Moral Hypocrisy 101...........

[disneydream06]

Low Income Women Can't Get Abortions, But RNC Staffers Can

by Jen Nedeau

Published November 12, 2009 @ 08:05PM PT

.It is pretty obvious by now that Republicans don't want you to be able to have an abortion. Republicans don't want government funds to be used to cover a legal medical procedure that "kills babies" despite the fact that they support the death penalty and federal funding for psychotherapy for pedophile priests.

Oh but wait - hold on - while they don't want you to have an abortion, it is okay if they have one. 176 Republicans and 64 Democrats in the House voted on the Stupak Amendment last Saturday - the most prohibitive legislative measure against abortion introduced since the Hyde Amendment - which basically blocks access for low-income women to an abortion, despite the fact that staffers of the Republican National Committee have had abortion covered under their insurance plan since at least 1991.

From Politico, the GOP is once again, the party of ultimate moral hypocrisy:

The Republican National Committee's health insurance plan covers elective abortion - a procedure the party's own platform calls "a fundamental assault on innocent human life."

Federal Election Commission Records show the RNC purchases its insurance from Cigna. Two sales agents for the company said that the RNC's policy covers elective abortion.

Informed of the coverage, RNC spokeswoman Gail Gitcho told POLITICO that the policy pre-dates the tenure of current RNC Chairman Michael Steele - and suggested that it may be short-lived.

So tell me again - how is it acceptable for a political party to lobby against a policy they themselves employ?

Comments

[jiang-shi.livejournal.com]

I could never really manage to grasp the exact reason gay rights were such an issue. If I have read the Constitution and Declaration of Independence right, and I like to think that I have, it states very clearly that all men are created equal. Did I miss the line that reads but only if they're straight men or something here?

Guess this kind of falls under the same ideaology that women are less than men and had to fight for their own rights (or any other minority group). I don't understand that. If America is said to be the "Land of The Free" how can we pick and choose who can do what?

What this is, and there is no other way of saying it, is playing God with the Declaration and Constitution. What he is saying (and others like him) is that because they don't like gays and lesbians that they can't be married. They can't take care of their loved ones funeral. What comes next? Where do we draw a line?

I've seen how this story is, and I'm not willing to stand for it. We (the LBGT community) have to make a stand. Because if we don't, we will be written out. We will become the next Native Americans, run off our land and into a Reserve. God, how do we ever allow people like that to run our government? It's sick.

[thespian15.livejournal.com]

I can't agree more.

I think I did an oops. Wrong story with the title. lol.. I better go look. :p

[jiang-shi.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I think you might have there. I was reading it and I was like "where's the women who can't have abortions"! It's a funny opps!

[thespian15.livejournal.com]

Correct story is there now. Sorry.....

[jiang-shi.livejournal.com]

Oh, no reason to be sorry! We all make mistakes! One such as this is a humourous sidenote compared to some...like when Ramses II destoryed Syria. That was a mistake.

[thespian15.livejournal.com]

Oops... :p