Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

pnwmom

(108,990 posts)
Mon Aug 13, 2012, 11:55 AM Aug 2012

Why Obama, the pro-choice candidate, is also the truer pro-life candidate.

http://ncronline.org/news/politics/which-presidential-candidate-truly-pro-life

For example, Obama's Affordable Care Act does not pay for abortions. In Massachusetts, Romney's health care law does. Obama favors, and included in the Affordable Care Act, $250 million of support for vulnerable pregnant women and alternatives to abortion. This support will make abortions much less likely, since most abortions are economic. Romney, on the other hand, has endorsed Wisconsin Republican Paul Ryan's budget, which will cut hundreds of millions of dollars out of the federal plans that support poor women. The undoubted effect: The number of abortions in the United States will increase. On these facts, Obama is much more pro-life than Romney.

But let's not stop there. Obama does not financially profit from the abortion industry. Romney does. Bain Capital, in the time Romney was listed as its legal head and even when he was attending Bain board meetings, was an owner of Stericycle, a major disposer of the dead bodies of aborted children in the United States. (See: Romney Invested in Medical-Waste Firm That Disposed of Aborted Fetuses, Government Documents Show.) Bain owned a share of Stericycle until 2004, selling its interest for a profit in the tens of millions of dollars. We can parse what Romney's 1999 "retroactive retirement" from Bain means, but he still gets an annual payout from the firm. To the extent those dollars are part of Bain's Stericycle profits, a strong argument exists that Romney is an abortion profiteer. How pro-life is that?

And it has long been known that millions of Bain Capital's original outside funding, solicited by Romney himself, came from wealthy El Salvadorian clans, some of whom, while they were funding Bain, were "linked to right wing death squads." (Salt Lake Tribune, 1999; See also: Mitt Romney Started Bain Capital With Money From Families Tied To Death Squads.) Death squads killed tens of thousands of mostly poor people in El Salvador. They also killed priests, nuns and Archbishop Oscar Romero. How pro-life is that? How pro-life is taking the money of these people and doubling or tripling it for them? And did any of their Bain profits fund more death squads? Before we endorse Romney's "pro-life" claims, isn't it important for us to know that?

SNIP
5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why Obama, the pro-choice candidate, is also the truer pro-life candidate. (Original Post) pnwmom Aug 2012 OP
And from a Catholic publication, no less. Lucy Goosey Aug 2012 #1
The major conflict between the "Nuns on a Bus" and so-called Catholics like Ryan pnwmom Aug 2012 #2
He's SEVERELY Pro Life Choice corkhead Aug 2012 #3
the rite is pro-'life', democrats are pro-human. pansypoo53219 Aug 2012 #4
"Dead bodies of aborted children"?? Zoeisright Aug 2012 #5

pnwmom

(108,990 posts)
2. The major conflict between the "Nuns on a Bus" and so-called Catholics like Ryan
Mon Aug 13, 2012, 12:02 PM
Aug 2012

is that the Sisters are actually trying to reduce the number of abortions by helping the lives of women in poverty, whereas people like Ryan think that voting against abortion is all they need to do.

Zoeisright

(8,339 posts)
5. "Dead bodies of aborted children"??
Mon Aug 13, 2012, 01:35 PM
Aug 2012

That's a poor choice of words. I hardly think that fetal tissue is the "dead bodies of aborted children".

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Why Obama, the pro-choice...