As Senate Bill Dies, President Trump, Mitch McConnell Call for Clean Repeal of Obamacare Now, Replacement Later

[jg121783 3,915]

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/17/senate-bill-dies-president-trump-mitch-mcconnell-call-clean-repeal-obamacare-now-replacement-later/

 

I think this is a way to go. I was never a fan of the Republican replacement bill though it is slightly better than Obamacare but has a lot of the same problems. A clean repeal would at least bring insurance costs down and end tax penalties for people who can't afford insurance among other things. I think it would bring more democrats to the table when a replacement bill is written and maybe it could be a bipartisan effort.

[JimandChristy 1,689]

Clean repeal is dead. 

[IAMX 3,055]

1 hour ago, jg121783 said:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/17/senate-bill-dies-president-trump-mitch-mcconnell-call-clean-repeal-obamacare-now-replacement-later/

 

I think this is a way to go. I was never a fan of the Republican replacement bill though it is slightly better than Obamacare but has a lot of the same problems. A clean repeal would at least bring insurance costs down and end tax penalties for people who can't afford insurance among other things. I think it would bring more democrats to the table when a replacement bill is written and maybe it could be a bipartisan effort.

 

Clean repeal and build up from worthwhile parts after, since apparently passing a bill is too tough.

[IAMX 3,055]

Well this isn't good..

 

Liberal Republican Senators to Block Defunding Planned Parenthood in Obamacare Repeal

 

Pro-abortion liberal Republican Sens. Susan Collins (ME), Lisa Murkowski (AK), and Shelley Moore Capito (WV) say they will not vote in favor of an Obamacare repeal bill. That decision puts the effort to both repeal Obamacare and defund Planned Parenthood out of reach for the Republican Party.

In the 2015 Obamacare repeal bill, which passed both the House and Senate, Collins and Murkowski joined then-Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) in an attempt to remove the bill’s provision to eliminate much of Planned Parenthood’s federal funding.

Capito kept her promise to her constituents to repeal Obamacare by voting in favor of the 2015 repeal bill, well aware that Obama would veto it. Now, with a Republican in the White House who will actually sign the bill to repeal the disastrous healthcare reform, she said in a statement that her opposition to repeal just two years later is based on the “concerns and needs of West Virginians.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is planning to vote once again on the same bill that repealed much of Obamacare, and which defunded abortion giant Planned Parenthood for one year.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/19/2015-clean-obamacare-repeal-bill-defunded-planned-parenthood-one-year/

[jg121783 3,915]

Abortions should not be tax payer funded period. Weather or not they should be legal is another debate but tax payers should not be forced to pay for the murder of babies.

[smilesammich 10,727]

9 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

Abortions should not be tax payer funded period. Weather or not they should be legal is another debate but tax payers should not be forced to pay for the murder of babies.

had no idea murdering babies was tax payer funded. why do we even have to pay for cps?

[bcking 3,157]

23 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

Abortions should not be tax payer funded period. Weather or not they should be legal is another debate but tax payers should not be forced to pay for the murder of babies.

Random ignorant "tax payers" should not be deciding what is considered "murder" in these cases.

[CaliCat 3,957]

20 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

Abortions should not be tax payer funded period. Weather or not they should be legal is another debate but tax payers should not be forced to pay for the murder of babies.

 

The has been settled over 40years ago. Abortions are legal in all 50 United States and territories. Here is the full opinion of the Court: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/410/113.html

 

however it has nothing do to with the fiasco involving Trumpcareless. Despite being at it for 7 long arduous years, the GOP was unable to produce a satisfactory bill to replace the ACA. The only ones to blame are those who crafted the bill in secret, and of course, those who voted for them. 

 

 

[IAMX 3,055]

2 minutes ago, bcking said:

Random ignorant "tax payers" should not be deciding what is considered "murder" in these cases.

Agreed, pay taxes so someone who deems themselves smarter than you can figure out for you how to spend your money.

 

[bcking 3,157]

3 minutes ago, IAMX said:

Agreed, pay taxes so someone who deems themselves smarter than you can figure out for you how to spend your money.

 

 

I'm not discussing whether or not taxes should go to fund abortion (or even if they are currently going towards funding abortion).

 

I was merely pointing out that a rando tax payer (perhaps, for example, some people on these forums) is not the person that decides what would be considered "murder" in these cases. Most have no legal expertise nor medical expertise on the subject. 

 

You don't have to like abortions, but an elective termination during pregnancy before viability is not murder. You can "believe" that if you'd like, but you would be wrong.

Edited July 19, 2017 by bcking

[CaliCat 3,957]

18 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

had no idea murdering babies was tax payer funded. why do we even have to pay for cps?

 

Murdering babies has been funded by taxpayer's money for decades now. When we dropped all those bombs in Vietnam, we didn't warn the villagers to move the babies away. When we refuse to provide women with adequate healthcare, because our politicians are unable to concoct a bill in 7 years, we're paying for babies to be murdered.

 

Of corse, from the inebriated state of religious ignorance, there are individuals who equate legal abortions to murder. You can find these individuals lining up on PP clinics begging to adopt babies from pregnant women who don't want to be mothers. Oh, wait. Not really. They are the ones who speak loudly against abortion, but do nothing to help unwilling mothers.

[jg121783 3,915]

4 minutes ago, CaliCat said:

 

Murdering babies has been funded by taxpayer's money for decades now. When we dropped all those bombs in Vietnam, we didn't warn the villagers to move the babies away. When we refuse to provide women with adequate healthcare, because our politicians are unable to concoct a bill in 7 years, we're paying for babies to be murdered.

 

Of corse, from the inebriated state of religious ignorance, there are individuals who equate legal abortions to murder. You can find these individuals lining up on PP clinics begging to adopt babies from pregnant women who don't want to be mothers. Oh, wait. Not really. They are the ones who speak loudly against abortion, but do nothing to help unwilling mothers.

Actually there are far more people on adoption waiting lists than there are abortions. Furthermore many adoption agencies will pay all of a women's living expenses and medical expenses while she is pregnant and extra money on top of that in many cases. So not wanting to be a parent is simply not an excuse.

[IAMX 3,055]

5 minutes ago, bcking said:

I'm not discussing whether or not taxes should go to fund abortion (or even if they are currently going towards funding abortion).

 

I was merely pointing out that a rando tax payer (perhaps, for example, some people on these forums) is not the person that decides what would be considered "murder" in these cases. Most have no legal expertise nor medical expertise on the subject. 

 

You don't have to like abortions, but an elective termination during pregnancy before viability is not murder. You can "believe" that if you'd like, but you would be wrong.

What you consider logical is really irrelevant, part of representation is voting and paying taxes, so whether or not you think they're being logical, or want to subjectively call their subjective views wrong, they're entitled to demand their taxes not go to fund abortions, and they're not wrong.

 

Having abortions legal isn't enough for the left (the discussion of the legality of abortion is amusing since it isn't being debated here), they demand others cover their baby killing endeavors and act as if it has anything to do with womens rights. The left today have pretty much no idea what rights are, and clearly are likewise devoid of the concept of responsibility that comes with those rights.

[CaliCat 3,957]

5 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

Actually there are far more people on adoption waiting lists than there are abortions. Furthermore many adoption agencies will pay all of a women's living expenses and medical expenses while she is pregnant and extra money on top of that in many cases. So not wanting to be a parent is simply not an excuse.

 

That debunks the myth that taxpayers are funding abortions. In any case, the point is moot. Abortions are legal, and should be available to any woman looking for the procedure.

 

Furthermore, if you are against abortions, by all means don't have one. 

Edited July 19, 2017 by CaliCat

[IAMX 3,055]

4 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

Actually there are far more people on adoption waiting lists than there are abortions. Furthermore many adoption agencies will pay all of a women's living expenses and medical expenses while she is pregnant and extra money on top of that in many cases. So not wanting to be a parent is simply not an excuse.

Gotta help those poor unwilling mothers.. you know, since everyone else helped them get pregnant to begin with, I guess that's everyone elses fault too. No end to the entitlement attitude. I'd love to see every single abortion provider that uses taxpayer money criminally liable. If that means irresponsible women go the route of back alley abortions like the days of yore, so be it.. tired of these people thinking that their dumb choices are society's responsibility to fix.