Bachmann speaks out on D.C. abortion ban

Michelle, are YOU going to pay to raise children who are “saved” from abortion? It seems that raising a child on public assistance is MUCH more expensive than any abortion procedure would be. No one wants to see a person get an abortion, but we have to consider social implications of banning the practice- one of which is more children needing to go on public assistance. I think Michelle has it backwards yet again. Michelle, the rate of foreclosures in your district is a high as anywhere in the country. I suspect your constituents- ya know, the people you’re SUPPOSED to be REPRESENTING, would appreciate you tackling some more pressing issues.

God bless you Michele!

I wonder if Michelle is willing to go into the ghettoes of Washington DC and tell those people she knows better than they do how to run their private lives? Talk about BIg Government, Michelle Bachmann represents forcing government controls over every intimate and private detail of your life. She is dangerous to American freedoms and rights because of her Taliban like insistence on her religious beliefs.

Bachmann says she believes in “women’s choices.” How can that be if she is against their getting an abortion if it is their choice?

Is this the same Michele Bachmann who regularly criticizes President Obama and Democrats because they want to reach into our lives more and more with greater government control?

What is it that this Representative from Minnesota is doing when she wants to manipulate legislation so poor women in Washington DC must bring a pregnancy to full term? Isn’t that government interference and control being inserted into among the most private, personal decisions we make as citizens?

Mill,

Michele Bachmann’s position is consistent. The government did not tell these women to get pregnant therefore the government should not have to pay for their abortions as well. Now what I see the problem is, what do you do with that baby when he/she is born and the mother is unable to provide for the child’s welfare. There is no easy answer but then again the universe doesn’t guarantee us one. I don’t think it’s moral to kill a baby simply because the mother was foolish and can’t afford to raise a baby. OTOH can we as a nation, allow poor people to simply reproduce at will without consequence.

BTW The state has no right to tell a mother what to do with her body but, since the state licenses Doctors, the state can, to some degree control what that doctor does.

Putting roadblocks in the way of abortion, or making it outright illegal, will not stop it. It will just drive it underground. Not only will babies still die, the risk for the mother will become extremely high as well.

Obama has the right attitude: Work on reducing unwanted pregnancy, work on improving the adoption system, work on reducing the reasons women seek abortions and you will succeed in reducing the number of abortions. Driving the procedure underground will only make it a more secretive tragedy.

This is an example of government getting in between a woman and her health care provider. Michelle, aren’t you against that?

[...] Speaks out against Obama’s Proposal to Lessen Restrictions on Abortion The Minnesota Independent reported that Rep. Michele Bachmann and her colleagues from the House Pro-Life Women’s Caucus [...]

In response to Mike’s point, the government also did not tell obese patients to eat unhealthily and not exercise, and yet it is paying for these patients’ high blood pressure, diabetes, and heart disease care. Reproductive health care for a woman is basic health care. Any significant change to one’s body is life-altering. Just as other patients have the right to choose their medical care, pregnant women should too.

PRO-VASECTOMY! Abortion won’t be an issue…