Yesterday a heated debate took place on the House floor over the issue of abortion, and one congresswoman described her own personal experience of going through an abortion procedure. In telling her story, Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) was responding to Rep. Christopher Smith (R-NJ), who described abortion procedures as elective in nature and done without much thought on the part of women. While Speier did not go into too many details, she stated that her abortion procedure was not elective in nature, but necessary due to medical complications in the seventeenth week of her pregnancy. Speier then went on to condemn Republicans for even bringing up the issue when most Americans want the Congress to be focusing on jobs (video to the left).
The debate last night centered around a crucial continuing resolution being considered in the House. The Congress must pass a funding bill by March 3rd to avoid a government shutdown. Yesterday Republicans offered an amendment which would cut off all federal funding to Planned Parenthood. Republicans argue that Planned Parenthood offers abortion services. Democrats argue that federal funds are strictly separated so as to not be used for abortions. In addition, Democrats contend that Planned Parenthood offers a number of other important services such as access to birth control.
Republicans have focused a lot on the abortion issue in the first month in power. Earlier Republicans passed H.R. 2, the “No Taxpayer Funded Abortion Act” in the House. That bill has gone nowhere in the Senate. Similarly, the amendment to strip funding from Planned Parenthood passed in the House, but has virtually no chance of passing in the Senate where Democrats maintain a majority.
In supporting their focus on abortion Republicans like Christopher Smith have focused on stories on the importance of the unborn child. Speier offered a reminder that a woman is involved in the equation as well, and that not all abortions are elective in nature.
Comments
The House floor is nowhere to have an abortion!
This sad Congresswiman did not 'lose' a baby--after great anguish and lacking the support that she deserved for herself and her baby, she intentionally chose to have her baby's life terminated.
There is no excuse for violence against a baby.
Every abortion is an act of violence, albeit in a medical setting. In every abortion,the innocent unborn child is at risk of lethal violence 'legally' perpetrated by the abortionist who penetrates the mother's womb to exterminate the tiny human person being protected and nurtured therein.
There is no excuse for anyone, abortionist or any other assailant in a position of power, to use lethal violence against any child being nurtured and protected in his/her mother's womb.
Violence against children is never 'necessary'. All violence against children is preventable.
Before as well as after birth, children should never receive less protection than adults.
Their mothers' personal and social needs can and should be met by non-violent means.
What gives you the right to choose what happens with my womb -- since you feel compelled to tell me what to do with my womb maybe I can have the right to tell you what to do with your ding-a-ling..
Ypu obviously did not read her statement or watch it on the news.
She did not "choose" to terminate her pregnancy. Her baby had moved from her cervix to her vagina and there was no hope for the child. This poor woman did this under great stress and for you to say she "murdered" her unborn child puts you in the same ignorant category as the congressman who described in great detail an abortion procedure. You and your Right Wing friends are vile for saying this poor woman did this voluntarily.
With over 800,000 children being murdered EVERY YEAR there is a high possibility that there is a significant percentage that use the procedure as a form of birth control.
will only increase if the Title X funds designated for PP are cut. Not one dollar of PP's federal funding is used for abortions, but rather health services that allow women to avoid unintended preganancies.
To all the short sighted people who oppose abortion: Do YOU want to take care of all the babies born to unfit parents? Because somebody has to. It's easy to tell people what to do, but when it comes time to take care of the children who were born into awful and unhealthy situations, where are you to adopt, foster and take care of them? We have so many children right now without parents, love, and compassion. Pro-life people don't seem to take that into consideration or do much to help. That's not to say all pro-life believers don't do anything to help, but most don't do anything except talk or donate a little money (which, let's be honest, isn't making much of a difference in their lives). Anybody who considers themselves to have high morals and believes strongly in pro-life should adopt or foster children, because otherwise you're just being hypocritical and talking the talk but not walking the walk. And don't even try to counter this by claiming I don't love children- I would sacrifice my life for a child without blinking an eye. My issue with pro-life is that they assume that a child being born automatically gives it a better life than it would have had, had it not been born, and I don't think that's true. I'm trying to have an open mind and be respectful towards those I disagree with, I'm not trying to spew hate and attack. Discuss
I have a child with Down Syndrome that the same legislators are talking about cutting the funding from. Which is it? Do I abort my baby, or do you help me support him to help him join society as best as he is able? If you believe in children then put your money where your mouth is and start funding schools, headstart programs, school lunch programs, WIC, early childhood, affordable quality care, and other programs which directly benefit the health and well being of children. If you are looking for where we can acquire that money without raising taxes, then we could perhaps stop funding Israel to a tune of 3 billion per year or stop participating in the wars in Afghanistan ($3.1 billion per month) or Iraq ($9 billion per month). Which do we care about, bombs or babies?
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!