Robots
Uncle Sam promotes abortion?
Mr. Paul's bills would prohibit federal funds from being used for population control or "family planning" through exercising Congress' constitutional power to restrict federal court's jurisdiction by restoring each state's authority to protect unborn life.
http://insider.washingtontimes.com
In their search for middle ground on the subject of abortion, Democrats are encountering a mixture of resistance and retreat from abortion rights advocates in their own party.
http://nytimes.com/
The clock counts down to May for California's audacious $3 billion experiment in funding stem cell research...Not that the institute actually has decided to fund any grants or even has an application process. That's all still in the works.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/
Greenspan, if his past statements are any guide, is likely to support the concept of private accounts, though he may not be enthusiastic about their effect on the federal budget deficit, which set a record of $412 billion in the last fiscal year and is projected to rise to $427 billion this year.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Traffic/
Despite the obstacles, Congress ordered in 2000 that a third of the ground vehicles and a third of deep-strike aircraft in the military must become robotic within a decade. If that mandate is to be met, the United States will spend many billions of dollars on military robots by 2010.
http://nytimes.com/2005/02
Mr. Paul's bills would prohibit federal funds from being used for population control or "family planning" through exercising Congress' constitutional power to restrict federal court's jurisdiction by restoring each state's authority to protect unborn life.
http://insider.washingtontimes.com
In their search for middle ground on the subject of abortion, Democrats are encountering a mixture of resistance and retreat from abortion rights advocates in their own party.
http://nytimes.com/
The clock counts down to May for California's audacious $3 billion experiment in funding stem cell research...Not that the institute actually has decided to fund any grants or even has an application process. That's all still in the works.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/
Greenspan, if his past statements are any guide, is likely to support the concept of private accounts, though he may not be enthusiastic about their effect on the federal budget deficit, which set a record of $412 billion in the last fiscal year and is projected to rise to $427 billion this year.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Traffic/
Despite the obstacles, Congress ordered in 2000 that a third of the ground vehicles and a third of deep-strike aircraft in the military must become robotic within a decade. If that mandate is to be met, the United States will spend many billions of dollars on military robots by 2010.
http://nytimes.com/2005/02
posted by bryan at 10:04 AM
6 Comments:
For some reason abortion rates have increased since Bush has been in office. During the Clinton years abortions decreased 17.4% putting abortion rates at a 24 year low.
Reports from silly interest groups are attempting to link the abortion increase with Bush's economic policies saying poor people are too poor to have babies so they kill them instead. There might be some truth to that, but I doubt there's a whole lot. Is it just coincidence that abortion rates are increasing? What if it's bill's like the one Mr. Paul is proposing that is increasing abortion rates?
Groups like Planned Parenthood, while ardantly pro-abortion, prefer to prevent preganancies with increased awareness and knowlege of contraceptives. As government tries to reverse it's stance on aiding family planning by "prohibit[ing] federal funds from being used for population control or 'family planning'", they might just get the adverse affect.
I know it's the libertarian thing to say that the government has no business supplying ANY money to stuff like this, but it does and has for decades. It's not going to stop meddling. It really should pass legislation that would actually prevent abortions by not decreasing all types of funding to family planning groups because some of that money might be used for abortions. The side affects could very well be an increase in abortions, as less women are likely to be able to obtain birth control. My sweet mormon sisters got some subsidized birth control from Planned Parenthood (that shocked me off my ass at first and I began shouting accusing them of supporting abortion). But do we really think that taking the pill is immoral? Go ahead and quote Joseph F. Smith.
There should be legislation that encourages insurance companies to provide discounts for birth control like it does for viagra. I think then we'd see a decrease in abortions.
I feel like such a damned dirty liberal.
i agree aaron-i dont think i wouldve made the same logical thinking line that you did, but it makes sense...so, kudos to you aaron!
you are a dirty liberal.. always have been.. always will be... if i was just going to take a guess i would say that an increase in abortions very much due to an economic downturn starting around the turn of the century/tech bust. but i think it would be interesting to research... i just may see what i can find out...
so i did a little bit of quick research which is always fun... but anyway.. heres some of the stuff i found out...
i dont buy the 17.4% statistic. that was data release by a group called "Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life". theyre actually a pro-life group.
data source
MCCLA group that is considered by many from what ive seen to be reputable in aboration rates is a nuetral non-profit called "The Alan Guttmacher Institute"
AGI they dont offer statistics past the year 2000 and that " substantial proportion of the 11% decline in abortion rates between 1994 and 2000 was due to women's use of emergency contraception."
The Center for Desease Control also maintains statistics on abortion rates and does not have any reports that offer numbers beyond the year 2001 in which "...853,485 legal induced abortions were reported to CDC. This total represents a 0.5 percent decrease from the 857,475 abortions reported in 2000."
CDCit seems like one could assume that it takes a few yearsuntil real accurate data is available in report form on abortion rates.
taking the subject in another direction here is an opinion piece that was in the Wall Street Journal on the numerical effects that abortions have had and will continue to have on the Democrat Party.
The Empty Cradle Will Rockbtw, dumb blogger wont let me put break or paragraph tags, so hopefully the formatting isnt too bad...
and the formatting is bad :/ grrrr..... the preview option is a hoax... ah well
Post a Comment
<< Home