Freedom of Choice Act

[MagicOPromotion]

Some of you may not like the fact that I have made this post.
Some may complain, and ask that it be removed.
If it is removed, then that is what I will accept,
but every once-in-awhile, I do have something to bring up
that I feel is important.

Some of you think I am a flaming liberal, and you know I supported Barack Obama. Supporting Barack Obama was a difficult conundrum for me because of The Right to Life Issue which I support in theory and in most practice, although I do think there are some really crazy elements in this cause. I rationalized voting for Barack Obama because I refused this time to be shackled to the Republican Party because of this singular though important issue.

One of Obamas promised NEW pieces of legislation that I do NOT support is
THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE ACT FOCA.

Abortion is legal in this country due to Roe vs Wade January 22, 1973. The new legislation essentially removes ALL restrictions now in place. FOCA , the most radical and divisive pro-abortion bill ever introduced in Congress, would create a "fundamental right" to abortion that government could NOT limit but would have to support. FOCA would overturn many existing widely-supported policies, including laws protecting parental involvement and concious rights and those preventing partial-birth abortion and taxpayer funding of abortion.

If you are opposed to this up coming legislation as I am, please write your representatives now....or better yet, go to any Catholic or most Protestant church denominations and ask for their printed postcards to Senator George V. Voinovich, Senator Sherrrod Brown, and Congressman Steven C. LaTourette address: United States Senate or United States House of Representatives - Washington, D.C. 20515.

Sincerely,
RTT

[CipBok]

I would want government funding for abortions stopped first. A greater affect would be done there by first eliminating that force as "everyone" must provide for that "common good".

Additionally, the objection to freedom of choice is easier if peoples individual funds are not related to it.

[mestrada]

Originally Posted by shunthenonbeliever

Refusing customers at restaurants or convenient stores is quite a bit different from refusing health care. pregnancy can result in life or death of the mother; however, there should be a limit on how old the baby must be (age of viability). if a doctor will not help a person medically, he should not be given a license to practice.

Pregnancy can result in life or death of the mother but abortion only results in death of the child. It does not matter "how old the baby must be" 2 weeks, 3 months, 10 months, it is still a baby and yes doctors should be able to choose if they want to kill a human being or not. Noone helps someone else by killing an innocent being. That's senseless. Doctors souldn't be deprives from having a license just because they decide to do what's right.

[Bryce Caldwell]

Since when is it hard to find an abortion clinic? And if morals can't bring equality than tell me this, was slavery a moral issue? If so, that proves that some laws, like the abolition laws, can provide equality based on morals. If not, how is it not a moral issue?

[brandirascoe]

I think that doctors should have a choice to perform an abortion or not. Just because he went into the medical field doesn't mean he should give up his moral values because someone made a mistake. Forcing someone to do that is unjust in my eyes