “Oh, but it’s a choice.” Tell that to the baby who is about to be slaughtered.  Wow, talk about emotional outrage.  Baby?  Slaughtered?

   If women are honest with themselves, they realize killing the unborn is attempting an easy fix for the immediate situation. They know they have a child within, or they would not request someone to remove the very small child.  Hmmm, this goes to the old question, when is a baby a baby?  At birth?  At conception?

   Abortion does not help the mother in crisis, it only adds to the burden she must endlessly endure.  What about the child that must endlessly endure an inept mother who creates a dysfunctional attitude in the child who later grows up to be a dysfunctional adult?

   For the last 40 years the only reason abortion has been tolerated is that women have been duped, lied to, threatened and coerced, being led to believe that this is compassion. What a contradiction in the blindingly white, sterile, cold, “clean” clinical death chamber.  The reason abortion is tolerated is because women were having quacks cutting out their unwanted baby and them dying by septicemia.

   Now we are faced with a mandate, an order, by the government, to provide health/“death” care insurance for those who demand to use it. You or employers have no choice, no ability to use one’s own conscience for decision-making. Your conscience is no longer of value. Your tax dollars will fund the onslaught and butchering of innocent, unborn children.  The argument is so trite, I debated whether or not to blog about it, but decided I had to.  This woman is living in the 18th century where a woman's body was not her own but her husband's: love, honor and OBEY.

   “Evil persists when good men do nothing.”  She's right about this.  That's why we voted in Rowe V Wade.

   Are you ready to do something? Will you stand and fight for the unborn? Haven’t we been sitting quietly long enough and letting the evils prevail?  God NO!

   Here’s one way to let your opinion be recognized: get factual information, go to www.stophhs  . com/sign-the-petition Also write to our congressmen.

   Wouldn’t it be wonderful if mothers’ wombs were as safe as cars? Ninety people died each day in 2010 from car accidents but 3,700 (yes!) babies die each day by the abortionist’s hand, and 93 percent of them because the babies are an “inconvenience.” (Statistics from Guttmacher and Centers for Disease Control. Who knew? Pregnancy is a disease?) 54,000,000-plus dead babies is enough!

   Don’t you agree with your mother’s choice?  How would I know?  I wasn't there when she 'chose.'

   Susan Hamilton, Nampa