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. Morrigan

    The government should pay for as many damn abortions as a woman needs.

    Birth control can fail and can be difficult to get in some areas. Condoms can break.

    And the government continues to allow schools to teach terrible 'abstinence only' programs that result in higher teen pregnancy rates.

    Frankly the government owes it to women to provide this service.

    Also too many pro-lifers need to care more about the kids who are already born but need help. I bet not a single one of you has ever donated to any programs that help needy, abused, and/or neglected kids. They're only important when they're fetuses amirite? 'Respects life' my ass.

    March 22, 2010 at 7:41 am | Report abuse |
  2. DR

    Reproductive Health Care? Can it sound any "Cleaner"? For the vast majority, Womin had the right to choose,,They could choose to say "NO, I'm not ready" That was when you had the "Power" and "Control" over your body.

    March 22, 2010 at 7:46 am | Report abuse |
  3. Adam Richards

    Inflammatory rhetoric. President Obama knows that abortion is a controversial and nuanced issue. It is a legitimate position to support a woman's right to choose, and yet NOT support taxpayers' money being used to fund abortion. Despite all the obstacles, Obama is still a consensus-builder. Welcome to the middle, N.O.W.

    March 22, 2010 at 7:48 am | Report abuse |
  4. Not for NOW

    I'm sick of NOW and their harping that they represent me and my sisters in this country. They are tantamount to an out-of-control union, spraying out buzzwords to get people riled up if they don't get what they think is justice. I believe the hardworking women of America widely support the President's decision....and wouldn't mind seeing NOW go the way of the dodo. I hope President Obama gets inundated with letters and blogs of support on this.

    March 22, 2010 at 7:51 am | Report abuse |
  5. Hogger1918

    I am pro life. You want the Federal government to use tax payer money to pay for an abortion? I have a right to be pro life and I should NOT have my, as well as other pro lifers tax money used to end a life. The problem with NOW is they do not THINK.

    Women have a CHOICE, whether to get pregnant or not.

    March 22, 2010 at 7:53 am | Report abuse |
  6. pro-choice=pro-death

    How many more forms of birth-control are needed for couples not to have an unwamted pregnancy?!? Condoms, birth control pills, diaphragms, etc..... NOW believes abortion is just another form of birth-control. They claim to fight for women's right to choose, but who is fighting for the baby's right to live. We all know that babies are born pre-maturely all the time and go on to live normal, healthy lives. At what point can we agree that there is a human being there?!? Its amazing to me that liberals fight for the right to terminate a pregnancy, but are against executing child killers. Please explain that one!!

    March 22, 2010 at 7:58 am | 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