House Democrats File Bill to Force All Americans to Fund Abortions

[MyLadiesDaddy]

This is how far out of touch Governor Andrew Cuomo is with reality. In New York state, the Bastion of Democratic Socialist is approval numbers are tanking.

 

 

 

[patrickgold]

On ‎2‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 9:59 AM, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

I pray to God you pay for your evil Johnny boy 

 

 

Traitor of our Constitutional rights.  What a sick, sick bonehead!!! His justice will be served. Karma indeed.

Edited February 13, 2019 by patrickgold

[MyLadiesDaddy]

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

And to think that some here 

wonder why I point out what the 

Democratic Socialist actually think

 

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

We will Loose our souls 

and Our Country, Our Freedom, Our Independence 

if We Don't ALL rise up and Put this Evil Down.

God will NO LONGER TOLERATE OUR INDIFFERENCE 

 

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

Rhode Island Bills Will Legalize Abortions Up to Birth, Including Partial-Birth Abortions

 STATE   MICAIAH BILGER   FEB 19, 2019

 

 

A leading pro-life organization warned that two Rhode Island bills being considered this winter would legalize abortion up to birth even with proposed amendments.

 

One bill, the Rhode Island Reproductive Health Care Act, co-sponsored by state Rep. Edith H. Ajello, would strip away even minor, common-sense abortion regulations – ones that a strong majority of Americans support. It would eliminate protections for unborn babies, including the partial-birth abortion ban and abortion clinic regulations, and codify Roe v. Wade into state law in case the U.S. Supreme Court overturns the ruling. Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union are lobbying for the bill.

A second pro-abortion bill, sponsored by state Rep. Anastasia Williams, similarly would keep the state from passing even minor abortion restrictions by prohibiting any such restrictions before or “after fetal viability when necessary to preserve the health or life” of the mother.

Rhode Island Right to Life, a leading advocate in the fight for unborn babies, said state abortion activists have been deceiving the public.

“Contrary to false assertions by bill proponents and local media, expert legal analysisdemonstrates how, among many serious issues, both bills allow for abortion in Rhode Island up to the moment of birth, and for virtually any reason whatsoever,” the pro-life group said this week.

It also warned that several proposed amendments would not do anything to protect unborn babies.

“Multiple sources have privately confirmed to us that abortion proponents are planning an amended (Sub A) version of these bills, likely the Williams bill (H5125),” it said. “They will falsely claim that the cleverly and deceptively amended language resolves many of the problems we have demonstrated. Some abortion activists may even publicly pretend opposition as a ruse for assisting its passage.”

SIGN THE PETITION: Stop Infanticide! Stop Abortions Up to Birth!

The pro-life group urged people to call their lawmakers and urge them to oppose both bills, as well as the worthless amendments.

While both bills appear to allow restrictions for late-term abortions, they add a broad “health” exception for abortions after viability. The exception would allow women to abort unborn babies up to nine months of pregnancy for basically any “health” reason, including “age, economic, social and emotional factors,” a definition given by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Doe v. Bolton.

Gov. Gina Raimondo, who claims to be Catholic, has been pushing for the legislation. Writing to state Rep. Robert Craven, chair of the state House Committee on the Judiciary, she said she “strongly supports” Ajello’s bill, state House Bill 5127.

“I believe that no one should get in the middle of a decision between a woman and her doctor and that no woman should have to choose between health care and making ends meet,” she wrote.

Raimondo claimed that everyone wants to reduce unwanted pregnancies and abortions, but the legislation that she supports would do the opposite.

If either bill passes, America could see abortion rates rise after a steady decline for decades. Both are similar to a New York law that Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed in January, legalizing abortion for basically any reason up to birth. The Vermont, Massachusetts and New Mexico legislatures also are considering bills this winter to expand late-term abortions.

ACTION: Contact the Rhode Island legislature to oppose this bill. And contact Gov. Gina Raimondo to oppose the bill.

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

[MyLadiesDaddy]

[MyLadiesDaddy]

Ohio Bill Will Ban Abortions After Baby’s Heartbeat Begins, Governor Mike DeWine Will Sign It

 STATE   MICAIAH BILGER   FEB 12, 2019   |   11:52AM    COLUMBUS, OHIO

 

 

Ohio finally appears poised to pass a bill to ban abortions after an unborn baby has a detectable heartbeat this year.

 

State lawmakers came close to passing the pro-life legislation in 2016 and 2018, but then-Gov. John Kasich vetoed both bills. This year, with Republicans in control of both state houses and new Gov. Mike DeWine saying he will sign the legislation, it looks like it will pass.

The Springfield News-Sun reports state Reps. Candice Keller and Ron Hood introduced a heartbeat bill Monday with 50 co-sponsors.

The bill would prohibit abortions after an unborn baby’s heartbeat is detectable, about six weeks of pregnancy, in Ohio. At this point, many women do not even know they are pregnant; so the legislation could protect almost all unborn babies in Ohio if it goes into effect.

Here’s more from the report:

House Speaker Larry Householder, R-Glenford, said last week that he would like to see the Senate pass the heartbeat abortion ban bill first.

No problem, said Senate President Larry Obhof, R-Medina. “We are going to introduce it next week and we will pass it by the middle of March,” Obhof said last week. “We were planning on doing that irrespective of what happened in the other chamber.”

Ohio Right to Life supports the bill, saying it is “the next incremental approach to end abortion in Ohio,” the AP reports.

Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and videos.

However, NARAL and other pro-abortion groups oppose the bill and could sue the state if it becomes law.

In January, DeWine said he “absolutely” would sign a heartbeat bill, even though the abortion industry will challenge it.

“Ultimately, this will work its way up to the United States Supreme Court. And they’ll make that decision,” he said.

Pro-life lawmakers have introduced a number of heartbeat bills this winter, hoping for a victory with the new conservative majority U.S. Supreme Court. Similar bills are being considered in Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee.

The bills almost certainly will face legal challenges if they become law. In January, a judge declared Iowa’s heartbeat law unconstitutional.

The goal of the legislation is to prevent the deaths of thousands of unborn babies every year. However, even some pro-life advocates admit that the success of the legislation is uncertain. North Dakota and Arkansas passed heartbeat bills several years ago, but federal courts struck down both laws.

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals said the following about its ruling on the six-week abortion ban: “Because there is no genuine dispute that (North Dakota’s law) generally prohibits abortions before viability — as the Supreme Court has defined that concept — and because we are bound by Supreme Court precedent holding that states may not prohibit pre-viability abortions, we must affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the plaintiffs.”

When courts rule against such laws, state taxpayers often are forced to reimburse pro-abortion groups for their legal fees.

There is more hope that the new conservative-majority U.S. Supreme Court may consider an abortion ban, but it is difficult to say if it would for certain – especially after Chief Justice John Roberts recently sided with the liberal justices on an abortion case.

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

EVIL MONSTERS

Ever wonder why the name Vermont 

always reminds you of the word

VERMIN 

 

Representatives reject Republican amendments to new abortion bill

 

Representatives vote 104 - 40 to give preliminary approval, returning Thursday for final vote.

https://www.mynbc5.com/article/vermont-representatives-reject-republican-amendments-to-abortion-bill/26436231

 

 

MONTPELIER, Vt. —

It was a day dominated by a laundry list of amendments to a state House bill that would maintain a woman's current right to get an abortion in Vermont.

Six hours of discussion and debate ended in the House approving the bill 104-40 Wednesday night, with a final vote expected Thursday.

 

"This is legal, that we trust women with their choices, and those decisions are very personal and need to be made in concert with their health care provider," said House Speaker Mitzi Johnson (D-South Hero) during a press event Wednesday morning before the bill was brought up on the floor.

Leading up to Wednesday's vote, the House Human Services Committee heard from 300 people who testified on the topic of abortion and received 270 written comments.

The Human Services and Judiciary committees heard from over 50 people at a public hearing held two weeks ago.

"We want to encourage women to seek the medical care that they need without fear of prosecution," Judiciary chair Rep. Maxine Grad (D-Montpelier) added.

Republican representatives suggested nearly a dozen changes, which resulted in seven roll-call votes.

An amendment that a viable fetus be recognized as a person in Vermont failed 41-106.

"Currently, the most unrepresented person or thing in the world, or here in Vermont, anyway, is a viable fetus that has not yet been born," Rep. Carl Rosenquist (R-Georgia) said.

An amendment that would make abortion illegal after 24 weeks, unless there's a medical emergency, failed along similar margins at 40-107.

Rep. George Till (D-Jericho), a former obstetrician/gynecologist, said on the floor that later-term abortions are incredibly rare and that procedures some Republican representatives referenced as "partial-birth abortions" do not happen.

"To have an abortion, and this is even if there's a life-threatening disease for the mom, and even if the fetus has anomalies which are not compatible with life, even in those situations, beyond 23 weeks and zero days, must convene an ethics panel," Till said.

But some felt this was ignoring a possible future problem.

"A lot of things that I thought 50 years ago wouldn't happen have happened... Then let's pass (the amendment)! What's the harm?" Rep. Robert Bancroft (R-Westford) asked.

Another amendment mandating informed consent, which would include anatomical and physiological characteristics of the unborn child, 48 hours before the procedure is performed failed 32–115.

An amendment requiring parental consent for a minor to get an abortion failed 24-123, and an amendment echoing a federal provision that would ban partial birth abortion failed 43-101.

Two amendments by Rep. Vicki Strong (R-Albany) also failed Wednesday night.

One would require safety standards and inspections for doctors and facilities (failed 33-113), and the other would be to provide an ultrasound for a pregnant woman to see the fetus and hear the heartbeat in an effort to present an informed choice whether to get an abortion (failed 13-131).

Two proposed amendments were withdrawn before voting could happen, and more suggested changes could come Thursday morning ahead of the House's final vote.

 

[pokerplayer]

Trying to force people to be murderers LGD,  IMHO

 

pp

[MyLadiesDaddy]

48 minutes ago, pokerplayer said:

Trying to force people to be murderers LGD,  IMHO

 

pp

I know sister, nothing makes my blood boil more than this subject. But then I have to remind myself to pray for them. 

God forgive them for they know not what they do. And then I realize that neither do I. 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

This isn't about Choice,

If it ever Was.

THIS IS JUST MURDER

[MyLadiesDaddy]

Arizona Defeats Bill to Allow Infanticide, Repeal Medical Care for Babies Born Alive After Abortions

 STATE   STEVEN ERTELT   FEB 20, 2019   |   5:38PM    PHOENIX, ARIZONA

 

An Arizona House committee has defeated legislation that would allow infanticide, following the new law in New York state for abortions up to birth. Like that New York state law, the Arizona bill would repeal medical care for babies born alive after abortions. That’s a law that’s been on the books for 44 years.

 

Last week, 17 members of the Arizona House introduced HB 2696. Today, a House panel gave it the heave ho.

Ron Johnson of the Arizona Catholic Conference told LifeNews about how the bill was defeated after hundreds of pro-life Arizona residents showed up at the state legislature.

He said, “The House Judiciary Committee rejected a bill (HB 2696) to deny babies born after failed abortions with basic medical care. Following testimony from the Arizona Catholic Conference and other allies the bill failed on a vote of 0-8, with two voting present.”

“Arizona has long had a law on the books requiring that babies born after a failed abortion receive basic care. In 2017, this law was successfully amended to clarify the type of basic care required, as well as ensure that at least one person who is trained in neonatal resuscitation is present in the room for abortions taking place after twenty weeks’ gestational age,” he added.

“These statutory provisions are common sense. They were even the law of the land in New York until very recently when essentially the same provisions were repealed and a national controversy ensued,” Johnson concluded. “We are strongly believe that Arizona’s current law gives newborn babies a better chance at life, and are grateful that HB 2696 has been defeated!”

Here’s more:

Rep. Raquel Terán, D-Phoenix, introduced House Bill 2696 that would repeal the 1975 law that states doctors must use all “available means and medical skills” to save the baby.

Terán said she intended only to repeal a 2017 law that broadened the 1975 measure and blamed a drafting error for the situation.

The House Committee On Judiciary debated the bill despite Terán’s request that it be held. It was later amended to cover only the 2017 expansion, but the committee voted down the measure 8-0, with two lawmakers voting present.

REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.

Allen refused her request, saying the bill was sponsored by numerous Democrats who should be willing to debate a bill they co-sponsored.

“This is a core value of a lot of members on the other side of the aisle who signed onto this bill,” he said as Terán repeated her request to hold the bill. “It’s a discussion worth having.”

Center for Arizona Policy president Cathy Herod released a statement to LifeNews following the vote:

Arizona lawmakers who thought it was a good idea to repeal lifesaving measure for babies who survive abortions, got a lesson today in Arizona values.

Over 600 Arizonans, not willing to follow New York’s lead in passing extreme abortion laws, packed House hearing rooms in protest of HB 2696. Protesters made it clear to lawmakers behind the ruthless bill that they stood alone if they repealed protections for babies born alive during an abortion.

Members of the House Judiciary Committee voted down HB 2696, with no one voting for it in the end.

I am proud to stand with passionate, fellow Arizonans who came to the Capitol today to stop this attempted overreach. And I am grateful for the legislators who boldly rejected this inhumane attempt to cater to abortion activists.

Sponsored by 17 house members, HB 2696 originally would have repealed a 44-year old law requiring abortion providers to use all available means and medical skill to save babies born alive during an abortion. Even the amended version would have left staff unequipped to carry out their duties.

A last minute attempt to halt discussion and hold the bill failed and witnesses were allowed to go ahead with their compelling testimony.

With no legislators voting for the bill in the end, it is apparent just how out of touch sponsors are with the values and priorities of the people they represent.

This is Arizona, not New York, not Virginia.

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

Let This truly sink in

 

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

BOOM:

Trump Just Wiped Planned Parenthood Of

$286 Million With The Stroke Of His Pen

 February 22, 2019  Collin Rugg

 

 

Boom! On Friday, the Trump Administration announced that they are baring groups that offer abortions, such as Planned Parenthood, from being able to participate in the $286 million family planning program that has been federally funded in the past.

The Trump administration issued a rule Friday barring Planned Parenthood and other groups that offer abortions or abortion referrals from participating in the $286 million federal family planning program.

Per the Post, critics of the mandate say it indirectly defunds Planned Parenthood, which provides general health care and STD treatment in addition to abortion services. The Title X program mostly serves low-income women. Supporters of the rule and antiabortion groups, like the the Susan B. Anthony List, say it will “disentangle taxpayers” from Planned Parenthood.

GOOD! I don’t know about you, but I don’t want my tax dollars going towards an organization that is involved with the abortion of thousands and thousands of babies each year.

As you can imagine, not everyone is thrilled about this announcement.

 

Read what Clare Coleman, the president and CEO of the baby killing machine, National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association had to say.

“This rule intentionally strikes at the heart of the patient-provider relationship, inserting political ideology into a family planning visit, which will frustrate and ultimately discourage patients from seeking the health care they need,” said Clare Coleman, president and CEO of the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association.

 

“This clear attack on family planning care could result in lower-quality care or none at all for people struggling to make ends meet,” added Coleman, whose organization represents publicly funded family planning providers and administrators.

If groups like this want the funding, maybe they should stop performing abortions. The Trump Administration is sending a clear message that if you perform abortions, you will not receive federal funding no matter what the money is used for within the organization.

Many people however, like Marjorie Dannenfelser who is the president of the Susan B. Anthony List, are applauding the Trump Administration.

“We thank President Trump for taking decisive action to disentangle taxpayers from the abortion industry,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List.

“The Protect Life Rule does not cut family planning funding by a single dime, and instead directs tax dollars to entities that provide healthcare to women but do not perform abortions,” Dannenfelser said in a statement. “The Title X program was not intended to be a slush fund for abortion businesses.”

 

The Title X Family Planning Program was originally introduced by President Nixon with the good intent of providing health services along with family planning.

What started off as good faith, got twisted into providing money to organizations that perform abortions.

Sorry, but an abortion has absolutely nothing to do with “family planning.” Thank goodness the Trump Administration is taking action to set the record straight!

Even though the law states that federal funding cannot go towards abortion practices, many people throughout the country feel that abortion clinics like Planned Parenthood should receive no money from the government if they are practicing abortion.

What are your thoughts? Do you support the Trump Administration’s decision? Comment below!

 

[jg1]

9 minutes ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

BOOM:

Trump Just Wiped Planned Parenthood Of

$286 Million With The Stroke Of His Pen

 February 22, 2019  Collin Rugg

 

 

Boom! On Friday, the Trump Administration announced that they are baring groups that offer abortions, such as Planned Parenthood, from being able to participate in the $286 million family planning program that has been federally funded in the past.

The Trump administration issued a rule Friday barring Planned Parenthood and other groups that offer abortions or abortion referrals from participating in the $286 million federal family planning program.

Per the Post, critics of the mandate say it indirectly defunds Planned Parenthood, which provides general health care and STD treatment in addition to abortion services. The Title X program mostly serves low-income women. Supporters of the rule and antiabortion groups, like the the Susan B. Anthony List, say it will “disentangle taxpayers” from Planned Parenthood.

GOOD! I don’t know about you, but I don’t want my tax dollars going towards an organization that is involved with the abortion of thousands and thousands of babies each year.

As you can imagine, not everyone is thrilled about this announcement.

 

Read what Clare Coleman, the president and CEO of the baby killing machine, National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association had to say.

“This rule intentionally strikes at the heart of the patient-provider relationship, inserting political ideology into a family planning visit, which will frustrate and ultimately discourage patients from seeking the health care they need,” said Clare Coleman, president and CEO of the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association.

 

“This clear attack on family planning care could result in lower-quality care or none at all for people struggling to make ends meet,” added Coleman, whose organization represents publicly funded family planning providers and administrators.

If groups like this want the funding, maybe they should stop performing abortions. The Trump Administration is sending a clear message that if you perform abortions, you will not receive federal funding no matter what the money is used for within the organization.

Many people however, like Marjorie Dannenfelser who is the president of the Susan B. Anthony List, are applauding the Trump Administration.

“We thank President Trump for taking decisive action to disentangle taxpayers from the abortion industry,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List.

“The Protect Life Rule does not cut family planning funding by a single dime, and instead directs tax dollars to entities that provide healthcare to women but do not perform abortions,” Dannenfelser said in a statement. “The Title X program was not intended to be a slush fund for abortion businesses.”

 

The Title X Family Planning Program was originally introduced by President Nixon with the good intent of providing health services along with family planning.

What started off as good faith, got twisted into providing money to organizations that perform abortions.

Sorry, but an abortion has absolutely nothing to do with “family planning.” Thank goodness the Trump Administration is taking action to set the record straight!

Even though the law states that federal funding cannot go towards abortion practices, many people throughout the country feel that abortion clinics like Planned Parenthood should receive no money from the government if they are practicing abortion.

What are your thoughts? Do you support system">support the Trump Administration’s decision? Comment below!

 

Trump must think a baby with a heart beat is a person with rights!💥💟😍

The babys thank you.

The (mothers) strike that/ I mean woman murderers will hate you. 

Being in the right  will help you sleep at night.

Edited February 23, 2019 by jg1

[jg1]

BUmp

[MyLadiesDaddy]

33 minutes ago, jg1 said:

Trump must think a baby with a heart beat is a person with rights!💥💟😍

The babys thank you.

The (mothers) strike that/ I mean woman murderers will hate you. 

Being in the right  will help you sleep at night.

Amen and a Thousand Pluses to you @jg1

[MyLadiesDaddy]

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]