"DEMOCRATS VOTE AGAIN AGAINST FUNDING TO COMBAT ZIKE VIRUS BECAUSE BILL DIDN'T PROMOTE ABORTION" - Steven Ertelt, Sep 6, 2016| http://www.lifenews.com/2016/09/06/democrats-vote-again-against-funding-to-combat-zika-virus-because-bill-didnt-promote-abortion/
Democrats have now voted a third time against a bill that would fund efforts to combat the Zika virus because the bill didn’t promote the Planned Parenthood abortion business and abortions on babies affected by Zika.
The Hill reports the bill provides $622 million in funding to combat the mosquito-borne Zika virus, which has been spreading throughout South America and into North America and across the world. The bill passed the U.S. House but Senate Democrats Democrats objected, arguing that American tax dollars should be used to fund abortions for women with Zika.
Here’s more: Senate Democrats on Tuesday blocked a $1.1 billion Zika funding measure for the third time, a move that is expected to trigger new negotiations to author a bipartisan bill aimed at combating the mosquito-transmitted virus that is spreading in Florida. Senate Republicans tried yet again to get the 60 votes needed to end debate on the bill and call it up for a final vote, but fell short 52-46 as Democrats voted against it. The Democratic filibuster marks the third time party lawmakers have stood in the way of the GOP-authored bill.
Democratic lawmakers have refused to back the legislation because it strips more than half a billion dollars from a defunct Obamacare fund as well as more than $200 million from other unspent federal funds. Democrats also oppose the bill because the funding would not be distributed to clinics in Puerto Rico that are affiliated with Planned Parenthood, a women’s health care and abortion provider.
“It’s hard to explain why, despite their own calls for funding, Senate Democrats decided to block a bill that would keep pregnant women and babies safer from Zika,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Tuesday. “For the third time this year, a partisan minority blocked important appropriations bills from advancing,” said pro-life Colorado Senator Cory Gardner.
“I voted to approve more than $1 billion to combat the Zika virus,” Gardner added. “While a partisan minority continues to call for Zika funding in the press, they chose to block this measure from moving forward today for the third time this year. It is a glaring example of the political machine at its worst: the very people who are demanding the passage of Zika funding are its only obstacle to approval. It is time to put politics aside and approve these critical funding packages.”
Abortion advocates have been using the Zika virus as an excuse to push for more abortions on babies with disabilities. The virus has been linked to birth defects in babies. Several South American countries have reported an alarming spike in the number of babies born with microcephaly in the past few months. The brain disorder is not typically fatal, but it can cause health problems throughout the child’s life. In an eugenic-like push, abortion activists argue that South American countries should legalize abortion so that women infected with the virus can abort unborn babies who may have the disorder.
Despite touting abortion as answer to Zika to kill disabled babies, a recent, expansive study has cast legitimate doubt on the Zika/microcephaly connection.
The New England Complex Systems Institute has shed new light on the situation and opened the possibility that the declared Zika link may be premature. The study is expansive and so credible that the New England Journal of Medicine published the preliminary results in spite of already concluding Zika was the problem. The study looked at nearly 12,000 pregnant Colombian women infected with Zika. None of them had a baby with microcephaly. Four cases of microcephaly were reported with women who didn’t have Zika symptoms and were not part of the study, which is consistent with the normal expected number of cases.
Based on estimated numbers there should be about 60,000 pregnant women in Colombia with the Zika virus, yet there are hardly any cases of microcephaly. If the link to Zika is legitimate, there should have been a dramatic increase in the number of babies with microcephaly.
[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]
Democrats have now voted a third time against a bill that would fund efforts to combat the Zika virus because the bill didn’t promote the Planned Parenthood abortion business and abortions on babies affected by Zika.
The Hill reports the bill provides $622 million in funding to combat the mosquito-borne Zika virus, which has been spreading throughout South America and into North America and across the world. The bill passed the U.S. House but Senate Democrats Democrats objected, arguing that American tax dollars should be used to fund abortions for women with Zika.
Here’s more: Senate Democrats on Tuesday blocked a $1.1 billion Zika funding measure for the third time, a move that is expected to trigger new negotiations to author a bipartisan bill aimed at combating the mosquito-transmitted virus that is spreading in Florida. Senate Republicans tried yet again to get the 60 votes needed to end debate on the bill and call it up for a final vote, but fell short 52-46 as Democrats voted against it. The Democratic filibuster marks the third time party lawmakers have stood in the way of the GOP-authored bill.
Democratic lawmakers have refused to back the legislation because it strips more than half a billion dollars from a defunct Obamacare fund as well as more than $200 million from other unspent federal funds. Democrats also oppose the bill because the funding would not be distributed to clinics in Puerto Rico that are affiliated with Planned Parenthood, a women’s health care and abortion provider.
“It’s hard to explain why, despite their own calls for funding, Senate Democrats decided to block a bill that would keep pregnant women and babies safer from Zika,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Tuesday. “For the third time this year, a partisan minority blocked important appropriations bills from advancing,” said pro-life Colorado Senator Cory Gardner.
“I voted to approve more than $1 billion to combat the Zika virus,” Gardner added. “While a partisan minority continues to call for Zika funding in the press, they chose to block this measure from moving forward today for the third time this year. It is a glaring example of the political machine at its worst: the very people who are demanding the passage of Zika funding are its only obstacle to approval. It is time to put politics aside and approve these critical funding packages.”
Abortion advocates have been using the Zika virus as an excuse to push for more abortions on babies with disabilities. The virus has been linked to birth defects in babies. Several South American countries have reported an alarming spike in the number of babies born with microcephaly in the past few months. The brain disorder is not typically fatal, but it can cause health problems throughout the child’s life. In an eugenic-like push, abortion activists argue that South American countries should legalize abortion so that women infected with the virus can abort unborn babies who may have the disorder.
Despite touting abortion as answer to Zika to kill disabled babies, a recent, expansive study has cast legitimate doubt on the Zika/microcephaly connection.
The New England Complex Systems Institute has shed new light on the situation and opened the possibility that the declared Zika link may be premature. The study is expansive and so credible that the New England Journal of Medicine published the preliminary results in spite of already concluding Zika was the problem. The study looked at nearly 12,000 pregnant Colombian women infected with Zika. None of them had a baby with microcephaly. Four cases of microcephaly were reported with women who didn’t have Zika symptoms and were not part of the study, which is consistent with the normal expected number of cases.
Based on estimated numbers there should be about 60,000 pregnant women in Colombia with the Zika virus, yet there are hardly any cases of microcephaly. If the link to Zika is legitimate, there should have been a dramatic increase in the number of babies with microcephaly.
[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]
No comments:
Post a Comment