Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Contraceptive Funding

I said if I found something positive that Obama does, I'd point it out here. According to Michelle Malkin, "Obama wants the Dems to eliminate Pelosi’s pet contraceptive funding from the Generational Theft Act of 2009". See this link for more details.


comradi0 said...

I'm glad you saw that.

House of Brat said...

So basically you think poor women should get abortions for children they can't afford to have rather than have access to contraception. Interesting...

Tyler said...

Wow Tami! I am really impressed that you held true to your were, and pointed out a positive aspect of the man that I voted for! I think I might start crying! Just kidding. But really I am really glad that you pointed out something positive on your blog.

Paul said...

But today they left this in H.R. 1 instead.

Page 147

(4) not less than $335,000,000 shall be used as an additional amount to carry out domestic HIV/AIDS, viral hepatitis, sexually-transmitted diseases, and tuberculosis prevention programs, as jointly determined by the Secretary and the Director;

How many jobs does this create as claimed by Nancy Pelosi?

In the past, the CDC has used STD education funding for programs that many Members of Congress find objectionable and arguably unrelated to a mission of economic stimulus [such as funding events called 'Booty Call' and 'Great Sex' put on by an organization that received $698,000 in government funds].

Tami said...

Yeah, House of Brat, that's exactly right. Way to make up stuff....you guys are getting really quite good at it. Thanks for the continued ammo.

Tami said...

By the way, house of brat, funding of contraception actually INCREASES unwanted pregnancy.

Anonymous said...

Can you list your research on the fact that funding for research increases unwanted pregnancy?

Tami said...

I didn't say funding for RESEARCH increases unwanted pregnancies, I said funding of contraception increases unwanted pregnancy. I will look it up and let you know.

Anonymous said...

Excuse me, yes, that's what I meant - funding for contraceptives. Sorry.

Tami said...


I have heard this on many of the conservative talk shows, and when it is talked about, sources are cited-it was those I was searching for before I posted the others I found, but I can't locate the list of the ones that were cited when I was listening. Anyway, here are some others I have read: there are many, so this is just a sampling. Google can be of great assistance on this subject, depending on wording.


“As acceptance of contraception increases so does acceptance of abortion. Why is this the case? Because at the root of contraception is the notion that a couple can engage in sexual activity and avoid its natural consequences. Couples who unintentionally conceive a child while using contraception are far more likely to resort to abortion than others . . . Taking the possibility of human life out of the sexual act has lead to a false sense of ‘sexual freedom’ and with it a neglect of the responsibility that ought to accompany sex.”




What I was pointing out, thought my point wasn't well made above, was that the funding for contraceptives--which provides contraceptives for untold millions of women, does just what is stated in the quote above. I am not against a woman being on the pill, but I am against the government taking my tax money to give it to a teenage girl, along with condoms, and such. These kids need to be taught that abstinence works 100% of the time when tried....this works better for everyone. First, it causes the individual to be responsible for their own actions, it prevents the murder of the unborn, the spread of STD's, etc., etc.....hope this helps.