So We Don't Have To Pay For Things We Are Morally Opposed To?

That seems to be the only argument for the Stupak amendment and why people support it. "Federal taxpayer dollars shouldn't be used for things people are morally against." Well, a lot of us are morally against war, and yet we're paying for two of them. I'm morally against a lot of things Republicans stand for, and yet we're still paying their salaries. I'm morally against some of the rulings coming out of the Supreme Court, and yet we're paying the salaries of the 5 (or more) on that side until they die. I'm morally against what some of the Blue Dogs do, and yet we're paying for their salaries.

Since when do people get to pick and choose what the federal government does and does not pay for?

I'm in Ohio, my tax dollars help fund executions, and I'm very much morally opposed to that.

If the government didn't pay for everything that someone was morally opposed to, they'd never pay for anything.

This is just a short diary with my thoughts on that amendment and the arguments I've been hearing FOR it. If you don't want federal money to go towards paying for abortions, than use the part of the money that the woman is STILL paying for (as I understand it, none of the plans would be FREE) to pay for "that" part of the plan. I don't get what's so difficult about that.

What else is the Federal Government doing that I'm morally opposed to, I wonder?
blog comments powered by Disqus