Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Pro-choice but pro-Hyde Amendment?
How can someone be pro-choice but personally against the use of their tax dollars funding "elective" abortions?
Also, is there any other legislation which bans the use of federal funds for a specific legal medical procedure? Or anything else?
For instance, let's say a large number of americans are against their tax dollars going towards Head Start programs. Is there actually a chance such legislation would pass? Or is abortion unique?
Re: Pro-choice but pro-Hyde Amendment?
I don't understand the question. Of course you can support people's right to obtain an abortion and not their right to have it paid for by the government.
The equivalent for Head Start would be supporting parents right to pay for preschool, but not supporting government-funded preschool.
Find me here instead!
I don't get how this is a problem.
I might be for the right to bear arms, but think my tax money shouldn't be used to provide people with handguns.
And there could be different reasons for that - it could be a strictly budgetary decision or it could be that I'm not ok with the government actively encouraging people to buy guns or it could be that I think people should pay for their own damn guns and skittles.
If you agree with abortion being singled out as something the government will not pay for, then no, I don't think it is possible for you to be prochoice.
For example, if you're fine with medicaid, just not with abortion being included in medicaid then no, you are not pro choice. If you just don't think the government should pay for anything (ie not singling abortion out) then you can be both.
For me, I don't understand how someone that supports the marginalization of abortion could legitimately call themselves pro choice.
I am pro choice yet against tax payers footing the bill. It is a CHOICE. Not a RIGHT.
I'd rather pay the $600 for someone to get an abortion than the thousands and thousands of dollars they will receive in taxpayer aid once the baby is born (this is assuming the person wants to get an abortion, not that I think that all poor people should have abortions).
So you think that anything tax dollars go to is a right? I got federal loans for college and grad school (both expensive private schools), but wouldn't call either of those a right. Tax dollars pay for choices all the time.
I agree with you. I'm not sure the cause/effect thing comes to mind for a lot of voters, though...I think the assumption is that if voters don't pay for it somehow the person will still get it, without the taxpayers footing the bill.