Women banned from talking about abortion online

reply to post by ShogunAssassins


Government isn't what advanced American society. Private citizens risking their money was.

If UNPRINCIPLED republicans keep getting into office(same with dems) then the dark ages are surely around the corner.

Please excuse me, I'm feeling a little crabby from a headache, but I thought this had to be stopped before it picked up a thousand flags and started another occupy group.

SA 768. Mr. DeMINT submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 2112, making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:


At the appropriate place, insert the following:

Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for mifepristone, commonly known as RU-486.

That's it. The government won't buy your RU-486 with the money in this bill. It's got nothing to do with the internet, women's health care, free speech. There is something running around ATS making research and thought into legal issues impossible. I've got to take some more pills. Sorry if I offended anyone.

THOMAS - Congressional Record

Originally posted by charles1952
Please excuse me, I'm feeling a little crabby from a headache, but I thought this had to be stopped before it picked up a thousand flags and started another occupy group.

SA 768. Mr. DeMINT submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 2112, making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:


At the appropriate place, insert the following:

Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for mifepristone, commonly known as RU-486.

That's it. The government won't buy your RU-486 with the money in this bill. It's got nothing to do with the internet, women's health care, free speech. There is something running around ATS making research and thought into legal issues impossible. I've got to take some more pills. Sorry if I offended anyone.

THOMAS - Congressional Record

I'm not offended.

But, if you read on page one, you will see we have a link up of the actual bill. The actual amendment being discussed has not been posted by congress on the bill. Therefore, your article, just like mine in the OP, is just conjecture at this point.

We will have to wait and see when the amendment is updated to see the text and see what is really going on. Appropriate research is being done, even if you didn't see it.

Originally posted by charles1952
Please excuse me, I'm feeling a little crabby from a headache, but I thought this had to be stopped before it picked up a thousand flags and started another occupy group.

SA 768. Mr. DeMINT submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 2112, making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:


At the appropriate place, insert the following:

Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for mifepristone, commonly known as RU-486.

That's it. The government won't buy your RU-486 with the money in this bill. It's got nothing to do with the internet, women's health care, free speech. There is something running around ATS making research and thought into legal issues impossible. I've got to take some more pills. Sorry if I offended anyone.

THOMAS - Congressional Record

Thank you for finding that
I'm relieved to know we aren't going to have to remind yet another politician of our freedoms, lol. Although I couldn't believe this at face value, I didn't think the Senator was proposing such things.

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said Sen. DeMint’s amendment is similar to one the House of Representatives voted to insert into an agriculture bill on June 17

This is a quote from the article in the op. I believe this might be where the subject turns from fact into fear mongering.
From what I've noticed, the rest of the paragraph is opinion but not that of Nancy Keenan's, although it's set up to seem like it's from her and that it's factual.
Personally, I would support any proposal that relieves the burden of paying for someone else's personal responsibility if they aren't disabled or elderly.

I hope your headache is gone, thanks again for finding that.

reply to post by Ameilia


Thank you for the additional links. I'm glad you posted this and I share your concern when it looks like our freedom of speech is being smothered yet again.
When all of the dust settles, I suspect this was just a case of fear mongering and demonizing, if so, we can take a sigh of relief ...until the next attack against our rights, lol.

What's sad to me is that so many responses here immediaately turned to violence and guns. Get your pens and paper out. Write letters, and emails and make some freakin phone calls. Get your friends and family involved. If Sen. DeMint is a threat to your freedoms, GET HIM OUT. Legally. Violence should be a LAST resort.

Originally posted by Gridrebel
What's sad to me is that so many responses here immediaately turned to violence and guns. Get your pens and paper out. Write letters, and emails and make some freakin phone calls. Get your friends and family involved. If Sen. DeMint is a threat to your freedoms, GET HIM OUT. Legally. Violence should be a LAST resort.

I find it sad that citizens discussing purchasing legal weapons for self defense and training purposes is referred to as violence. No one suggested violence. Everyone has the right to protect themselves.

Edit: Besides, we aren't even sure what's going on yet. It might be nothing.

It isn't the purchase of weapons for self preservation that bothers me. It's that it was the first direct response for several members. Get a grip. I personally believe in self preservation by any means possible. I however, don't believe we need to bring out cannons because someone doesn't like what we talk about on our phones or internet.

There are literately millions of websites that she can post to and they can't monitor them all. If she finances her own and pays the server fees she can talk about whatever she wants and no one can do or say a thing about it.

reply to post by marg6043


A central and core tennet of The global Occupy movements as we are against corporate influence upon our system we also stand against religious influence upon our system as that is one bloc that everyone seems to ignore.

Brought to you by The Tea Party and the GOP! This is what will happen to your daughters, sisters, mothers, aunt's, niece's. How much more crud has to occur?

Here is another view of this...and I think that NARAL is using the idea of free speech to protest the legislation but what the legislation is really about is not using federal funding of technology to promote abortions.

Republican Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina submitted an amendment to an appropriations bill on Tuesday to ensure that federal funding being invested in telemedicine services can not be used by reproductive health centers like Planned Parenthood.

Planned Parenthood clinics in Iowa have tested a program that allows pregnant women to remotely consult with a qualified physician about the abortion drug mifepristone, commonly known as RU-486. The drug can only be prescribed by specially licensed physicians.

Republican Rep. Steve King of Iowa sneeringly labelled the practice “robo-abortion” and submitted an amendment to the Agriculture appropriations bill in June to block “telemedicine for the robo-abortions.”

www.rawstory.com...

So that is what is really going on with this move.


And remember Planned Parenthood was formerly Margaret Sanger's American Birth Control League (aka depopulation center for Rockefellers et al)

This is not about restricting free speech on the Internet, it is to disallow federal funding of telemedicine approach to dispensing the abortion pill. The feds are not going to go looking for people discussing abortion on a blog. Normally I take a more Libertarian approach to free speech.

reply to post by Ameilia


it's becoming crazy, totally crazy ....
man man man, how is it possible for anybody to accept all this freedom killing politics ....
want to know what Tea Party thinks about this ...
ask yourself : where do my freedoms go .....

Originally posted by Sunlionspirit
reply to post by Ameilia

 

it's becoming crazy, totally crazy ....
man man man, how is it possible for anybody to accept all this freedom killing politics ....
want to know what Tea Party thinks about this ...
ask yourself : where do my freedoms go .....

Maybe you should have thought of that before Nancy Pelosi crammed govt healthcare down our throats. She opened the door to federal control of healthcare, now you get the results.

Stop and use your brain. How can this be possibel to enforce, even if it were true.

Once you come to the answer you'll discover something......

Why is it so many people hear stuff and come to insane conclusions of ruin and dismay.

Poepl of ATS, grow up or head for the hills but stop doing this to yourselves on a public forum.