Merely underscores that in Washington, either party, politics out weigh morals!
Disappointing but no surprise.

53-46, to me, they just admitted that Obamacare doesn't work. Planned Parenthood shouldn't just be defunded, it should be abolished and give the money to Obamacare.

Not a surprise to anyone, and it was a vote on getting it to the floor for debate, not an actual de funding.

It does raise a few things to me anyway......

Will this issue, which is not going to go away, going to help the turnout of conservatives in 2016 ?

Will this spur a congressional investigation into the practices of Planned Parenthood ?

Glad it got to a vote....under Reid, most things never made it this far :)

The vote was more of a ritual. BUT rest assured this vote will have repercussions for a lot of folks.

Not sure it will reach the Obama care part but it could.

What does Obamacare have to do with Planned Parenthood?

Obamacare should be doing what Planned Parenthood is TRYING to do but a whole lot better. Abortions should be done in real hospitals by real Doctors. Birth control pills should require a prescription by a real Doctor too. Just maybe we wouldn't be seeing the baby butchering we are seeing now.

Either way, you are wasting taxpayer money.

Oh my God!

Dear Guest: You do realize that in every manner and respect you may believe it would be a whole lot better but it would also be the beginning of America's version of the Final Solution. I do not want my tax dollars to pay for birth control in any size ,shape or manner (period). You are opening the door of opportunity for future unciviized, unethical and immoral practices. Abortions became law because people rationalized that it is acceptable to kill the unborn for the vanity of the living.

China rationalized a one child policy and now find their country's population aging quickly and hence reverse its one child policy. America is murdering its future. And embracing and celebrating single mother births is adding fuel to this dangerous path we take.

Snicker if you will, call me dated, but history past and present is on my side of this discussion.

Personal Best Regards:

[QUOTE=Guest;1095555]Dear Guest: You do realize that in every manner and respect you may believe it would be a whole lot better but it would also be the beginning of America's version of the Final Solution. I do not want my tax dollars to pay for birth control in any size ,shape or manner (period). You are opening the door of opportunity for future unciviized, unethical and immoral practices. Abortions became law because people rationalized that it is acceptable to kill the unborn for the vanity of the living.

China rationalized a one child policy and now find their country's population aging quickly and hence reverse its one child policy. America is murdering its future. And embracing and celebrating single mother births is adding fuel to this dangerous path we take./QUOTE]

On one hand you seem to say you are against abortion 100 percent. However, on the next paragraph, you say that embracing single mother births is wrong. So, are you saying you do or do not agree that single minority mothers should have abortions on demand so that there are fewer welfare babies? Which is it?

[QUOTE=Guest;1095621]Why does it always have to be one or the other with your type? That person may be against abortion AND against single mother births. You can discourage single mother births by several means. One is to NOT add welfare money for each child born. Harsh? Maybe, but tough love may be called for. You can educate females at an early age about birth control and quit with the stupid shows on TV about teen mothers, unless the liberal Hollywood idiots want to show the hardship and negative but real aspects of raising children by single parents. If the gov insists on forcing everyone to purchase health care insurance, then they can also force single women with a lower income and not able to support children, to participate in birth control. As much as I hate big gov, if they are going to take responsibility for me having health care, then maybe this is something that they should also be responsible for, birth control enforcement. If the mother can't take care of the child properly, then take the child away from her until which time she is able to take care of it. Just different options to kick around. I am not saying that I subscribe to any of them, but I am just showing that it doesn't have to be "either one" of two choices that you suggest. One thing we know that doesn't work, rewarding those that have more babies by giving them more welfare. I know you are going to suggest that if we cut their welfare for having babies then we are encouraging them to seek abortion. That might be true, but if the gov quits paying for those abortions maybe FEAR of having to support a bunch of kids will give them incentive to utilize one of the many types of free birth control that's offered today.
Of course, I can see the need response of "Republicans hate women, Republicans hate children." Well, I have one for you liberals too. Liberals hate children because they want to abort them before they are even born. When you have more black babies aborted than born, that should tell you how the liberals think. What happened to "black lives matter" ????

I think the best method of getting rid of all those welfare babies is to mandate tubal ligation at the time of a welfare mother's second child birth. No abortions, no birth control pills and no more welfare babies.

Even though I dislike the gov infringement on us, your means to a solution would be absolute.

Entrepreneurs would open up tubal ligation reversal clinics and somehow the government would end up paying for a second procedure.

Can't argue with that. Innovative capitalism is great, isn't it?