HHS secretary reveals Biden admin is considering using taxpayer money to help women receive abortions

[Counselor706]

Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra admitted Tuesday the Biden administration is considering using taxpayer money to help women receive abortions.

The admission comes as lawmakers, like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), urge the federal government to use federal lands for abortion. Warren even suggested on Monday that national parks be used.

"They could put up tents, have trained personnel — and be there to help people who need it," Warren said. "It’s time to declare a medical emergency."

Becerra's admission that his agency is considering all avenues comes after he suggested on Saturday that he was considering using taxpayer money to transport women to states where abortion is legal.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/xavier-becerra-abortion-federal-money

 

[PaxNurgle]

And you seem to think this is a bad thing.

What the heck do you expect woman to do, if they have an ectopic pregnancy threatening their lives, or they were impregnated after being raped by a family member or an acquaintance, or while they were passed out drunk?

You have no compassion for women at all. Or for anyone else for that matter. A common fault these days. At least Biden does.

And no, you cannot simply virtue signal the tired cliche "But...but I care about the unborn babies..." because lets' face it, you really don't.

Once these unwanted babies are born, you honestly couldn't care less whether they have loving homes, medical care, enough food to eat, or an education provided for them (Because that's "Socialism" or whatever.)

 

[dmonty]

And you seem to think this is a bad thing.

What the heck do you expect woman to do, if they have an ectopic pregnancy threatening their lives, or they were impregnated after being raped by a family member or an acquaintance, or while they were passed out drunk?

You have no compassion for women at all. Or for anyone else for that matter. A common fault these days. At least Biden does.

And no, you cannot simply virtue signal the tired cliche "But...but I care about the unborn babies..." because lets' face it, you really don't.

Once these unwanted babies are born, you honestly couldn't care less whether they have loving homes, medical care, enough food to eat, or an education provided for them (Because that's "Socialism" or whatever.)

Less than 1% of all abortions are for medical reasons, you're supposed story is false. Women will still have access to abortions in medical necessary instances

 

[Rightguide]

That would be a violation of the Hyde Amendment.

 

[YDB95]

Less than 1% of all abortions are for medical reasons, you're supposed story is false. Women will still have access to abortions in medical necessary instances

Who are you to say what's "necessary"? It's not your body.

 

[HisArpy]

Who are you to say what's "necessary"? It's not your body.

The law says what's necessary. The decision in Roe was being abused by stupid shits and they got exactly what they deserved for it.

 

[mayfly13]

That would be a violation of the Hyde Amendment.

Are Counselor/Sugardaddy your alts?

I'm asking because for a few months, when Counsellor/Sugardaddy weren't too active, you were flooding the board with the exact style of C&P right-wing propaganada threads

 

[LittleSwitchy]

https://www.theblaze.com/news/xavier-becerra-abortion-federal-money

That’s been prohibited for years.

 

[HisArpy]

That’s been prohibited for years.

So?

Dem's don't care if what they want to do violates the law (see eg: Gavin Newsome performing gay marriage ceremonies even though gay marriage was outlawed at the time in California), they just do it anyway.

Why? Because they cannot be held personally liable if they're a legislator and won't be held liable if they're engaging in "social justice" which is the new euphemism for "breaking a law that prosecutors and judges don't agree with."

 

[Rightguide]

So?

Dem's don't care if what they want to do violates the law (see eg: Gavin Newsome performing gay marriage ceremonies even though gay marriage was outlawed at the time in California), they just do it anyway.

Why? Because they cannot be held personally liable if they're a legislator and won't be held liable if they're engaging in "social justice" which is the new euphemism for "breaking a law that prosecutors and judges don't agree with."

Probably a direct violation of the Hyde Amendment but criminals have little regard for the law.

 

[dmonty]

Who are you to say what's "necessary"? It's not your body.

The doctors are qualified to determine medically "Necessary" vs the 98%+ that are purely for birth control methods.

 

[ll74]

Still not an accurate statistic

 

[YDB95]

Still not an accurate statistic

Not to mention if you want fewer elective abortions, the thing to do is make contraceptives more readily available. I sincerely doubt dmonty supports that, though.

 

[Kindfarmer]

https://www.theblaze.com/news/xavier-becerra-abortion-federal-money

You fuckers iland your political footballs. Goddamn women should be able to determine everything about their own life especially healthcare. And since the GOP has had control of government far longer than the Democrat since 1980, write a reasonable immigration policy or shut the fuck up about the border. The planet is dying and this country is a shit hole. Wake the fuck up. Neither one of those two issues are in the top 100 reasons we find ourselves in the outhouse.