Oklahoma abortion bill veto upheld

[Terri]

By UPI Staff
United Press International
April 27, 2007

OKLAHOMA CITY (UPI) -- The Oklahoma state Senate failed to overturn Gov. Brad Henry's veto of a bill that would have blocked state-operated hospitals from performing abortions.

Senate Bill 714, which would also have kept public funds from hospitals performing abortions, failed by a 31-17 vote -- one vote short of the required amount to overturn a veto, The Oklahoman reported Thursday.

More

[candles]

"I am pro-life, and I have consistently voted for pro-life legislation. This bill, however, holds poorer Oklahomans to a different standard than everyone else, and I can't support that."
He added: "It does not allow an exception in the case of rape or incest and medical experts in Oklahoma believe this bill will undermine the relationship between doctors and their patients. The bill also interferes with private health insurance coverage."

He should think about the unborn babies before any of the above.

[DinosaurTracks]

This bill, however, holds poorer Oklahomans to a different standard than everyone else, and I can't support that. -- Gov. Henry on why he vetoed SB714

There is an ugly little reality about abortion funding to which Gov. Henry alluded when he vetoed this bill. A large percentage of the funding for abortions, abortion proponent organizations (planned parenthood, et al) and the pushing of abortion as a global priority comes from conservatives. Public funding of abortion is truly in the political interest of conservatives regardless their statements regarding “Pro Life” positions. Were the true motives widely comprehended the opprobrium would be immeasurable.

Gov. Henry knows that the people he wants to have populating his fine state can afford their own abortions, and the fact is, he doesn't want anymore of those kind of people who can't pay for an abortion. If these people want an abortion yet cannot pay for it, we are going to get stuck paying for childbirth, then WIC, then education for a person who by all statistics is more likely to cause trouble, kill someone, use and sell drugs, end up in prison...

And in underdeveloped countries... the more of them that are never born, the fewer there will be "invading" our society trying to find something better in life. Yes! Every mother in any under developed nation has the RIGHT to terminate every possible pregnancy. (by this philosophy—not “right” in the sense of it being morally acceptable)

Why do you think funding to Planned Parenthood and abortion clinics in the slums of every major city is abundant while normal social programs there go lacking? Why would conservatives with enormous wealth who wouldn’t consider investing in such a place, surreptitiously donate hundreds of millions to advance free abortion on demand all the way through the final trimester? It is a form of population control. If the mother can be convinced that having that child will be an inconvenience, then the child will never become an "inconvenience" to the rest of us later.

Yes, Gov. Henry, we need to take care of the poor before they are born or we will have to take care of them for the rest of their lives. But you did word it much more palatably.

[Bill Dafence]

Why do you think funding to Planned Parenthood and abortion clinics in the slums of every major city is abundant while normal social programs there go lacking? Why would conservatives with enormous wealth who wouldn’t consider investing in such a place, surreptitiously donate hundreds of millions to advance free abortion on demand all the way through the final trimester? It is a form of population control. If the mother can be convinced that having that child will be an inconvenience, then the child will never become an "inconvenience" to the rest of us later.

so by vetoing the bill and then upholding the veto the dems were actually just showing the world what merciless murdering savages the republicans are and the dems part in the continued murder of unborn oklahomans is of no consequence...and the devil really did make them do it...

[pnyikos]

Gov. Henry .... doesn't want anymore of those kind of people who can't pay for an abortion.

Where do you get all this inside dope on Gov. Henry?

If these people want an abortion yet cannot pay for it, we are going to get stuck paying for childbirth, then WIC, then education for a person who by all statistics is more likely to cause trouble, kill someone, use and sell drugs, end up in prison...

What makes you think the majority of poor people are like this and have these kinds of children? Fact is, a greater percentage of abused children were "wanted" --90% according to one study, as opposed to 63% of children in the general population.

[Source: Abortion Questions and Answers, 1991 edition, citing an article by E. Lenoski in Heartbeat, December 1980.]

The rest of what you said ignores the fact that America is getting older, so to speak, with baby boomers starting to retire in earnest without enough young people to put money into Social Security for them. And baby boomers are the lucky ones: they have benefits guaranteed until SS goes bankrupt; it's the X and Y generations that are really going to get the raw deal.

[billybigrigger]

I'm pro-life but legislation is never going to end abortions. The one's that can afford it will go were their available, and a certain percentage of those that can't will still find a way, some will die trying. You have to change people's hearts. You have to give women considering abortions alternatives.

Their are 10's of thousands of American children waiting for adoption, just not healthy, little white babies. If they can't find what they want here they will pay a $100,000 to a adopt a cute little Chinese girl.

[Old Man]

You have to change people's hearts

http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/312.pdf

This Pew Research center report is a must read if you want to understand what a battle not only Conservatives face, but all Republicans.

Check out the chart on page six. From a little over a decade ago, the Democrats and Republicans at 44% and 43% have moved to 50% and 35% when you combine both the membership and "leaners."

But, the report also shows the large shift in moral and social views including willingness for even more debt to "help the needy." It documents the move away from religion to secularism and things like

• Republicans are increasingly divided over the cultural impact of immigrants. Nearly seven-in-ten (68%) conservative Republicans say immigrants threaten American customs, compared with 43% of GOP moderates and liberals. Democrats have long been divided along ideological lines, but the GOP previously had not been.

But, abortion is still pretty stable

Opinions about abortion have also have changed relatively little over the past several years. A 56% majority opposes making it more difficult for a woman to get an abortion, while 35% favor this.

There is a sizable partisan gap on this question as well, with 53% of Republicans favoring making it harder to get an abortion, while just 24% of Democrats agree. There is a very large intra-party gap among Republicans, with fully 63% of conservative Republicans wanting to make abortions harder to get, compared with only 37% of moderate and liberal Republicans; moderate and conservative Democrats (30% favor) differ from liberal Democrats (15% favor) on this question as well, but the gap is not as large as among Republicans. There are no significant gender or age differences on this question.

It isn't the "opposition" as much as the "apathetic" that make only 35% support the view most on this forum have. As BillBigRigger states, without a change of heart, 35% (which is just about the number of Republicans and "leaners" will be dead in the water if they make this a campaign issue that drives voters away.

Now, I support those who will make a "stand" on this issue just as I support anyone on any Constitutional issue but, they need to know, they face an uphill battle and probably won't win. If "principle" is more important than "victory," then you have to also be prepared for not only defeat, but no chance of turning the nation around until it hits bottom and there is, "a change of heart."

Being adopted, I am very "pro-life." So, I support this issue but, also, because of the Constitution, believe it is a State Issue. Yet, since the Supreme Court has made it a "federal issue, what choice does that leave the "pro-life" people? I believe you have to get the "choice" back to the state first and that will take a Constitutionally minded Court. So, electing a President who is "pro-life" won't matter if that same President has it in mind to appoint moderate Justices to satisfy the senate.

If you don't have a "strategy" to "win the hearts" of the people, you can't win this battle or most of the others. I doubt their is a strategy currently that will do that. The time to have had a strategy and implement it was 3 decades ago or more. "The progressive generation" is now in control of movies, TV, Newspapers, and Congress. The liberalization of our Churches is a prime example of the evidence in how hard an up-hill battle Conservatives face.

While we figure out ways to win the Presidency, the left has been busy "winning the minds and hearts" of voters so that no matter who they run, they have a better chance at victory.

How do we win the hearts back?

[RealDeal]

How do we win the hearts back?

Good question considering we are indoctrinated from early ages that we are a product of chance, not special in relation to (other) animals.

And that the "fetus" is only a "potential human being" or "product of pregnancy" not at all a baby/child/offspring; fully HUMAN from conception. And ALIVE.

But we can start by talking about it. We while they

We need to educate to win over hearts and minds.. and the discussion SHOULD NOT DELVE INTO THE THEOLOGICAL!! That IS NOT a winning strategy.

"Believe what you want about God and the cosmos... scientifically speaking, human life begins at conception."

I'm pro-life but legislation is never going to end abortions.

Agree with you, but we certainly do not have to endorse it (with or without funding) as a nation, either. Law = morality, for most... don't forget it. Since it's legal it isn't "wrong".

Laws against murder (in the generally accepted definition) hasn't stopped murder. That's no arguement not to end this abomination called "abortion on demand".