The 7 Democrats Who Voted to Restrict Access to Abortion (and the 2 Republicans Who Didn’t)

A few moments ago, the U.S. Senate voted 54-45 (with Robert Byrd ill) to kill the Nelson-Hatch Amendment. The Senate equivalent of the Stupak Amendment, it would have prohibited abortion coverage in health care plans. Under the Nelson-Hatch Amendment, if just one single person gets a partial federal subsidy for a plan, NO ONE in the plan can get coverage for abortions, not even those who pay for the insurance wholly by themselves.

These are the 7 Democrats who just voted in favor of restricting women’s access to abortion in America:

Evan Bayh
Robert Casey
Kent Conrad
Byron Dorgan
Ted Kaufman
Ben Nelson
Mark Pryor

And these are the 2 Republicans who voted to defend women’s access to abortion in America:

Susan Collins
Olympia Snowe

Notice the pattern? The only Republicans to vote pro-choice are women. The 7 Democrats who voted against women’s access to abortion are men. A great number of the speeches on the floor this afternoon made appeals based on the personal preferences of senators. 45 of the votes made tonight took a personal preference and sought to impose it upon 48% of the nation’s population.

This entry was posted in Democrats, Legislation, Liberty, Politics, Republicans, Sex and Gender and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to The 7 Democrats Who Voted to Restrict Access to Abortion (and the 2 Republicans Who Didn’t)

  1. Tomas says:

    Yes…everyone should have a right to kill an unborn child…

    • Jim says:

      Is a zygote an “unborn child,” Tomas?

      If so, are you working to prevent all the deaths of the “unborn child” zygotes out there?

  2. Tomas says:

    Yeap….

    • Jim says:

      Wow, you really are committed. What exactly are you doing to help out the 30% to 50% of all zygotes that fail to implant in the uterus? Those poor “unborn children!”

      • Jim says:

        Notice the lack of an answer to this question.

        • Jacob says:

          Yep, you really got him (stands to applaude). With this win for you killing babies is definantly OK now…

        • Jim says:

          OK, fine, now YOU answer, Jacob.

          If it’s a “baby” from conception onward, why aren’t YOU mounting rescue operations for the 30% to 50% of conceptions that fail to implant? If they’re really “babies,” then for you to idly stand by while 30% to 50% of “babies” die is simply horrid. How can you live with yourself with all these “babies” dying around you, many, many, many times more “babies” killed than ever die through abortion?

          Don’t you care about “babies”?

        • Jacob says:

          I do all I can to donate funding to research i this area. You forget, we lost a baby this way. We watched the heartbeat every week for a month until the bay shut down and died. If I remember correctly something similiar happened to you and your wife. It was the hardest thing I ever went through in my life. If I can prevent that from happeneing to even one person I would give everything I have.

          Lets look at this from the side of the elderly and sick. The implications are the same. I would fight until my dieing breath to make sure legal suicide never came to AMerica. Life is too important to snuff out. While fighting this cause I would still fight cancer and aids and other diseases.

          Just ike in that case I will fight until the day I die for the rights of the unborn child. I will not stand by and watch while people kill them for convience (which 90+% of the time that is the case). That does not prevent me from fighting for those that die from natural causes.

        • Jim says:

          I’m not talking about early births or miscarriages of fetuses. I’m talking about the 30% to 50% of fertilized eggs that fail to implant — in numbers, far, FAR above premature births or miscarriages or abortions.

          They’re “babies” dying, right now, and THEY are the hugest source of “baby” deaths out there. Are you ignoring this, the hugest source of “baby” deaths on Earth? What are you doing to save the fertilized eggs that fail to implant? Or are these “babies” just not important to you?

          If fertilized eggs that fail to implant, leading to “baby” deaths in the biggest numbers, aren’t really a source of mourning for you, then I’d submit that you’re engaged in gradational, subtle thinking about humanity that goes beyond “if it’s fertilized, it’s a baby.”

          Of course, I might be wrong, and you might be doing things right now to prevent failed implantation, the hugest source of “baby” death on Earth, in which case I’d like to hear what that is.

  3. Retired First Sgt says:

    Every woman has the absolute right to terminate a pregnancy at any time and for any reason. A zygote or embryo is no more human life than a virus or amebia.It is in effect nothing more than a parasite. It deserves no rights or protections until it is born and breathing outside the womb.So Thomas yes a zygote or embryo can be regarded as nothing more than an intrusion into a woman’s body to do what she wills and it is nobody’s body.

    • Jacob says:

      I see apost that says it is not human until the baby is outside the body and breathing on its own. Is that a real comment? I think the people like jim who argue that babies arnt real early on are wrong but I can at least se their confusion. To say that not until birth is just retarded. Babues are not delivered until 40 weeks but are viable life starting at 22 weeks. they could live on their own if given a chance. Even at that early age they have a 50/50 shot at it. By your definition a women could be in labor at 40 weeks and still get an abortion. That is beyond retarded.

      • Jim says:

        Jacob, it looks to me, at least, as though Sgt’s comment is sarcastic, trying to make an absolutist, dichotomous point of view look stupid. Thank you for acknowledging that I have a different position — although it is not exactly that “babies aren’t real,” but that at different stages of development fetuses and embryos and gametes have different status and that’s worth paying attention to.

  4. Tomas says:

    Yea…okay…a parasite…so a woman that terminates a child a 8 months has a right to, eh? Wow a lot of pre-mature babies that are now great people would disagree with you…but hey, like they say, guys, including dads, have no say. Aren’t you luckey YOUR mom chose life?

  5. Tom says:

    bravo (i mean it – very well spoken)

    The earth is above its carrying capacity. It’s no ones fault as we’re just busy “being”.

    • le pelerin says:

      The earth is above its carrying capacity – of liberals, yes.

      • Jim says:

        Le Pelerin, I believe Sgt. is actually agreeing with you by making an argument sarcastically. Whether he is sarcastic or not, his is a dichotomous statement when the reality of human development is gradational.

  6. le pelerin says:

    “And these 2 Republicans who voted to defend women’s access to abortion in America”

    Jim, you purposely mistate what is happening in this heathcare debate to get a rise out of people. It’s not about restricting access to abortion, but making everyone complicit to an abortion by having everyone chip in to pay for these women’s abortions. Ya, non news that is unfit to print for sure.

    • Jim says:

      What you write is true, except for the entirety of it that is UNtrue.

      Under the health care reform bill as it stands, no tax dollars would pay for policies that cover abortions. Under the Nelson-Hatch Amendment, nobody — even if they pay for an insurance policy entirely with their own money! — would be able to obtain abortion coverage for insurance policies in the national exchange.

      If you’re going to debate, get your facts straight.

      • le pelerin says:

        You can argue with these guys.
        http://www.usccb.org/comm/archives/2009/09-253.shtml
        I’ll believe them before you.

        • Jim says:

          I’ll believe the text of the Nelson-Hatch Amendment before I believe the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (especially after their lies during the Maine marriage equality campaign). Why believe what an authority figure tells you to believe? Don’t be sheepish. Go to the source document. Read the text of the Amendment:

          No funds authorized or appropriated by this Act (or an amendment made by this Act) may be used to pay for any abortion or to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion, except in the case where a woman suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would, as certified by a physician, place the woman in danger of death unless an abortion is performed, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself, or unless the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.

          Under the Nelson-Hatch Amendment, if just ONE person uses a federal subsidy to help pay the premium for an insurance plan, NO ONE under the plan can obtain abortion coverage, EVEN if those other people pay their premiums wholly on their own.

        • Jacob says:

          I dont think the bill goes far enough. the line “or unless the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.” should not be included. The baby did nothing wrong and does not deserve a death sentence. I understand it would be hard for the women but that doesnt make it right to kill the baby. The mother should have the baby and give it up for adoption if she does not want it.

        • le pelerin says:

          I agree the bill isn’t perfect but at least 99% of abortions wouldn’t be covered by taxpayers.

  7. le pelerin says:

    I believe Snowe is the only Rebublican to vote pro abort.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>