U.S. Congress - H.R.3 No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act
H.R.3 - No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act
To prohibit taxpayer funded abortions and to provide for conscience protections, and for other purposes. view all titles (4)
All Bill Titles
- Short: No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act as introduced.
- Official: To prohibit taxpayer funded abortions and to provide for conscience protections, and for other purposes. as introduced.
- Short: No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act as reported to house.
- Short: No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act as passed house.
Vote on This Bill
-
Share This Bill
More Share via Email
Sort By
Comments Feed
Displaying 31-60 of 239 total comments.
So you’d prefer to die and let your unborn die with you, rather than have an emergency abortion, when the child has attached to your fallopian tube rather than the uterus?
If you are dying, or are in pain, why would you go to planned parenthood?
There in lies the problem with your logic and all others who support this kind of instrusion into women’s lives. Planned parenthood also provides prenatal care and other services to women. So woman who was experiencing pain as a result of a pregnancy, who can’t afford HEALTH
As I was saying…can’t afford health care could be seen at a planned parenthood.
Spam Comment
When pigs fly and hell freezes over. This is what the GOP does in their spare time when they aren’t out committing infidelity.
I personally have a right to buy guns, houses, cars, food, DVDs, beer, and upper-class healthcare. I can’t afford any of this so maybe we should tax people for it, even people who don’t believe in these things. This is not ridiculous at all.
It’s not just the woman’s own personal matter. When does human life begin? Science says conception. There’s just a few minutes difference between a horrible murder( partial birth abortion )and a wonderful gift for the child and those begging to adopt it. It’s also a public matter of the public having to pay for it. Abortion is Planned Parenthood’s biggest money maker- no wonder they avoid the “choice” of adoption. Last year they made 63 million in profits- why do they need help from the government? Other “non-profits” get by fine without government help. We have to cut spending if we don’t want to go back to the “Carter years”.
“When does human life begin? Science says conception.”
Actually, science says that life began with abiogenesis and, since that time, has continued in a nonstop process. Life doesn’t begin with conception, because there was life prior to conception; two gametes that fuse together to start the formation of a new organism are both alive, as are the parent organisms they derive from.
The real question is when does a developing human become an actual person.
Barring illness, catastrophe, or failure to sustain the mother’s life, those cells will certainly become an actual person some amount of time after conception. With no unusual action on your part, a child is born. Removing the embryo kills the possibility of that child and therefore effectively kills that child. You may not feel guilty about it, but it is still removing a life from existence.
Using your argument, however, you admit that the fetus at the beginning of a pregnancy is simply a cluster of cells that will “become an actual person some amount of time after conception.” With this kind of logic you could also say that any viable egg or sperm in the woman’s or man’s body is capable of becoming life and therefore should not be wasted. I do not think that the majority of pro-choice advocates would ever say that partial birth abortions or late term pregnancy abortions are okay. However, if a woman has taken all precautionary measures to not get pregnant (via birth control), or had her essential human rights violated and was raped, why shouldn’t that woman have the right to have a say over her life?
Spam Comment
Spam Comment
Letter to Rep. Steve Womack (and anyone else supporting this bill):
Please explain to me how HR 3 is an example of smaller government. Subjecting a victim of rape or incest to an audit is an insult beyond words. If Catholics mount a campaign against tax benefits for plans that cover vasectomies or hysterectomies because they decide they are the same as birth control, will you attack those next?
Let me put this clearly as I can: my money is my money. You are not a doctor and thus have no credibility when deciding the necessity of an abortion or whether I can use my own money to obtain one for a spouse or family member. If I wanted to have every aspect of my life controlled by an out of touch leader, I’d become a Catholic.
You continue to disappoint me with your so-called representation. You cannot continue to claim to support smaller government and then co-sponsor a bill like this. It’s time for you to choose.
When will women stop murdering their children-to-be so that they can avoid taking responsibility for their actions? Oh, I’m sorry, is that too blunt for you?
When will birth control be 100% effective? When will those slutty married couples stop having sex? When will men start taking responsibility for the “person” (by your definition) they have created? This wouldn’t be such a big deal if men were required to take some responsibility too. Why does the woman have to foot the entire bill for the LEGAL MEDICAL PROCEDURE?
Why can’t people who don’t agree with abortion volunteer at a clinic that offers contraceptives? Why can’t the U.S. stop thinking that abstinence-only education is not an abysmal failure?
What makes you think that if the government can restrict access to a woman’s legal right to an abortion, thus requiring her to carry the child to term, that they can’t require women to have an abortion if she wants the child?
See how taking choice away works both ways?
the free market already created an 100% effective birth control (excluding rape) and that is called the zipper.
Also, we have naver had an abstinence only education. There are barely any school teach solely abstinance-only educations in relationship to otherwise.
People have jobs, they can’t always work at places that offers contraceptives.
Also, if we are pro-life, why would we even allow the government to force women to have abortions?! We would be the first ones protesting! What we want is a for the government to recognized the civil right to life for those who are yet to be born, which would ensure the government would not be able to force women to have abortions. people were not forced to have slaves once it was no longer legal.
When i mean excluding rape, I mean that it will not protect against that.
Moderated Comment
Spam Comment
Spam Comment
REALY?! This issue has so many more connotations than just the most obvious one…the death of an unborn fetus. This is a social policy issue and our government has made a campaign of eliminating programs that would give these girls and women greater access to education and prevention of these unwanted pregnancies. I do not condone abortions but there is so much more to consider here…..
Spam Comment
I disagree. I don’t feel that preventing funding for abortions is a violation of liberty. I view it to actually be congress stepping up to prevent people from paying for abortions who would otherwise not want to.
ONCE AGAIN- taxpayers do not pay for abortions. My God, do the pro-life/anti-abortion people actually read anything.
Dear MichaelIDSP,
I saw your comment regarding the proposed No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act: “Ridiculous!! When will the GOP stop trying to pry into women’s personal matters?” I thought I’d give you my view as well.
Please not, that I do NOT intend to aggressively refute your view, but rather provide my dissenting opinion as it currently stands. Please not that I will be HAPPY to hear YOUR SIDE of the argument since I am a fledgling when it comes to the pro-life/pro-choice debate.
My view:
An abortion is a personal matter. That I agree with, but an abortion becomes public when that woman uses, intentionally or inadvertently, tax payer dollars. If a tax payer disagrees with abortions he should not have to pay taxes, which might pay for the very thing he abhors: a doctor performing an abortion on a woman, who was not raped or who will not die if she keeps the baby.
My Proposed Solution:
The
Spam Comment
They aren’t “Prying into women’s personal matters”. The GOP doesn’t want people’s hard earn money going towards paying for an abortion! I strongly agree with Mophatt!
Abortion is murder, not a woman’s right, not an issue of privacy. When people are being killed, it becomes everybody’s business. I support this bill. No one should be given the right to decide to lives and who’s dies for any reason. A woman does not have the right to kill her neighbor, why does she have the “right” to kill her child? Abortion should be outlawed forever.
As a rape survivor who conceived a child as a result, I can state that you are an idiot!