Trump’s Interior Dept. Takes Massive Stand for Memorials at Civil War Battlefield


Trump’s Interior Dept. Takes Massive Stand for Memorials at Civil War Battlefields

Advertisement – story continues below

President Trump’s Interior Department is apparently refusing to bow to liberal pressure to remove Confederate memorials on Civil War battlefields, with a spokesman saying that commemorating those that died in those conflicts was “an important part of our country’s history.”

In a statement to E&E News Tuesday, Park Service public affairs officer Jeremy Barnum said the Park Service and the Department of the Interior weren’t going to be removing the statues and monuments any time in the near future.

“The National Park Service is committed to safeguarding these memorials while simultaneously educating visitors holistically and objectively about the actions, motivations and causes of the soldiers and states they commemorate,” Barnum said.

Advertisement – story continues below

The remarks came after an attack at a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia —  which was originally sparked by the removal of a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee — claimed the life of one counter-protester this past weekend. On Monday, in Durham, North Carolina, a crowd of leftists toppled a Confederate war memorial monument.

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke also said he stood behind the president “in uniting our communities and prosecuting the criminals to the fullest extent of the law,” although he wouldn’t comment specifically on statues and monuments.

“The racism, bigotry and hate perpetrated by violent white supremacist groups has no place in America,” Zinke said. “It does not represent what I spent 23 years defending in the United States military and what millions of people around the globe have died for. We must respond to hate with love, unity and justice.”

Advertisement – story continues below

In a speech last month, given at the Antietam National Battlefield in Maryland, Zinke said that “history’s important” when pressed about the Confederate monuments on the battlefield.

“What did the Battle of Antietam bring us?” Zinke told a reporter. “One is that it was the deadliest battle in the history of our country, but also one can argue successfully that it also brought us the Emancipation Proclamation. So there’s goodness that came out of this battlefield, but recognizing two sides fought, recognizing the historical significance of a change in our country. I’m an advocate of recognizing history as it is.”

“Don’t rewrite history,” Zinke said. “Understand it for what it is and teach our kids the importance of looking at our magnificent history as a country and why we are what we are.”

Zinke and the Park Service are taking the right tack. Removing monuments dedicated to those who died on the battlefield won’t undo what men like James Fields or the marchers did in Charlottesville. Instead, it will merely erase a history that we desperately need to contextualize for generations to come.

Advertisement – story continues below

H/T The Daily Caller

Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter with your thoughts on the Interior Department’s decision.

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

Robert E. Lee Was Actually Against Confederate Monuments. Here’s Why.

The latest debate in our polarized society involves whether or not Confederate monuments should be taken down. The Charlottesville protests were centered around protecting a statue of Robert E. Lee. Ironically, Lee was actually against putting up Confederate monuments.

According to Jonathan Horn, a Lee biographer, Lee opposed proposed Confederate memorials as president of Washington College because he thought that they would only open wounds in a country that was in the process of healing after the bloody Civil War.

“As regards the erection of such a monument as is contemplated; my conviction is, that however grateful it would be to the feelings of the South, the attempt in the present condition of the Country, would have the effect of retarding, instead of accelerating its accomplishment; & of continuing, if not adding to, the difficulties under which the Southern people labour,” Lee wrote in an 1866 letter.

That reasoning is akin to his reasons for rebuffing an invite to visit the site of the Gettysburg battle.

“Lee believed countries that erased visible signs of civil war recovered from conflicts quicker,” Horn told PBS. “He was worried that by keeping these symbols alive, it would keep the divisions alive.”

Horn added that Lee likely would have called for his own monument to be taken down, although you’d “have to ask why.”

“He might just want to hide the history, to move on, rather than face these issues,” Horn said.

Lee was also opposed to a memorial to Stonewall Jackson because he didn’t think it would be right to ask for money from the cash-strapped Confederate veteran families.

It’s worth mentioning that, according to PBS, Lee viewed slavery as a blight on the country but he felt that his state, Virginia, had the right to secede from the country.

There are certainly good arguments in favor of upholding Confederate monuments, with the main argument being that it’s important to keep such history, no matter how vile, crystallized so it’s not forgotten. But Lee was right to fear the divisiveness of such memorials, as now it seems they’re being used as political tools to tear apart the country.

Follow Aaron Bandler on Twitter.

via Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

Gotcha: Dem Congressman Arrested After Sick Anti-Trump Protest


Gotcha: Dem Congressman Arrested After Sick Anti-Trump Protest

Advertisement – story continues below

Rep. Luis Gutiérrez, an Illinois Democrat known for his outspoken opposition to any form of immigration law enforcement, was arrested along with 30 protesters on Tuesday after an anti-Trump rally outside the White House became disruptive.

According to The Hill, Gutiérrez was part of a rally, marking the fifth anniversary of President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals legislation, which was taking place in Lafayette Square just across Pennsylvania Avenue from the presidential mansion. However, he and about 30 others were arrested by the U.S. Park Police after sitting down on the White House sidewalk, The Hill reported.

Before his arrest, Gutiérrez said that he was objecting to the fact that DACA benefits were being taken away by the Trump administration “for no good reason.”

Advertisement – story continues below

“The same values that I inculcated in my daughters, that my wife and I raised them, (Dreamers) are an example and exemplify them. Their dreams are just like my kids’ dreams,” the congressman said.

The protest also came amid a legal threat by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to sue the federal government if the Trump administration didn’t rescind DACA by Sept. 5. As Red State points out, the Trump administration hasn’t shown much desire to move toward stopping DACA, a program under which 800,000 individuals who arrived in this country illegally in early childhood are protected from deportation.

Another point of contention for protesters is a program called Temporary Protected Status, which allows citizens of countries affected by natural disasters to seek refuge in the United States. According to The Hill, the Trump administration has indicated it might be willing to end TPS for citizens of some nations, particularly El Salvador and Haiti.

Advertisement – story continues below

You may not be surprised to learn that this isn’t Gutiérrez’s first rodeo when it comes to being arrested at protests. He was arrested in 2010 and 2011 outside the White House for similar actions, and was led away in handcuffs earlier this year when he refused to leave a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement office in Chicago.

H/T RedFlag News

Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter with your thoughts on Rep. Gutiérrez’s arrest.

Advertisement – story continues below

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

Oregon Governor Signs Bill Requiring Free Abortions for All

Oregon Governor Signs Bill Requiring Free Abortions for All

17 Aug, 2017
17 Aug, 2017

Oregon Gov. Kate Brown (D) has signed a bill into law that requires all state insurers to provide free abortions to all – including illegal immigrants.

Enacting the law – the first of its kind in the nation – will cost the state $10.2 million, with $500,000 going toward abortions for some 22,900 women eligible for Medicaid in Oregon, reports the Washington Times.

According to the law, Oregon insurers must provide 100 percent coverage for abortions without co-pays or deductibles. Those Medicaid beneficiaries who are covered by the state’s single nonprofit Catholic health insurance provider will still have their abortion costs reimbursed by the state.

“Thank Kate Brown for signing the nation’s most progressive reproductive health bill into law today!” NARAL Pro-Choice Oregon said in a statement.

Gayle Atteberry, executive director of Oregon Right to Life, however, said Brown has solidified her relationship with the abortion industry by signing the bill into law.

“Oregon taxpayers already cover nearly 50 percent of all abortions in the state whether they like it or not,” Atteberry said, according to the Times. “By making abortion free, this percentage will inevitably increase. We also expect more late-term abortions, which are currently very expensive as well as risky to perform. All completely covered by either insurance companies or by the Oregon taxpayers.”

Planned Parenthood assisted in drawing up the legislation that excludes citizenship status as a requirement for Medicaid coverage.

“We are so grateful for the bold leadership of Gov. Brown and legislative champions who understand that Oregonians don’t want reproductive health care attacked,” said Laurel Swerdlow, advocacy director of Planned Parenthood Advocates of Oregon. “Women, transgender and gender-nonconforming individuals, people of color, immigrants and people of faith are not going to silently stand around while politicians in Washington, D.C., try to take away our health care.”

Rep. Bill Post (R), however, said on Facebook, “The saddest day of my life was when I had to vote on this bill, though of course I voted NO, there was no reason to actually run this bill at all. Oregon should be ashamed and embarrassed.”

Nevertheless, states that wish to remove abortion providers, like Planned Parenthood, from its list of Medicaid reimbursements received encouraging news Wednesday as a federal appeals court ruled that Arkansas may block Planned Parenthood’s Medicaid reimbursement funding in response to the release of videos by undercover journalists that exposed the abortion chain’s alleged profiteering from the sales of aborted baby parts.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

Harrington: Google Doesn’t Want Any Diversity of Thought

Washington Free Beacon reporter Elizabeth Harrington discussed a Google employee who was fired for a memo about the company’s diversity practices, saying Tuesday that Google does not want any "diversity of thought."

Harrington said on Fox News that engineer James Damore was essentially fired for committing a "thought crime." Rather than being anti-diversity, Harrington said, as it was depicted in much of the media coverage, Damore’s memo delved into the biological differences between men and women, the nature of the tech business, and how Google’s diversity initiatives were flawed.

Google’s new diversity vice president put out a statement that the company would continue to be committed to diversity in the wake of Damore’s firing.

"James Damore did not say that he was against diversity. What that statement is saying to me is yes, we want diversity and inclusion of different races, genders, sexual orientation, but they don’t want any diversity of thought, and that’s exactly what James Damore offered," Harrington said. "A different view on this whole discussion of gender and women in STEM, and he offered a different view … Google said no, thank you, we are only on the left."

Damore noted in his writing that he was concerned about Google’s intolerance for conservative views.

"I hope it’s clear that I’m not saying that diversity is bad, that Google or society is 100% fair, that we shouldn’t try to correct for existing biases, or that minorities have the same experience of those in the majority," Damore wrote. "My larger point is that we have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that don’t fit a certain ideology."

Harrington said people who called it an anti-diversity screed did not read it.

"The scary thing is if you’re fired for your thought, for essentially a thought crime at Google, this company knows a lot about all of us … It’s a little creepy at the end of the day if they’re firing and going after people for just their beliefs," she said.

The post Harrington: Google Doesn’t Want Any Diversity of Thought appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

COUP in Works? Carl Bernstein: GOP, Military, Intel Hi-Ups Say POTUS Trump ‘Unfit to Be President’

Former Washington Post reporter Carl Bernstein of Watergate fame posted a three tweet thread Tuesday afternoon claiming “important Republicans” and “high ranking military and intelligence figures” are privately saying President Donald Trump is unfit to serve as president.

Carl Bernstein, image via Twitter avatar

“(1/3) Important Republicans/conservs/Intel-military hi-ups increasingly saying in private that @realDonaldTrump is unfit to be president.”

“(2/3) BC of lack of ethics, competence, ‘temperament/stability.’”

“(3/3)—Reporters should find out how pervasive such talk may be.”

Bernstein is an infrequent user of Twitter, having only posted 43 times in the year since he opened his account.

The post COUP in Works? Carl Bernstein: GOP, Military, Intel Hi-Ups Say POTUS Trump ‘Unfit to Be President’ appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

Activists Urge Timely Action from Tillerson on Efforts to Save Religious Minorities from ISIS

Catholic leaders and key human rights activists said they were encouraged by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s statement Tuesday that ISIS is one of the world’s biggest threats to religious freedom and is responsible for genocide, but added the administration must take action in the next few months to save minority religious groups in Iraq.

The State Department released a much-anticipated annual report on religious freedom Tuesday. In the preface to the report, Tillerson made his clearest statement to date that ISIS’s mass slaughter of Yazidis, Christians and other religious minorities constitutes a genocide and vowed that the Trump administration will make the protection of these groups a "priority."

"ISIS has and continues to target members of multiple religions and ethnicities for rape, kidnapping, enslavement, and death," Tillerson stated in the preface. "ISIS is clearly responsible for genocide against Yazidis, Christians, and Shia Muslims in areas it controlled."

"ISIS is also responsible for crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing directed at these same groups, and in some cases against Sunni Muslims, Kurds, and other minorities," he continued. "The protection of these groups—and others who are targets of violent extremism—remains a human rights priority for the Trump Administration."

Tillerson followed up with a statement he said was aimed at removing "any ambiguity from previous statements or reports by the State Department."

"We will continue working with our regional partners to protect religious minority communities from terrorist attacks and to preserve their cultural heritage," he said.

The religious freedom report assesses the degree of religious freedom in 199 foreign countries and chronicles what the United States is doing to help protect those rights.

Human rights activists and dozens of members of Congress have spent months pressing the Trump administration to firmly declare the ISIS mass murders of ethnic minorities in the region genocide and quickly change the way the U.S. aid is distributed on the ground in Iraq in an effort to save these religious communities from the edge of extinction.

Andrew Walther, vice president of communications for the Knights of Columbus, one of the largest Catholic fraternal organizations in the world, praised Tillerson for his statement and said the survival of these religious minorities now depends on how swiftly the U.S. government can act over the next several months.

"It’s very important that the genocide committed by ISIS continue to be recognized as a serious threat to religious freedom and it continues to be recognized as a genocide, which the secretary clearly has done," Walther said. "The next few months are critical not only to the final defeat of ISIS militarily but also ensuring that their ideology is not successful in removing these minority religious groups."

"If they are defeated militarily but their agenda—their stated purpose [of wiping out other religions]—continues unabated, then even in defeat they would have achieved the ideological win, and a win that will have consequences for generations for pluralism and the makeup of that region that will have worldwide consequences."

The Knights of Columbus have spent years working with the local Catholic archdioceses in Iraq to try to ensure U.S. aid reaches these communities. Christian Iraqis don’t go to refugee camps where U.S. and U.N. aid is distributed out of fear they will be targeted for persecution.

Congress, in several recent appropriations bills, has specifically designated millions of dollars of funds to try to save the groups from extinction, but the State Department has yet to act on those directives.

"There are ways in which these communities have been left out [of U.S. and international efforts to help ISIS victims]," Walther said. "There is a very clear willingness among the political appointees of this administration. It’s just important that it gets executed in a very timely manner."

"Time is not on our side here," he added.

Nina Shea, an international human rights lawyer who directs the Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom, and other activists recently criticized the State Department, saying it spent months this year removing or preventing the word genocide from being used in official documents or speeches in relation to ISIS persecution of Christians, Yazidis, and other groups in Iraq.

Shea, a former commissioner on the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, has applauded statements Tillerson and others at State have made to try to respond to the criticism and clarify its position on the genocide issue.

She lauded Tillerson on Tuesday for going further than he has before in stating that ISIS is responsible for genocide in Iraq.

"The secretary’s comments are strong and wide-ranging," she said. "He not only clearly designated ISIS’s genocide but spoke to the immediate crisis of defending the targeted religious minorities and also of the need to act to preserve their culture in the aftermath."

"The last is an urgent issue as their numbers dwindle and their spirits flag from marginalization, not only by their own government but by the U.N., from its aid programs," she added.

The post Activists Urge Timely Action from Tillerson on Efforts to Save Religious Minorities from ISIS appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

Rebels of Google: Senior Vice President Led BLM Chant on Google Stage

Rebels of Google: Senior Vice President Led BLM Chant on Google Stage

15 Aug, 2017
15 Aug, 2017

An exclusive interview with a high ranking former Google engineer who wishes to remain anonymous reveals more aspects of the company’s politically correct office culture, including senior employees leading a Black Lives Matter chant on stage.

The former Google engineer (alias “Arthur”), worked at Google for several years in a relatively prominent position within the company. Arthur provided Breitbart News with direct insight into the company’s politically correct culture and blatant displays of political affiliations from higher-ups within the company.

When asked if he felt that there was a bias against conservatives at Google, Arthur stated, “Yes. That was the case especially during the 2016 election, but well before that as well. After Trump was elected, there was a mammoth outpouring of anti-Republican and anti-Trump sentiment. There was a meme applauding punching ‘Nazis,’ which had a massive number of upvotes. (I believe the lawyers or HR took that one down.)”

Arthur went on to elaborate on a specific moment saying, “Most memorably, there was an open meeting in Charlie’s (the largest meeting space on campus) where people could deal with their grief at Trump’s election. It was either Ruth Porat (the CFO) or Eileen Naughton (the head of HR) who actually shed tears on stage; my memory was that it was Ruth. At some point in the meeting, she asked everyone to hug the person next to them.”

When discussing the political leanings of Google’s upper management, Arthur pointed out that Alphabet CEO Eric Schmidt held fundraisers for both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton at his home, and attended Hillary Clinton’s post-defeat meeting following the 2016 election.

WikiLeaks also revealed how Schmidt wanted to be “head outside advisor” to the Clinton campaign, and was prepared to “fund, advise, and recruit talent” for Clinton. As early as 2014, Schmidt was feeding campaign ideas to Clinton.

Arthur said that despite this, there was an even more blatant display of political leanings. “the most overt act was during the Trayvon Martin trial,” said Arthur, “where David Drummond, a senior VP who is black, interrupted an all-hands meeting by leading a group of people up on stage chanting ‘What do we want? Justice! When do we want it? Now!’”

This isn’t particularly surprising given that Drummond has appeared alongside BLM activist Deray McKesson on a panel questioning how technology can help social justice,


Arthur also talked about the number of Google employees supporting a series of petitions that called for the boycott of Breitbart News. Arthur stated, “the only one that I have personal knowledge of was the petition to ban advertising on Breitbart. It got somewhere between 750 and 1000 signatures. There was also a counter-petition that had about 250. In the end, I don’t think the company changed anything.”

Arthur finished our interview with a final thought relating to Google’s decision to cancel their diversity town hall meeting over fear of internal leaks saying,

“Since the town hall meeting was canceled because of people’s fear of ‘doxing,’ here’s a quote from Eric Schmidt, ‘if you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.’”

“All those people said hateful, vicious, threatening things to Damore, and now they’re upset that they’ve become public. Maybe they shouldn’t have said them?”

Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News, covering issues of free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolan or email him at

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

VIDEO – H.R. McMaster: Muslim Terrorist Groups Are ‘Really Un-Islamic,’ ‘Irreligious’

TEL AVIV – In a 2014 speech on the Middle East, embattled White House National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster claimed that Islamic terrorist organizations are “really un-Islamic” and are “really irreligious organizations” who cloak themselves in the “false legitimacy of Islam.”

McMaster’s comments represent views of Islamic terrorism that are diametrically opposed to those espoused by President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly utilized the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism.”

McMaster, who serves in a critical national security position, seems to be minimizing the central religious motivations of radical Islamic terrorist groups who are waging a religious war against Western civilization. Indeed, in his speech, McMaster urged the audience to focus on the “human factors” that he says drive conflict while downplaying any religious motivation.

McMaster was speaking at the 136th general conference and exhibition of the National Guard Association of the United States (NGAUS) in a thirty-minute speech reviewed by Breitbart Jerusalem. He addressed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the fight against terrorism.

Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of McMaster’s speech [emphasis added]. (Comments begin at the 9:08 mark in the above video):

War is profoundly human. What do all of these conflicts have in common? Of course, there are a lot of differences, right? And we have to be sensitive to local differences and realities that drive conflict. But what you see is you see these really irreligious organizations. These criminal organizations, who cloak themselves in this kind of false legitimacy of Islam. But they are really un-Islamic.

They want to portray themselves as patrons and protectors of aggrieved parties. So their strategy has been to pit communities against each other. Get them to fight each other and then come in as patron and protector and gain control of a chaotic situation and then establish control through brutality, through intimidation. Use control of populations and resources to conduct more attacks, more mass murder of innocent people to drive retribution attacks like you saw maybe these Shia militias conduct this execution in the mosque in Diyala province. That is what they want. They want this kind of cycle of violence to accelerate–to get more and more destructive.

McMaster went on to describe what he believes are the motivators of conflict in the war on terrorism, failing to mention religion:

And so the drivers of conflict is what we have to remember. What is driving a conflict? Sometimes when we look at very quick and easy military solutions to problem sets, we are not thinking about what is the nature of this conflict. What is the nature of this war? What are the human factors? Really, people fight, I think, for the same reasons the Greek philosopher and historian Thucydides identified 2,500 years ago: Fear. Honor. You might say sense of honor. And interest. So understanding those human dimensions and being able to affect them is important, and we have to remember that.

The comments are not the only time McMaster has seemingly denied the Islamic motivations of America’s terrorist enemies. In February, CNN cited a source inside a National Security Council meeting quoting McMaster as saying that use of the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism” is unhelpful in working with allies to fight terrorism.

In May, McMaster spoke on ABC’s This Week about whether Trump would use the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism” in a speech that the president was about to give in Saudi Arabia. “The president will call it whatever he wants to call it,” McMaster said. “But I think it’s important that, whatever we call it, we recognize that [extremists] are not religious people. And, in fact, these enemies of all civilizations, what they want to do is to cloak their criminal behavior under this fall idea of some kind of religious war.”

In the speech, Trump eventually urged Muslim-majority countries to take the lead in “combatting radicalization,” and he referred to “Islamist extremism and the Islamist terror groups it inspires.”

Shia and Sunni Islamic terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, and the Islamic State each openly espouse Islamic motivations, repeatedly cite the Quran, and claim they are fighting a religious war. Some of the Sunni groups are violent offshoots of the Muslim Brotherhood, which seeks to create a global Islamic caliphate.

Osama bin Laden, the founder of al-Qaeda, infamously cited Quranic scripture and was heavily influenced by Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood leader, ideologue, and Islamic theorist Sayyid Qatb, considered the Brotherhood’s intellectual godfather. Writing in the New York Times magazine in 2003, author Paul Berman dissected the Quranic origins of Qatb’s book Milestones – utilized by bin Laden as a sort of religious guidebook – as being drawn from Qatb’s massive commentary on the Quran, titled In the Shade of the Qur’an.

Hamas’s original charter repeatedly cites the Quran and other mainstream Islamic texts. In March, Mahmoud al-Zahar, a senior Hamas leader in Gaza, claimed that “removing the Jews from the land they occupied in 1948 is an immutable principle because it appears in the Book of Allah.” Zahar was referring to the entire state of Israel.

While there are legitimate arguments about how much these terrorist groups in some cases may utilize an extremist interpretation of Islam, McMaster is clearly downplaying the transparent religious motivations of America’s terrorism enemies.

Reacting to McMaster’s statements on terrorism, Frank Gaffney, founder and president of the Center for Security Policy, told Breitbart News that he believes McMaster is endangering U.S. national security by seeming to scrub Islam as a motivating factor.

Stated Gaffney, “It is no small irony that National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster – a man who wrote a book entitled Dereliction of Duty about malfeasant political interference in the U.S. military’s conduct of a war – is now perpetrating the greatest reprise of such dereliction since Vietnam with his insistence that the wellspring for jihadist terror is not authoritative Islam and its supremacist Sharia doctrine. President Trump must treat such incompetence as a firing offense.”

Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio.” Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook.

This article was written with additional research by Joshua Klein.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

Texas Gov. Abbott Permanently BANS Taxpayer Funded Abortions

Texas Gov. Abbott Permanently BANS Taxpayer Funded Abortions

On Tuesday, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed a new law banning taxpayer funded abortions. “The new law will keep Texans from having to pay for elective abortions through their insurance plans,” reports reports:

“As a firm believer in Texas values I am proud to sign legislation that ensures no Texan is ever required to pay for a procedure that ends the life of an unborn child,” Gov. Abbott said. “This bill prohibits insurance providers from forcing Texas policy holders to subsidize elective abortions. I am grateful to the Texas legislature for getting this bill to my desk, and working to protect innocent life this special session.”

HB-214, which the House passed last week and the Senate approved Sunday, applies to “elective” abortions and specifically includes an exemption for cases of medical emergency to save the mother’s life.

“What we’re saying here is: If you want to buy this coverage, you can buy it,” Republican Rep. John Smithee said during the House debate. “This isn’t about who can get an abortion. It is about who is forced to pay for an abortion.”

In the past, Texas law on abortion has faced major headwinds. In June of last year, the Supreme Court struck down a law which would have shut down nearly all of the state’s abortion centers.

Guardian UK reported:

The US supreme court on Monday struck down one of the harshest abortion restrictions in the country and potentially paved the way to overturn dozens of measures in other states that curtail access, in what might be the most significant legal victory for reproductive rights advocates since the right to abortion was established in 1973.

The 5-3 ruling will immediately prevent Texas from enforcing a law that would have closed all but nine abortion clinics. But in a coup for abortion rights supporters, the court also in effect barred lawmakers from passing health measures backed by dubious medical evidence as a way of forcing large numbers of abortion clinics to close.

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the opinion for the majority and was joined by justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Anthony Kennedy, whose support was key to determining if the liberal or conservative bloc of the court would prevail.

“We conclude that neither of these provisions offers medical benefits sufficient to justify the burdens upon access that each imposes,” Breyer’s opinion read. “Each places a substantial obstacle in the path of women seeking a previability abortion, each constitutes an undue burden on abortion access … and each violates the Federal Constitution.”

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: