There is a concerted and orchestrated effort to attack new pro-life legislation by focusing on “defending women’s health and reproductive rights” using a sleight-of-hand interpretation of the provisions in the various bills
Targeted are three bills, H.R. 3, No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act; H.R. 217, Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act; and H.R. 358, the Protect Life Act. These proposed bills would make a significant dent in the pro-abortion camp’s profitability column and agenda.
Rhetorical Assault: The Daily Kos says “H.R. 3 imposes a series of tax hikes on women and small businesses, in addition to outlawing legal and life-saving medical procedures in thousands of facilities around the country.”
Reality: No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion, H.R. 3, with 205 cosponsors means to prohibit federal funds for all abortions, with the usual exclusions for rape, incest, and a woman in danger of death. The measure would disallow tax credits for abortions or for health benefit plans that include abortion coverage, and medical deductions for abortions. This is not a tax hike. This does not raise taxes for small businesses. In order for this to be an actual tax hike, it would have to affect everyone and all businesses as a matter of course. If President Obama has his way and tax credits for home mortgages are eliminated across the board, THAT is a tax hike and it’s revenue generating. This is far too selective in nature and is better known as a benefit for those who end the life of unborn babies.
Rhetorical Assault: According to “women’s expert” Linda Lowen “H.R. 217 would deny federal family-planning funds under Title X to groups that offer abortion access such as Planned Parenthood. This would eliminate needed medical services for millions of women who use family planning clinics as their main source of health care.”
Reality: Rep. Mike Pence’s H.R. 217 with 164 cosponsors would defund the most notorious private for-profit abortion business in the country, Planned Parenthood, by ensuring that taxpayer money for family planning is denied to that organization. For 100 percent pro-lifers, a caution; there are exclusions in the bill for the usual “rape or an act of incest against a minor” and for a “woman in danger of death unless an abortion is performed, including a condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy.” It would not force these conditions on any hospital if said hospital doesn’t provide funds to any entity that performs abortions. Does H.R. 217 eliminate needed medical services for millions of women? Of course not. Planned Parenthood can still provide these tests, for a small fee, or better yet, as a free service, as they say they are so committed to providing. They can join crisis pregnancy centers providing services free of charge as an all-volunteer non-profit agency.
Rhetorical Assault: H.R. 358, the The Protect Life Act, says Daily Kos, who have actually labeled H.R. 358 “The Let Women Die” bill, “would make it legal for hospitals to deny women abortions, even if it meant a woman would die right then and there in the hospital without receiving one.” Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) said “under current law, if a woman comes in and she’s gonna die if she doesn’t get the medical service, then they have to provide that medical service. This new legislation would eliminate that law.” RH Reality Check and Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) have made similar comments.
Reality: The Protect Life Act, H.R. 358 with 121 cosponsors amends the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act -- ObamaCare -- by prohibiting federal funds from being to used to cover any part of the cost of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion services, upholding the Hyde Amendment. It would prohibit discrimination against institutions or individual entities based on the entity’s refusal to train or perform induced abortions, etc., meaning it restores the conscience clause that took a beating in ObamaCare. It also requires investigations into complaints for violations, and creates consequences for violating the law. This bill will in no way leave women in need of medical attention dying in emergency rooms. By restoring the conscience clause for health care facilities and providers it makes sure they are not discriminated against for declining involvement in abortions. They must and will treat patients; if a pregnant woman is the patient, both mother and baby will be treated separately and equally.
Those who support the policies of the Hyde Amendment and rights of conscience need to contact their representatives and urge them to vote for H.R. 358, H.R. 217 and H.R. 3. All three of these bills respect and promote the life and health of human beings, especially the preborn, and prevent the federal government from funding or promoting abortions with taxpayer money.
Thanks,
Your friends at The John Birch Society
No comments:
Post a Comment