EVERYONE Already Pays For Abortions!!

Yep. I'm gonna go there. I'm going to talk about abortion. It's one of the few things about which the Libertarian Party & I disagree. They think it's a choice. I think it's murder and as such that we don't have a choice. I'm sure we can all agree that people on both sides of the issue tend to feel strongly.

What I don't get is why people are all of a sudden up in arms about having to pay for abortion regardless of their beliefs. It's one of the cries against the health care legislation (which is STILL unconstitutional...but I digress).

People, you're ALREADY paying for abortion!!!! This isn't anything new! Regardless of how you feel about it, I can guarantee you that taxpayer money & consumer money IS going to pay for abortions!

Right after Obama came into office, he signed legislation that overrode what Bush had done allowing our international aid money to help fund abortions in other countries. This happened a year ago...but it didn't start there either.

If you purchase anything from any company that supports the United Way; then you are paying for abortions. They help support Planned Parenthood which offers abortions hence YOU paying for abortions. Which companies support United Way? Last time I checked, pretty much EVERY big company did; Target, Wal-Mart, take your pick...the list goes on.

The ONLY way you are going to NOT pay for abortions is if you ONLY purchase from a local farmer who is 100% self-sufficient or only purchases items from farmers who are 100% self-sufficient or only purchase from farmers who are 100% get the idea. You'd also want to make sure that the farmer doesn't support any organizations who give money to United Way or any other company that gives to a company who offers abortion. You'd also want to make sure those farmers don't pay taxes because if they do then ultimately the money YOU gave them would help pay those taxes which would help fund abortions overseas which means that you're STILL helping to pay for abortions.

That's why I don't get that it's JUST NOW that people are getting upset about it. Why? Is it because you're REALLY upset that you're paying for abortions? Or is it because THIS TIME, the right-wing media TOLD you to be upset about paying for abortions?

Seems to me that if you're JUST NOW getting upset then perhaps it's because you've been TOLD to.

I realize there are some people who didn't have the knowledge of these things. Who's fault is that, though? The media's fault? Or your fault for not doing the research to know where your money is going & waiting until someone told you to get upset before you got upset?

I don't like that my money goes to pay for abortions. I'm also not willing to stop paying my taxes. I'm also not yet living on a homestead where I'm fully self-sufficient. As a result, I know that even though I don't like it & even though abortion is murder...I DO still help pay for it...and I'm not going to get upset now acting like it's the first time that this has ever happened. It's NOT! I was upset years ago when I found out about the United Way & purposed then to not give to their organization & to instead put my money much as I could help it. I was upset when Clinton signed the bill into law allowing international aid money to fund abortions. I was upset when Obama did it again.

Do I LIKE that there's yet another way where I'm paying for abortions? NO! I'm also not going to pretend like it's just happening either, though...or that there aren't other ways in which I'm STILL going to be paying for abortions even if the healthcare bill didn't go through!

Do your OWN research, people, and QUIT relying on the media to tell you what to do, think, & believe!


Elizabeth Grattan said...


I simply do not understand this perspective.

If you truly believed abortion was murder - then that means it is slaughter of babies - and I can't understand how a person could say they believed it was that AND STILL didn't act to boycott all funding for it.

My guess is that most people who claim they think it is murder (which it isn't, not in the states or according to the biblical text) don't really want to put their money where there mouth is so to speak.

If these "murders" were happening at daycare centers across the globe, would you still say "oh well, it's murder but i'm not ready to live on a homestead so i pay anyway"?

No. I doubt it.

It strikes me as convenient for people to use rhetoric as "murder" when the actions show otherwise.

I know you will disagree, but I think that's because you simply aren't willing (as you stated in the blog) to do anything and everything you can to stand up against what you claim is such a horrible reality.

Hope that makes sense. There was a fantastic article in Slate regarding this over the last year.


Gary Thompson said...


However, not relying on the media to tell us what to think might require some work on our part.

As a conservative, I'd rather just wait for Glenn Beck or Rush to tell me what I should think and do...and then do it.

I need to be spoon fed. I'm an American conservative.

Fact of the matter is, if we actually did the research, we'd see that the media's left versus right back and forth paradigm is mostly for entertainment value anyway.

But don't get me started.

Gary Thompson said...


Believing something is wrong and doing something about it are two different things.

Does knowledge and belief always lead to action? It should. But it doesn't always.

I agree with your assessment that if we really believed it was tantamount to daycare center massacres that we'd be crowding the streets to stop it.

I would submit that it's not a lack of belief that it is murder that waters down our action. It's a social apathy that has infiltrated us as the church.

I am aware of scores of world-wide injustices in our world that the church should be rising up against. But we aren't. And when I say "we" I include myself. But we don't do anything about it because we don't feel compelled to act based on the fact that we don't perceive a personal affect of said injustice upon us individually.

To sum up: I don't necessarily believe that the church would do much more to stop daycare center massacres than we currently do to stop abortions if those daycare massacres were as common place as abortions. Why? We're lazy and selfish by nature. And if it doesn't affect us personally, we tend to ignore it.

Since when has the church NOT abandoned our social responsibility? It's kind of our hallmark. But that doesn't make the truth any less true. If the church were really doing it's job, then there would be no need for welfare programs and government aid.

So really...just because we don't act on our belief that something is wrong doesn't negate the truth that said action is universally wrong. It just reveals the lack of character in us.

Elizabeth Grattan said...


I didn't say that it wasn't murder because no one was standing up against it. I said if you truly believed it was the outrage being claimed, you would stand up against it.

There really is no justified excuse not to, if what you say is true... that you believe it is murder and slaughter of innocents. It's no different than suggesting because Adolph ruled, oh well...

It's a glaring contradiction to say one is opposed WHILE not only condoning but with funds supporting the same action one says they oppose.

And there is no truth that it is a universal wrong. There is zero evidence to support a moral gene. That it doesn't sit right with one's own personal mores, in no way makes it "wrong" to anyone but them.

But I do agree it is a lack of character. And hypocrisy in a vast degree.

Which is what I'm saying: I don't understand the perspective, because it is such a glaringly obvious admission that some don't really - not really - believe it's as horrid as they claim it to be.

That's because belief fleshes itself in action, or it's irrelevant.

Melissa said...

Good blog. I work for Kansans for Life and we help get boycott lists into peoples hands every year (they get updates yearly). We have had several success stories as a result. No, we will probably not ever put Walt Disney or Johnson and Johnson out of business but the boycott list and actions of people have caused many organizations to desist their contributions to planned parenthood. I know one local community cancelled a fundraising event - I believe it was an American cancer society walk - and it caused so much commotion that that the ACS actually came back asking what waas going on. Also - UPS was on the boycott list and received so much communication about it that they contacted the boycott list group to see what they could do to rectify the situation.
Side note - where does it ever say in the bible that life is NOT sacred, that all life should NOT be respected, that all persons do NOT deserve to live in dignity?

Elizabeth Grattan said...

Regarding the side note:

The biblical text doesn't consider all life to be "sacred". It also doesn't promote all persons to live in dignity.

The biblical text shows that some life is to be snuffed out.

However, I'm not sure why that question is on this entry, only because, well, this isn't a post about "persons" and dignity? It's a post about abortion.

Biblical text doesn't address abortion.

Nancy Brooks said...


I read the article you suggested and find it to greatly oversimplify a complex situation. If children were being slaughtered in daycare centers, that would be quite a different situation than the one we have been fighting for the last 40 years.

For those of us who believe abortion is murder, the situation is more akin to the following analogy (times millions instead of in the singular): A tiny baby and a three year old are in danger of being killed by a pack of hungry wolves. At some risk to myself and my own family I can save the three year old. Indeed, I could save them both. However, a guard - who is unconcerned about either child -- stands nearby waiting to kill me if I save the baby. He will allow me to try to coax the baby away from the wolves as they rapidly approach. He will allow me to try to distract the wolves and he's not bothered if I exhaust myself and put my own family at risk doing so. Perhaps, if I were miraculously given the time I could indeed train the wolves that there are better options than eating babies. But in the meantime, both the baby and the three-year old are about to be slaughtered and in that immediate situation I can either save the three year old or watch both die.

My generation has done the protest by every means allowed us: marching, picketing, letter writing, establishment of centers to counsel and assist mothers with unwanted pregnancies. We entered into politics in a way we never had before. We threw our considerable political support to a political party that led us to believe they were as appalled as we are by the slaughter of innocents. It has been only recently that it has finally dawned upon many of us that these politicians have only been courting our support so they could do what is really near and dear to their hearts, which is to line their own pockets and maintain their positions of power.

We have been duped and the movement to halt abortion is fractured, with some people still duped, and some in shock at the way we were duped. Disagreement exists as to whether to go for full repeal or compromise, and confusion reigns as to how to move forward.

There are also factors such as the struggle to find jobs and keep our own children safe AND the added drag of now having a generation that has grown up with Roe v. Wade being the law.

But please do not be mistaken - many of us HAVE put our money where our mouths are and in some situations put our own lives and families at risk to save the unborn. The illegal attempts make the news. The rest is pretty much ignored by the media.

And please do not set up a false ethical dilemma: A choice to save millions of BORN children does not indicate the lack of a desire to also save millions of the unborn.


Elizabeth Grattan said...

Nancy....YOU are the one who fabricated a false dilemma. The analogy you give in no way represents the issue. And you know it.

Look, either you think it is the slaughter of innocents or you don't. If you think it is, and you claim you do... then don't pretend that it is "okay" to tolerate it while complaining about it as well.

That's the point. And yes, simple. As the article suggests.

Unknown said...


I've recently found a book that I'd like to suggest for all of us. It's entitled Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When Stakes Are High. It is not specifically about abortion, but instead applies to communication amongst those who disagree about any high-stakes and emotionally charged situations.

All the best,

Elizabeth Grattan said...

I'm not having an emotionally charged discussion... so I'm not seeing why that book would be relevant. But by all means, go ahead and read it for yourself if you feel you are communicating through emotion rather than objective discussion.

Nancy said...

Well, there's also the high stakes aspect of the issue. But I assumed you were emotionally charged because instead of responding logically you resorted to telling me what I really think. That leaves us nothing to build on in trying to understand each other. Your latest post then, leads me to assume that you're more interested in being right than in seeking to understand. My mistake. I apologize and will not bother you further.

Elizabeth Grattan said...

Nancy, There is nothing illogical in my post. It was you who fabricated a false dilemma argument then claimed it was my argument. I never suggested such an analogy.

And, I am right about the statements I made.

It is a contradiction for people to claim it is murder and then support it while stating they don't want to support it.

Anonymous said...

Abortion IS NOT a simple issue.

I am curious about where you have received your Bible teaching/training from, and which denomination you consider yourself to be.

I am a Christian and I BELIEVE in FAITH that each word in the Bible is God breathed or God ordained and therefor it is TRUTH from God, and because of that, I believe when God wrote the 6th commandment, "Do Not Murder" he had the unborn child in mind, because I believe that life begins at conception, and that ALL life is precious to God!

Isn't it interesting that Jesus never talked about abortion while he was here on earth?
Kim :)

Elizabeth Grattan said...


I can assure you that you are not basing your beliefs about this on the biblical text. NO WHERE does the text claim that all of life is precious. Nor does it claim that a soul (which is what I'm going to guess you mean by "life") exists at conception.

(we have zero evidence of a "soul" by the way.)

And murder dealt with the UNLAWFUL or UNJUST taking of a person. Those are loaded terms however, since the God of Abraham had no issue with the taking of lives of those who were not one of the Tribes.

In other words: Neither in the Torah, that Talmud, nor the gospels or letters from Paul or any other passage in the biblical text is abortion considered murder. Never. In fact, the text makes really no different distinction of a fetus or embryo than our modern laws today. The text speaks of a developing life in a womb (which no one counters) and that's about as far as it goes. Not a soul, not a spirit, not any more than that.

You are attempting to put something into the text that just isn't there. The 6th commandment makes no such statement about an embryo or fetus, and the writers and audience at that time didn't understand it to mean what you are suggesting at all.

Now, you likely have been programmed to believe it's "murder" because of a lot of ignorance about the history of the ancients and the rhetoric that gets tossed around today. But again, I assure you, it just isn't there.

It is pretty simple an issue. That you choose to complicate it is your decision.

Your interest in my education is irrelevant. And your assumptions are insulting as well.

Take a course in critical thinking and perhaps we can discuss the issue clearly and objectively.