People For the American Way

This amendment has nothing to do with taxpayer dollars being used to pay for abortions -- which, though they may be a "sensitive issue," ARE a legal medical procedure. The bill itself prohibited federal funds from being used to pay for abortion. The appalling part of the Stupak Amendment is that it prohibits private plans -- paid for by private dollars -- from participating in the exchange if they cover abortion services. Talk about getting between a woman and her physician.

Share your views with a letter to the editor. Here's mine published today in Springfield, MA newspaper (The Republican).

In Saturday's House of Representatives health care bill debate, what rational argument led to the denial of a woman's freedom to purchase insurance to cover the risk she may need a safe and legal termination of a future pregnancy? Trick question; the answer is none.

Rather, elected representatives were bullied into it by the threat that leaders of some organized religions would rally their church members to prevent their reelection.... Read More

The authors of our Constitution foresaw and feared the power of religious leaders to thwart the dream of an American democratic republic where elected representatives reach decisions based on the application of reason to protect and advance the rights of the people. They rejected the historic role of religious leaders to demand that laws conform to particular interpretations of bible passages or claimed divine revelation.

Why should American women whose religion or conscience differs on this issue be bound by a law based on somebody else's religion's leader's claim to know the will of God?

Did I miss the memo that says openly hating is now politically correct?

Yes.

Couldn't have said it better myself!

Until Islam begins putting up posters decrying the shameful suicide bombings rather than glorifying them as martyrs, Islam has a real problem. They are using the peaceful aspects of their religion to justify the results of concentrating on the jihad/martyr aspects.
They could also use losing the notion of everyone but them being infidels. Soon or ... Read Moresooner. I remember when that pilot drove his plane load of people into the ocean chanting God is great. Many in the Islamic world said that he couldn't have done it because Islam does not sanction suicide. You don't hear much of that defense any more.
This attack was the result of Islamic fundamentalism and should not be completely separated from that aspect of Islam. Lest I be called intolerant, I have Afghani friends, Palestinian friends, and at least one Syrian friend. I also read Sufi writers who also hate the poisonous results of Islamic misunderstanding.

Republican victory in two states, big deal! How about Democratic victory in NY 23rd?

Since when did it become "okay" to be a hater, and then talk about it? I remember holding my tongue about a lot of things because it hasn't been "politically correct." So why all of a sudden can people speak out against other groups of people and have it be a popular thing to do? Perhaps they are just vocalizing their death throes, because it really ISN'T popular.

Why do people care? If one is against gay marraige then don't marry a homosexual. People should be free to love who ever they choose.

Where is the 'dislike button' when it's so desperately needed? I still think about the poor woman who died in the icu totally alone, because her partner was a woman. Their children didn't get a chance to say goodbye to her either! Shame on the hospital! Shame on the bigots who make the rules! Live and let live. Love and let love!

As the band Green Day says, "F....the moral majority, I want to be a minority". Dump Doma now!

The GLBT community would rightly feel used by Obama and Democrats in the same way that anti-choice and other social conservatives were used by W and Republicans. There is simply no explanation for Obama's failure to suspend DADT at this point in his presidency. Any meaningful action on DOMA, however, must begin in the Congress and fortunately it ... Read Morehas.

New York Rep. Jerry Nadler introduced the Respect for Marriage Act (HR 3567) which repeals DOMA and gives federal recognition to any marriage that is deemed valid by the State in which the married persons are domiciled so long as the marriage was entered into in a state or country where that marriage is valid. There are now 103 co-sponsors of this legislation, nearly half of that necessary for it to pass in the House. To to www.thomas.loc.gov and search on HR 3567 to see whether your Representative is a co-sponsor. If not CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVE and ask him/her to sign on. Passage of this bill in the House will help to pressure the Senate to follow suit.

He said he would take care of it...he DOES have some very important issues he is dealing with that need his full attention at this time...give him a chance...Good Grief!

WOO HOO!! Like this very much!

THANK YOU President Obama!!! :-)

its about time!

Hurray!!!