DNC platform supports abortion “regardless of ability to pay”

The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay.

~ Revised Democratic Party platform position, which essentially supports taxpayer-funded abortion, via the Weekly Standard, September 4

[HT: Laura Loo]

27 thoughts on “DNC platform supports abortion “regardless of ability to pay””

  1. The DNC also removed God from their platform. Sen. Durbin says its not a big deal, though:

     http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/80683.html?hp=l2

    I would argue that it’s difficult to call for the blessings of God when your platform is extremely proabortion.

       16 likes

  2. Still waiting for the “regardless” clause to help me with my 14 yr old’s 5,000.00 braces bill.

    Alice, don’t do it!!!

       19 likes

  3. Still waiting for the “regardless” clause to help me with my 14 yr old’s 5,000.00 braces bill.

    I know, right?!? :D

       14 likes

  4. Yet Cardinal Dolan will deliver a prayer and considers it an equally good thing to have two Catholic VP candidates (as if Joe Biden is a Catholic in good standing)….as a Catholic woman and mother I find this heartbreaking and unfathomable.

       10 likes

  5. To be fair a lot of them also agree with universal healthcare, and since they think abortion = healthcare they think it’s just one of many things that should be available regardless of ability to pay. I do wonder how they justify chomping at the bit to make abortion and birth control free of charge to everyone while people are struggling to pay for their ridiculously expensive asthma meds and such (seriously, my son’s asthma meds are over 300 a month, it’s breaking the bank just to keep him breathing). Honestly, I never have gotten a satisfactory answer from any of the abortion supporters for why birth control and abortion are a priority above life-saving meds. Albuterol on demand, without apologies? Not so much. 

       29 likes

  6. Jack: probably because keeping people breathing is more expensive than preventing their births or offing them before they make it down the birth canal?
    It’s about money.  And the sacred carbon footprint, don’tcha know.
     

       20 likes

  7. “The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay.”

    The Dems can’t have it both ways. How about unequivocally supporting a woman’s prerogative to make safe decisions regarding her pregnancy? That would rule out induced abortion, as it is inherently dangerous to the born woman as well as to the unborn child, male or female.

    Newsflash Dems, the stroke of a judicial pen could not, and did not, suddenly render a dangerous violation of a natural process safe.

    “Regardless of her ability to pay”… indeed. The abortionist’s fee is just the down payment. She will pay much more after (s)he has gotten what (s)he wants and kicked her out. Emotionally, physically, spiritually, mentally. Many have already paid with their lives for their “safe, legal” abortions. Wachet Auf, y’all, and get a bloody clue. Please. We’re glowing with anticipation.

       8 likes

  8. What about the obligations of society as a whole to decrease irresponsible sexual activity? 3 million unplanned pregnancies per year. 1 1/2 millions brutal abortions per year. Babies left by the side of the road and drowned in toilets.

    Sex is not a “need” but a desire. Neither men nor women keel over and die from lack of sex. But many people are dying from IRRESPONSIBLE sex. Society as a whole must make it clear that its members can abstain from sex leading to the above horrors. 

       9 likes

  9. And sadly enough I’ve heard pro-choicers make the argument that a person would be better off never born than to have a life long medical condition or disability that would cause “suffering” (I put suffering in quotes because it’s a subjective term and someone’s opinion) or require multiple surgeries and expensive medical treatments. My ex-
    husband was born with ear problems which led to eight surgeries and a developmental disability which required years of occupational therapy, yet his parents love him. While I may not like him, at least I don’t wish he was never born or dead.

       10 likes

  10. I think I’m going to dress as a pair of lungs and demand that my kid gets free asthma and allergy meds. I’ll call my protest “Poor parents are watching”. I wonder if any of those people who dressed like genitalia will come protest with me lol.

       22 likes

  11. There are times since my daughter was born that we have trouble affording diapers for her and vitamins for me. Will the dems cover those neccessary things as part of that “regardless of ability to pay” plank?

    If I get pregnant again, I will likely be considered high-risk due to pregnancy-induced high blood pressure. Will the dems cover the meds and other treatments I might need, as part of my “choice” to have a healthy pregnancy?

    And what about men?  My husband will never be pregnant, true, but he needs some expensive dental work. Can I call sexism on the dems if they refuse to help pay for that important part of his whole-body health?

    Why the hell is abortion such a sacred cow for lefties??? Forget the moral arguments for a moment; why should that one thing be funded and protected above all else?  There has to be something more going on for this to be so huge!

       17 likes

  12. Ask not, how can we prevent unwanted children from being concieved?

    Ask, how can we prevent children from being unwanted???

    That is the million dollar question.

    When you are lost in the forest, sometimes the way out is to turn back.  We need to turn BACK to when a woman was pregnant, and it was a foregone conclusion that she was going to give birth.   A woman is not pregnant with a thing, but with her own child, with whom she has a biological relationship by DNA.   Destroying one’s own children is the realm of rodents and lower animals.  Caring for one’s children is the realm of intelligent primates.  Willfully destroying one’s own children is absolutely a sign of dis-ease.   Are we rodents or are we human????   Are we sick?  Or do we want to embrace health?

        

       12 likes

  13. “When you are lost in the forest, sometimes the way out is to turn back.”

    Funny, that’s what I thought when i heard Obama’s campaign slogan was going to be Forward.  

       12 likes

  14. “Ask not, how can we prevent unwanted children from being concieved?
    Ask, how can we prevent children from being unwanted???”

    I just don’t understand why people say things like this. Of course we should be helping out people who are having a tough time parenting, because they are poverty-stricken or unprepared, or whatever. But there will always be people who don’t want kids, there will always be people who shouldn’t have kids. And I don’t know how you would “prevent” a kid from being unwanted. There was no way to make my mother love me, nothing could have made me be wanted. Honestly, I just don’t understand how people expect to accomplish this goal. That’s why I think it’s important that people should be able to prevent pregnancy as much as possible when they don’t want kids, because I don’t know if you even can make someone want their child if they don’t already.

    And, even if a woman knows she is expected to carry a child if she gets pregnant, that doesn’t make her love it. I mean, my mom knew that my dad wouldn’t let her abort me. She tried to get rid of me anyway, but I am pretty sure she knew she was expected to have me. And she still hated me. I just don’t get how people expect to accomplish this goal of making people love their own kids.

       7 likes

  15. @ ninek: The time of large families was during the agricultural phase.  It made sense to have large families then. You often had extended families with grandparents in the home as well as spinster aunts and bachelor uncles to help with the children. The word “spinster” comes from one of the contributions unmarried, childless women made to the domestic sphere by spinning fabric into clothing and other items.
    Do you believe we can return to a primarily agricultural lifestyle? 
    We seem to be losing even the nuclear family. Would it be possible to revive the extended family?
    Finances are often given as a reason for not wanting to have a baby. Do we need a family allowance so a family’s income automatically increases with a baby?
    Ninek, there are SOME women who are not suited to becoming mothers. That is truth. It is important that they not conceive.
     

       1 likes

  16. I’m relatively short, 5’7″.  I want the Dems to pay for my height enhancement procedure, my new abs, hair replacement, and yes, braces.  How about that?

       6 likes

Comments are closed.