Yesterday the Judiciary Committee considered a bill to protect chickens, roosters, from being carried across State lines for use in illegal cockfighting. An amendment was offered on a similar ``cross State line'' issue, protecting minor girls from being carried across State lines for the purpose of having an abortion without their parents' knowledge or consent.
While the committee ultimately passed the animal protections, they wouldn't even allow a vote on protecting young girls. Even more outrageous, the substance of the rejected amendment has passed twice in the House last year, with large bipartisan majorities.
In case anyone is having trouble following this, let's summarize: by rejecting this amendment, Democrats saw fit to provide greater protections to birds than to minor girls and their parents and unborn children. It is as simple as that. This is supposed to be the year of the children? Not all of the children.
Welcome to the Pelosi Congress.
2007-02-09 04:59:36 · 16 answers · asked by CaptainObvious 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
A big difference being that the birds are in cages and don't have a say in the matter...
you mean like the BABIES?
2007-02-09 05:09:30 · update #1
If they were going to die from it dont you think the parents might want to know about it. the law is to make sure the parents know and give permission.
2007-02-09 05:17:52 · update #2
Does that really surprise you? Democrats have always fought for the right to put down unwanted children.
2007-02-09 05:03:07 · answer #1 · answered by Abu 5 · 4⤊ 7⤋
Well, how about sending pink "you're fired" postcards to everyone who voted against protecting the girls, or who voted for the cockfighting law? Don't blame the Democrats for everything. Don't blame the Republicans for everything. If you didn't vote, blame yourself. If you didn't write letters to your Representatives telling them how you feel about the issue, blame yourself. If you don't get off your duff and do something besides complain, blame yourself. Pick up the telephone, call your congressmen and senators, call the attorney general, write letters, call your friends and have them do likewise. Then your elected officials will begin to understand what is important to the people and will have a harder time ignoring us.!
Get some pink stationary and write your officials to let them know what you want them fired. Write it on the front of the envelope -- "You're fired". Do something!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2007-02-09 05:11:16 · answer #2 · answered by MH/Citizens Protecting Rights! 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
So, until abortion is illegal, we should live in chaos? Makes a lot of sense. BTW, are you really angry that Bush and the 109th congress did NOTHING at all to get rid of abortion? AT ALL? They are the ones who claim to be against it, where is your criticism for them? Until you can find a way to not put undue burden on a woman in this matter, we women will always have our rights intact. It is as simple as that. And if you really cared about the health of youngt women, maybe you should fight the parental notification law that sends them over the state lines, hm?
EDIT: LOL, open the cages and let the birds and the babies free! Let's see who survives, shall we?
2007-02-09 05:15:07 · answer #3 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Protecting animals' rights has been one of the more important issues to liberals for some time now, and likewise so has ignoring fetuses' and children's rights.
Remember, using liberals' logic, making decisions for animals is considered protecting them from harm, while doing the same for any group of human beings is considered "imposing your values" on them, as if values are just abstract ideas never meant to be applied in real life.
2007-02-09 09:50:18 · answer #4 · answered by STILL standing 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
the place did you get that from?? Catholic hospitals have not such a coverage! the only coverage is to do each thing achieveable to maintain the two persons. If it did come to such a determination, that's truly unlikely, it would be the call of the mummy and dad, no longer the well being middle!
2016-09-28 21:20:28 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To our Congress, YES.
I wonder if all the people who say that Bush should send his daughters to Iraq would decry a suggestion that someone should take these congresspeople's minors across state lines for an abortion without their consent.
2007-02-09 05:10:37 · answer #6 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
A big difference being that the birds are in cages and don't have a say in the matter...
The women you're talking about aren't being "carried" across state lines... they're voluntarily crossing state lines to get medical treatment their fascist state denies them.
Why, aside from your partisan confusion, should congress write laws demanding that you not get medical treatment in other states in accordance with the laws of those states?
I thought you righties were supposed to be advocates of States' rights... apparently only when it serves your purposes.
Edit: I find it ironic that I'm getting thumbs down ratings for pointing out that women make their own choices.
2007-02-09 05:06:05 · answer #7 · answered by leftist1234 3 · 5⤊ 5⤋
Avian Influenza is a virus that has the potential to wipe out whole communities in less than a month. It mutates and spreads rapidly.
The virus and its effects are more of a REALISTIC threat than teenage girls having sex.
2007-02-09 05:11:44 · answer #8 · answered by murkglider 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
a ban on crossing state lines isn't meant to protect the girl, it's meant to control her and limit her rights, I guess it would be better for everyone if she just killed herself? Why didn't the Republicans pass the law when they had complete control for 6 years? Too busy subsidizing the oil companies?
2007-02-09 05:07:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
well i should say that it's just darn refreshing to see such a deep level of self reflection as i do out here today.
as long as we're pondering the unponderable - lets consider if corporations have more rights than taxpaying citizens.
oh wait, that's not on the talking point list, so you are not paying attention any longer...
2007-02-09 05:08:17 · answer #10 · answered by nostradamus02012 7 · 4⤊ 3⤋
I'm glad someone already pointed out that your post is a strawman.
What you call "protection" others call "coercion"
2007-02-09 05:18:22 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋