March 21st, 2010
06:19 PM ET

NOW 'incensed' over anti-abortion executive order

National Organization for Women President Terry O'Neill issued a statement Sunday afternoon slamming President Obama, saying that he had broken his faith with women by agreeing to issue an executive order that prohibits federal funding for abortions.

"The National Organization for Women is incensed that President Barack Obama agreed today to issue an executive order designed to appease a handful of anti-choice Democrats who have held up health care reform in an effort to restrict women's access to abortion. Through this order, the president has announced he will lend the weight of his office and the entire executive branch to the anti-abortion measures included in the Senate bill, which the House is now prepared to pass.

"President Obama campaigned as a pro-choice president, but his actions today suggest that his commitment to reproductive health care is shaky at best. Contrary to language in the draft of the executive order and repeated assertions in the news, the Hyde Amendment is not settled law - it is an illegitimate tack-on to an annual must-pass appropriations bill. NOW has a longstanding objection to Hyde and, in fact, was looking forward to working with this president and Congress to bring an end to these restrictions. We see now that we have our work cut out for us far beyond what we ever anticipated. The message we have received today is that it is acceptable to negotiate health care on the backs of women, and we couldn't disagree more."

soundoff (516 Responses)
  1. Drew

    Actually, why SHOULD taxpayers pay for abortions OTHER than in the allowable cases of rape, incest or where the mother's life is in danger? I don't want to pay for somebody's mistake in life that was 100% preventable with a condom.

    March 21, 2010 at 7:46 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Paul

    It is bad enough that Roe v. Wade continues to stand and paint this country as murderous, but for NOW to assert that not having federal funding for abortions will in some way restrict the freedom to choose whether or not to have one is an affront not only to pro-life people in this country, but to all taxpayers...pay for you own sins...the rest of us do not want to be a party to it!

    March 21, 2010 at 7:47 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Paul

    Dosen't anyone realize that this is already a law. You can't use federal money to fund abortions. I'm pro choice and believe more effort needs to be put into education about abortions for people to make clear choices but lets not let this issue bog down HCR.

    March 21, 2010 at 7:47 pm | Report abuse |
  4. Julie Schwinnen

    I was listening to the health care issue. I think for the most part it sounds pretty good, but
    I don't understand why abortion has to be brought into it. Why does that issue have to be the deciiding factor as to how to vote for health care. What I am hearing is that a women can have an abortion at any time of her pregnancy. I thought that was outlawed years ago. I voted for Obama knowing that he was for abortion, but also knowing that Bush was not and during his presidency nothing changed on the abortion issue and I figured that nothing would change again. I do not agree with abortion and I guess I must be pretty naive and did not think that this health care package would have such a positie impact on abortion. Why can't we just talk about health care and leave the abortion issue where it was. There is a lot more to the health care issue that needs to be addressed.

    March 21, 2010 at 7:47 pm | Report abuse |
  5. CJ

    Selling out women is unfortunately nothing new for President Obama....hard to forget some of the stuff he did against Hillary in the primaries. This isn't surprising, but still very disappointing. He doesn't mind scoring points with moderate/GOP sexists and anti-choice crusaders at the expense of feminist women because he knows feminist women will have no other candidate to support. It's depressing.

    March 21, 2010 at 7:49 pm | Report abuse |
  6. Steve Cohn

    I'm a long-time supporter of NOW and abortion rights, but all I could think of saying when I saw the headline was "Oh, shut up."

    The HealthCare bill is too important to fail because of one-issue people.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:03 pm | Report abuse |
  7. OldGoat

    NOW's unhappiness is proof that not matter what any president does, someone isn't going to like it. I'd prefer that public funds be used to take care of abortions. In the long run, it's a better return on investment than using public funds to support all those unwanted children.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:07 pm | Report abuse |
  8. Aaron Geiger

    I am disgusted by NOW for putting abortion rights over the rights of community health care. It doesn't matter if you are pro-life or pro-choice, this is an issue that should not even have been included in the original rhetoric. This isn't a means to restrict access to abortion; this is a means to help those WHO DON'T HAVE A CHOICE WHEN THEY ARE FACING ILLNESS AND CANCERS AND DEATH. This country is being wrecked by special interest idiots who worry about themselves instead of the greater good.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:13 pm | Report abuse |
  9. maureen peterson

    I'm pro-choice and in favor of health care reform but I also oppose federal funding of abortions. Many people believe abortion is taking a life and it is unfair to use their money to pay for the procedure. i think it's also unfair to use my money to wage war against Iraq but that's another issue.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:13 pm | Report abuse |
  10. Sheila

    Oh you NOW people do not represent the voice of all women. Abortion is hideous and should only be reserved for rare situations. But by no means should Washington D.C. use the taxpayers money to pay for the immorality of America, and the killing of unborn children. It isn't about "freedom" or "women's rights". Women have the right to close their legs, and men have the right to zip up their pants. So if they are concerned about their rights, let them exercise them by making moral and wise choices to begin with.

    Murder isn't a human right. You people just hate children ! Satan hates children and the traditional family. I think we found the connection !

    When I was a young woman I was deceived by your organization. You people are liars, deceivers and murderers. You make young women think that an immoral lifestyle can always be mitigated by abortion.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:15 pm | Report abuse |
  11. SameOlStuff

    Abortion isn't healthcare. It is birth-control and as such should not be paid for with taxpayer money! Sorry NOW.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:15 pm | Report abuse |
  12. Vince

    Doesn't NOW say that the government has no right to tell women what they can do with their bodies? Then why are they for government run health care?

    March 21, 2010 at 8:17 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Justin

    Let us think about this. I find, with honest disbelief that Republicans in 2010 can act and defend other Republicans saying that we should start from square one. Some states are heading to 12% and 13% unemployment if not higher. The number is still consistently rising and the amount of uninsured continue right behind. Americans your Republicans want our President to fail at health care. They want the millions of people with out insurance to suffer longer, and thousands more following, That said. :)

    These people need a grip on honest reality, it's not just about abortion. People need insurance, no questions asked. You say it will be like Canada or some UN country? This is America, quit the crying and excuse making even though it will never end. Make it happen and stop letting needless deaths continue, stop letting people who have yet to obtain the goals in life die while you stand on your high horses on Capital Hill.

    Insurance for those who need it, let's go.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:17 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Leonore Dvorkin

    I am also in favor of abortion rights, but I think such restrictive language had to be included in order to get the votes to pass the entire bill. I am very sorry for any woman who will suffer as a result of this, but the greater good has been served, here. NOW members need to ask themselves: Would they rather have had abortion rights included in the bill and then see the whole thing go down in flames, thus denying millions of Americans all the other benefits that are to be gained, here? I certainly hope not! I see this as a case of a necessary sacrifice made to serve the greater good. Now we need to work on getting better sex education for our young people, and better and cheaper birth control available to all, so that fewer abortions will be needed. - Leonore Dvorkin, Denver, CO

    March 21, 2010 at 8:18 pm | Report abuse |
  15. David

    Really???? Why does NOW act so much like THEN. Stop being so political and be a human being for once. Lets just slam Obama because millions of American's will have a better future and the insurance companies are now on notice to stop screwing with the the citizens of this county. NOW – wake up – you are old news and really belong in history books as just another useless lobby group. Abortion or health care reform??? Hmmm...

    March 21, 2010 at 8:20 pm | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35