Republicans Sneak Anti-Abortion Language Into Tax Bill

[theHawk]

From the OP:

“It’s time to emancipate every little unborn baby,” Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said at the hearing.

Actual human children and adults fare less well. The proposal gets rid of an adoption tax credit and ends popular tax deductions on medical spending and student loan interest. Although, perhaps if fetuses can save for college, kids of the future will rack up less in school debt.

These people are batshit crazy!

Killing a pregnant mother can already get a person charged with two murder counts.

So? That would make some sense if the pregnant woman wants the fetus. After all, it's her property.

You cant be charged with murder for destroying property

Arthur William Hodge - Wikipedia

And

On March 28, 1839, a coroner’s inquest presented at the rural Iredell County, NC farm of Mr. John Hoover, to investigate the alleged death of “one Mira a female slave the property of… the said John Hoover…”. An examination of the freshly exhumed body of Mira, then but one short day dead, led to only one conclusion: Mr. Hoover was “taken into penal custody on the spot, under the capital charge of murder.” In trial before the North Carolina Superior Court, Iredell County, Hoover was convicted of the charge and sentenced to hang.
'For the Murder of His Own Female Slave, a Woman Named Mira…': Slavery, Law and Incoherence in Antebellum Culture by Anthony V. Baker :: SSRN

Things have changed since the Republicans won the Civil War and declared human beings aren’t property.

 

[Baz Ares]

From the OP:

“It’s time to emancipate every little unborn baby,” Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said at the hearing.

Actual human children and adults fare less well. The proposal gets rid of an adoption tax credit and ends popular tax deductions on medical spending and student loan interest. Although, perhaps if fetuses can save for college, kids of the future will rack up less in school debt.

These people are batshit crazy!

Killing a pregnant mother can already get a person charged with two murder counts.

So? That would make some sense if the pregnant woman wants the fetus. After all, it's her property.

You cant be charged with murder for destroying property

Arthur William Hodge - Wikipedia

And

On March 28, 1839, a coroner’s inquest presented at the rural Iredell County, NC farm of Mr. John Hoover, to investigate the alleged death of “one Mira a female slave the property of… the said John Hoover…”. An examination of the freshly exhumed body of Mira, then but one short day dead, led to only one conclusion: Mr. Hoover was “taken into penal custody on the spot, under the capital charge of murder.” In trial before the North Carolina Superior Court, Iredell County, Hoover was convicted of the charge and sentenced to hang.
'For the Murder of His Own Female Slave, a Woman Named Mira…': Slavery, Law and Incoherence in Antebellum Culture by Anthony V. Baker :: SSRN

The reality IS that woman Mira was not property, no matter what someone says. She was a human being. Your not debating that are you? the guy was sentenced to hang for killing a human being.

If you are the drunk driver in a car crash, some states charge you with two murders/manslaughtering counts etc..
One is property till born. Right? Or they are not personal property. If not,
I would not be charged with stealing when I do the next best thang with them.
When these state forced broodmares are asleep.
I can take them for other uses, like for their medical stem cell donations.
Gee? Whatever happened to that outcry issue?

 

[Baz Ares]

From the OP:

“It’s time to emancipate every little unborn baby,” Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said at the hearing.

Actual human children and adults fare less well. The proposal gets rid of an adoption tax credit and ends popular tax deductions on medical spending and student loan interest. Although, perhaps if fetuses can save for college, kids of the future will rack up less in school debt.

These people are batshit crazy!

Killing a pregnant mother can already get a person charged with two murder counts.

So? That would make some sense if the pregnant woman wants the fetus. After all, it's her property.

You cant be charged with murder for destroying property

Arthur William Hodge - Wikipedia

And

On March 28, 1839, a coroner’s inquest presented at the rural Iredell County, NC farm of Mr. John Hoover, to investigate the alleged death of “one Mira a female slave the property of… the said John Hoover…”. An examination of the freshly exhumed body of Mira, then but one short day dead, led to only one conclusion: Mr. Hoover was “taken into penal custody on the spot, under the capital charge of murder.” In trial before the North Carolina Superior Court, Iredell County, Hoover was convicted of the charge and sentenced to hang.
'For the Murder of His Own Female Slave, a Woman Named Mira…': Slavery, Law and Incoherence in Antebellum Culture by Anthony V. Baker :: SSRN

Things have changed since the Republicans won the Civil War and declared human beings aren’t property.

Are they the same ones trying to reverse their mistake?
Or are these some new inbreeds?

 

[Lakhota]

Republicans hate big government - except when they don't.

 

[Baz Ares]

Republicans hate big government - except when they don't.

I wonder if these GOP/DOP saw Liberals, Colored folks, Poor Long Term Takers and FFS Mexicans in them vaginas.
Would Repuggers FULLY Fund those abortions?

 

[Chuz Life]

Republicans hate big government - except when they don't.

I wonder if these GOP/DOP saw Liberals, Colored folks, Poor Long Term Takers and FFS Mexicans in them vaginas.
Would Repuggers FULLY Fund those abortions?

It would be tempting to abort leftardz on sight if such a test could be developed. . . I (for one) would still be fighting for your children's rights . . Even if you don't want me to.

 

[Dale Smith]

Republicans slipped anti-abortion language into the draft of the tax reform bill they released on Thursday. The move is part of an effort by the Trump administration and House Republicans to define life as beginning at conception, with an eye to rolling back Roe v. Wade.

Buried on page 93 of the 429-page tax proposal is a provision that would allow fetuses to be named as beneficiaries of college savings accounts known as 529 plans ― investment vehicles that come with a range of tax breaks.

Abortion rights advocates were quick to call out the language. “This is a back-door attempt to establish personhood from the moment of conception,” Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), co-chair of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus, said in a statement. “The tax code is no place to define what constitutes an ‘unborn child.’ What’s next, giving a Social Security number to a zygote?”

Ostensibly, the idea is that parents can get a leg up on saving for their kid’s education before he or she is even born. However, it takes care to define the terms “unborn child” and “child in utero,” in what appears to be a naked attempt to establish so-called personhood for fetuses, a popular anti-abortion tactic.

Abortion foes believe that if fetuses were legally considered people, then abortion would have to be outlawed. State and federal legislation attempting to classify fertilized eggs, human embryos and fetuses as people has failed repeatedly over the years. The tax reform provision appears to be a sideways attempt at something similar.

“A child in the womb is just as human as you or I yet, until now, the U.S. tax code has failed to acknowledge the unborn child,” Jeanne Mancini, president of the anti-abortion group March for Life, told Politico.

There’s nothing in current law stopping parents from opening a 529 savings account before a child is born, explained Greg McBride, chief financial analyst at Bankrate.com, a personal finance site. A parent opens the account in his or her own name, and once the baby is born, changes the account beneficiary, he explained. McBride said he did this for one of his sons.

“I don’t know how this makes it different,” he said. McBride said at most, the tax reform provision would allow parents to skip the step of naming a new beneficiary. “Taking a nonstop flight instead of changing planes,” he said.

It’s unclear how the anti-abortion language got into the tax bill. Another anti-abortion group, however, thanked Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) “for his leadership on this important effort.”

More: Republicans Sneak Anti-Abortion Language Into Tax Bill

Why are Republicans always so sneaky about trying to undermine Roe v. Wade?

Are you a person per Black's Law dictionary defines or are you a living, breathing human being???

 

[foggedinn]

Abortion is a heartbreaking matter. I believe that there is a real silent majority who understand that silence is golden.

 

[Chuz Life]

Abortion is a heartbreaking matter. I believe that there is a real silent majority who understand that silence is golden.

I doubt many other child molesters or abusersvwany anyone poking their noses into their business, either.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

They're fascist

And aborting fetuses is not. The real Nazi's forced abortions on "non-aryan" women and advocated genocide. Kind of like the support of the left for the death of the Black Community. Blacks make up 16% of the population but are responsible for 34% of abortions. die Endlösung der Schwarzer

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Republicans slipped anti-abortion language into the draft of the tax reform bill they released on Thursday. The move is part of an effort by the Trump administration and House Republicans to define life as beginning at conception, with an eye to rolling back Roe v. Wade.

Buried on page 93 of the 429-page tax proposal is a provision that would allow fetuses to be named as beneficiaries of college savings accounts known as 529 plans ― investment vehicles that come with a range of tax breaks.

Abortion rights advocates were quick to call out the language. “This is a back-door attempt to establish personhood from the moment of conception,” Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), co-chair of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus, said in a statement. “The tax code is no place to define what constitutes an ‘unborn child.’ What’s next, giving a Social Security number to a zygote?”

Ostensibly, the idea is that parents can get a leg up on saving for their kid’s education before he or she is even born. However, it takes care to define the terms “unborn child” and “child in utero,” in what appears to be a naked attempt to establish so-called personhood for fetuses, a popular anti-abortion tactic.

Abortion foes believe that if fetuses were legally considered people, then abortion would have to be outlawed. State and federal legislation attempting to classify fertilized eggs, human embryos and fetuses as people has failed repeatedly over the years. The tax reform provision appears to be a sideways attempt at something similar.

“A child in the womb is just as human as you or I yet, until now, the U.S. tax code has failed to acknowledge the unborn child,” Jeanne Mancini, president of the anti-abortion group March for Life, told Politico.

There’s nothing in current law stopping parents from opening a 529 savings account before a child is born, explained Greg McBride, chief financial analyst at Bankrate.com, a personal finance site. A parent opens the account in his or her own name, and once the baby is born, changes the account beneficiary, he explained. McBride said he did this for one of his sons.

“I don’t know how this makes it different,” he said. McBride said at most, the tax reform provision would allow parents to skip the step of naming a new beneficiary. “Taking a nonstop flight instead of changing planes,” he said.

It’s unclear how the anti-abortion language got into the tax bill. Another anti-abortion group, however, thanked Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) “for his leadership on this important effort.”

More: Republicans Sneak Anti-Abortion Language Into Tax Bill

Why are Republicans always so sneaky about trying to undermine Roe v. Wade?

Because most Republicans are dishonest ideologues.

They’ll pursue their failed, ridiculous, wrongheaded agenda in spite of the facts or law.

The right’s moronic efforts to somehow designate an embryo/fetus to be a ‘person’ runs contrary to settled, accepted Constitutional law.

 

[Esmeralda]

From the OP:

“It’s time to emancipate every little unborn baby,” Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said at the hearing.

Actual human children and adults fare less well. The proposal gets rid of an adoption tax credit and ends popular tax deductions on medical spending and student loan interest. Although, perhaps if fetuses can save for college, kids of the future will rack up less in school debt.

These people are batshit crazy!

Killing a pregnant mother can already get a person charged with two murder counts.

So you want to protect murderers?

 

[easyt65]

Republicans slipped anti-abortion language into the draft of the tax reform bill they released on Thursday. The move is part of an effort by the Trump administration and House Republicans to define life as beginning at conception, with an eye to rolling back Roe v. Wade.

Buried on page 93 of the 429-page tax proposal is a provision that would allow fetuses to be named as beneficiaries of college savings accounts known as 529 plans ― investment vehicles that come with a range of tax breaks.

Abortion rights advocates were quick to call out the language. “This is a back-door attempt to establish personhood from the moment of conception,” Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), co-chair of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus, said in a statement. “The tax code is no place to define what constitutes an ‘unborn child.’ What’s next, giving a Social Security number to a zygote?”

Ostensibly, the idea is that parents can get a leg up on saving for their kid’s education before he or she is even born. However, it takes care to define the terms “unborn child” and “child in utero,” in what appears to be a naked attempt to establish so-called personhood for fetuses, a popular anti-abortion tactic.

Abortion foes believe that if fetuses were legally considered people, then abortion would have to be outlawed. State and federal legislation attempting to classify fertilized eggs, human embryos and fetuses as people has failed repeatedly over the years. The tax reform provision appears to be a sideways attempt at something similar.

“A child in the womb is just as human as you or I yet, until now, the U.S. tax code has failed to acknowledge the unborn child,” Jeanne Mancini, president of the anti-abortion group March for Life, told Politico.

There’s nothing in current law stopping parents from opening a 529 savings account before a child is born, explained Greg McBride, chief financial analyst at Bankrate.com, a personal finance site. A parent opens the account in his or her own name, and once the baby is born, changes the account beneficiary, he explained. McBride said he did this for one of his sons.

“I don’t know how this makes it different,” he said. McBride said at most, the tax reform provision would allow parents to skip the step of naming a new beneficiary. “Taking a nonstop flight instead of changing planes,” he said.

It’s unclear how the anti-abortion language got into the tax bill. Another anti-abortion group, however, thanked Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) “for his leadership on this important effort.”

More: Republicans Sneak Anti-Abortion Language Into Tax Bill

Why are Republicans always so sneaky about trying to undermine Roe v. Wade?

Ya mean sorta like Democrats 'snuck' more than 7,000 pieces of pork into Barry's NON-'job-creating' Stimulus Bill?!

 

[Lakhota]

Republicans slipped anti-abortion language into the draft of the tax reform bill they released on Thursday. The move is part of an effort by the Trump administration and House Republicans to define life as beginning at conception, with an eye to rolling back Roe v. Wade.

Buried on page 93 of the 429-page tax proposal is a provision that would allow fetuses to be named as beneficiaries of college savings accounts known as 529 plans ― investment vehicles that come with a range of tax breaks.

Abortion rights advocates were quick to call out the language. “This is a back-door attempt to establish personhood from the moment of conception,” Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), co-chair of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus, said in a statement. “The tax code is no place to define what constitutes an ‘unborn child.’ What’s next, giving a Social Security number to a zygote?”

Ostensibly, the idea is that parents can get a leg up on saving for their kid’s education before he or she is even born. However, it takes care to define the terms “unborn child” and “child in utero,” in what appears to be a naked attempt to establish so-called personhood for fetuses, a popular anti-abortion tactic.

Abortion foes believe that if fetuses were legally considered people, then abortion would have to be outlawed. State and federal legislation attempting to classify fertilized eggs, human embryos and fetuses as people has failed repeatedly over the years. The tax reform provision appears to be a sideways attempt at something similar.

“A child in the womb is just as human as you or I yet, until now, the U.S. tax code has failed to acknowledge the unborn child,” Jeanne Mancini, president of the anti-abortion group March for Life, told Politico.

There’s nothing in current law stopping parents from opening a 529 savings account before a child is born, explained Greg McBride, chief financial analyst at Bankrate.com, a personal finance site. A parent opens the account in his or her own name, and once the baby is born, changes the account beneficiary, he explained. McBride said he did this for one of his sons.

“I don’t know how this makes it different,” he said. McBride said at most, the tax reform provision would allow parents to skip the step of naming a new beneficiary. “Taking a nonstop flight instead of changing planes,” he said.

It’s unclear how the anti-abortion language got into the tax bill. Another anti-abortion group, however, thanked Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) “for his leadership on this important effort.”

More: Republicans Sneak Anti-Abortion Language Into Tax Bill

Why are Republicans always so sneaky about trying to undermine Roe v. Wade?

Ya mean sorta like Democrats 'snuck' more than 7,000 pieces of pork into Barry's NON-'job-creating' Stimulus Bill?!

Duh, no, not like that.