Infanticide Loophole

Did anyone think that the abortionists would go gently into the long night where they belong? No; I didn’t think so. Like all genocidal mass murderers, they will continue their slaughter, by any and all means until they themselves are exterminated.

Note please that I’m Anti-Abortion as opposed to Pro-Life. I have no moral qualms about exterminating vermin in order to protect the innocent – and who is more innocent than the unborn?

The baby killers on the Left have already taken steps to ensure that, even if some version Stupak’s amendment is included in the monstrosity of ObamaCare’s Health Insurance Reconstruction, the public funding of infanticide will proceed according to their plans.

President Obama’s pet Infanticide, Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary, Kathleen “Kill All You Want; We’ll Fund More” Sebelius, was proud to explain the abortion funding loophole in the current Senate bill.


HHS Sec., Kathleen Sebelius Explains ObamaCare Infanticide Loophole

During an interview on December 21, 2009, with the Feminists at Blogher, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius tried to quell their fears that they might have to pay out their own money in order to have their unborn children scalded within their wombs, scraped out, and tossed onto the trash heap.

HHS Secretary Kathleen "Kill All You Want; We'll Fund More" Sebelius - She never heard of a fetus she didn't want you to pay to murderSebelius explained to the representative from Blogher that the bill, irrespective of any Stupak or Hyde Amendment that might be applied to it, would force everyone who enrolls in the new Insurance Exchange created by ObamaCare to contribute part of their premiums to a “special set aside fund” by way of a special accounting procedure.

The separate, special fund to be created by this accounting procedure would then be used by the government to subsidize or pay for abortions without technically using any Public Funds, i.e., Americans’ tax dollars.

This is certainly an egregious loophole since it does bypass the Hyde Amendment and therefor any variant of the Stupak Amendment as well.

While public funds arent used, we are not isolating, discriminating against or invading the privacy rights of women. There would be an accounting procedure, but everybody in the exchange would do the same thing. Whether youre male or female, whether youre 75 or 25, you would all set aside a portion of your premium that would go into a fund, and it would not be earmarked for anything, it would be a separate account that everyone in the exchange would pay.

— HHS Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius
December 21,2009, Blogher Interview

So now public funds would be used to pay for abortions. Instead part of the money payed by every American who purchased a health insurance policy from ObamaCare’s health insurance exchange would be required by federal law to be set aside for that subhuman, nefarious purpose.

A Graphic Reminder For Those Who Need It

Since the Liberals reign for the moment, ObamaCare will likely be forced upon American and, with it both the health insurance exchanges and Sebelius’ favorite infanticidal loophole. This is all but a certainty since they’ll do anything to achieve it.

This places Americans in a very difficult position. Since it’s not actual tax dollars being used to fund infanticide / abortion, it is technically a voluntary contribution to that Hell-born cause. Yet, if one chooses to, or is forced to, purchase health insurance from the ObamaCare exchange, one is de facto choosing to fund the deaths of 100’s of thousands of babies per year.

Would you buy health insurance the ObamaCare exchange knowing that by fiat part of your premiums will go towards the deaths of unborn children? What if you’re one of the 100+ million Americans who will be forced due to economic pressures upon their employers to either purchase health insurance the ObamaCare exchange or do without?

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | |

9 Responses to “Infanticide Loophole”

  1. Elric66 Says:

    I guess I dont have a choice whether I want to help fund this barbaric act or not. And I thought the demomarxists were “pro-choice”.

  2. opit Says:

    I note your categorizing of the ‘abortion’ procedure as infanticide. Your priorities have puzzled me for a while. While I cannot say I ‘support’ abortion, I am aware that making it illegal leads to dying, cut up young women from botched amateur hour surgery.

    They don’t call them ‘hacks’ for nothing, in this case.

    Then there is the comparison to murder of women and children in foreign lands : actual people bombed as economic stimulus for the war machine.

    That seems o.k.

    What do you think about the children born to parents exposed to Depleted Uranium in ‘war’ zones attacked by the U.S. without reasonable cause ? : and don’t give me the al Qaeda drivel. Even were it true, bombing civilians is no reasonable or effective response.

    You seem affected by terribly selective outrage.

  3. jonolan Says:

    No, Elric66. You do have a choice. You can either actively support infanticide by purchasing health insurance from the ObamaCare exchange or you can put your blood and treasure – and that of your family if you have one – on the line to defend the unborn by refusing to do so, even if that’s your only means of getting health insurance.

    So how strong are your beliefs and commitment to them? The abortionists are counting on them being weak.

  4. jonolan Says:

    Yes, opit. Making abortion illegal would lead to “dying, cut up young women from botched amateur hour surgery.” A certain number and sort of people will continue in heinous behaviors whether those behaviors are legal or not. Otherwise there would no longer be other forms of murder, rape, assault, and the rest of the crimes that plague humanity.

    Making abortion legal, however, has led to slightly over 49,550,000 murdered babies. Care to compare that death toll to the number of women who died from botched abortions or the death toll of all the wars of the 20th and 21st century…or even both?

    As for war and how it fought – it too is an atrocity. We bomb civilian targets in order to win wars. The enemy surrounds itself and its infrastructure with those civilians in order to force those attacks and get people thinking like you do.

    As I said, it’s an atrocity. It’s also one whose effects I’ve seen first hand.

    The difference between the two atrocities is the causation. I have far less problem with such damages being done in the name of America’s national security and interests – and removing some tyrannical despots in the process – than I do when the reason for the atrocity is some people poor choices and personal convenience.

  5. Elric66 Says:

    “While I cannot say I support abortion, I am aware that making it illegal leads to dying, cut up young women from botched amateur hour surgery.”

    So?

    “What do you think about the children born to parents exposed to Depleted Uranium in war zones attacked by the U.S. without reasonable cause ? : and dont give me the al Qaeda drivel. Even were it true, bombing civilians is no reasonable or effective response.”

    Worked with Germany and Japan

  6. Elric66 Says:

    “So how strong are your beliefs and commitment to them? The abortionists are counting on them being weak.”

    I think thats something you will never know until one is put in that position; especially if your own child is sick. Of course these people are evil and know this. I just pray we never get to that point, preferably by peaceful means.

  7. jonolan Says:

    Opit,

    A quick follow-up to your, “don’t give me that Al-Qaeda crap,” comment. You might possibly benefit from reading this and the supporting documents it links to.

  8. in2thefray Says:

    Devils advocate here…
    Whether the 49,550,000 count is good or not is there any thoughts regard the quality of life any of those not born would have faced.I have a hard time believing ALL abortions are from the “Damn I got knocked up again” type. Many are situations where one is only controlling the inevitable.

  9. jonolan Says:

    in2thefray,

    All the statistics I can find place the percentage of abortions performed due to fetal health issues at 3 – 15% and show that number declining as medical science / care progresses. Sadly though, these studies don’t say what or how debilitating those fetal health issues were.

    The vast majority seem to due to simple unwillingness to be a mother.

Leave a Reply