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. Clif

    Boohoo, working Americans should NOT pay for the irresponsible garbage to sleep around without birth control.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:36 pm | Report abuse |
  2. RH Potfry

    No one's taking away your choice. We are saying, pay for your own abortion.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:36 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Robin

    I believe in a woman's right to choose. However, this choice should not be realized at the expense of the tax dollars of those who consider themselves "pro life". I don't feel abortions should be federally funded...and I consider myself pretty liberal.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:37 pm | Report abuse |
  4. Kevin

    Since when has abortions become an issue of healthcare and not of choice?? Should elective cosmetic surgeries also be included in healthcare coverage??

    March 21, 2010 at 8:37 pm | Report abuse |
  5. sparknut

    How would women be served by scuttling the entire health care bill over the abortion issue? The agreement essentially keeps things the way they were. If NOW wants to work for change at a later date, they are certainly free to do so.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:37 pm | Report abuse |
  6. concerned citizen

    Why should the tax payers continue to pay for all of those females that make sexual mistakes, then use abortion as their birth control. They should either get neutored or use birth control that is payed for. What a bunch of idiots that think that the goverment should continue to clean up after these people!!! Killing life is not the answer, stop making it if you do not want it.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:37 pm | Report abuse |
  7. cesar

    he is still pro choice but he is the president of the united states. all he is saying is that federal funding will not be used on abortion. a woman still has a right to choose. there is nothing wrong with that compromise

    March 21, 2010 at 8:37 pm | Report abuse |
  8. Peter L Fridrich

    Would it be worth scrapping the whole bill for this one item? Look at the benefits women will get out of what is going to pass. I can't stand single issue voters but unfortunately they are a reality that must be faced.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:37 pm | Report abuse |
  9. Ellea

    I dont believe women are depending on the government to pay for abortions. When a woman makes the tough decisoin to get an abortion they can usually come up with the 300 to 600 dollars. The bigger picture in this is access to Healthcare for women who dont get mammograms and other preventative screening or care due to cost. That is more expensive and long term and speaks to the quality of life ......and longevity of.......thats what we should be concerned with at this time.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:38 pm | Report abuse |
  10. vinnymom

    Anti-choice? Just because you are pro-life doesn't mean you are anti-choice. There are many choices other than killing unborn babies. If pro-life means anti-choice, does pro-choice mean anti-life!??!?!

    March 21, 2010 at 8:38 pm | Report abuse |
  11. Dorothy

    Incensed? Tough!
    I cannot BELIEVE the so-called 'National Organization for Women' (which has never spoken for this woman, thank you very much) would believe it was good public policy to FORCE any American citizen to have their tax money go to a cause they believed to be a deeply immoral, even homicidal, and wrong.
    And ladies, the idea that I'm going to predicate my FREEDOM on my ABILITY TO KILL MY OWN CHILD IN THE WOMB, that's your idea of freedom? Really? And you believe other women's "freedom" {sic} is also predicated thusly? Wow.
    That's misguided, even sick.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:38 pm | Report abuse |
  12. bp

    a right to abortion, should be the choice of the woman, not the government

    March 21, 2010 at 8:39 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Elle

    Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I don't know at what point he has limited access to abortion. The Hyde Amendment was already in place limiting federal funds from being used to pay for abortions. He just reiterated what was already there. At no point will women be amy more or less limited from receiving abortions in comparison to what they currently are because they already aren't to be paid for by federal funds. In other words, he has reaffirmed the status quo. As a woman I'm frustrated and offended by NOW's insistence on requiring others to pay for women's choices and making such misleading non-logical comments.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:39 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Gilemena

    I'm sure it was a tough decision for President Obama.

    He's doing his best.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:39 pm | Report abuse |
  15. Stp123

    I completely agree with the statement given by Ms. O'Neill. I voted for Obama and have watched back out of the promises he made. Not a surprise since he a politician after all. But this is the last straw. I won't be casting my vote for him in the furture and good luck to the incumbents next election because from what I see, none of you will be getting my vote either.

    March 21, 2010 at 8:39 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