foca?

Freedom Of Choice Act.
Legalizes Partial Birth Abortion, removes all restrictions on Minors, including parental consent, requires Taxpayer subsidization of all abortions nationwide.

anything that pushing apart church and state is a good thing, espically an act which gives people the freedom to do what they want

I'm social neutral but darn would I hate to pay for something I can't do.

church and state
=============================================
Speaking of which:
http://stix1972.typepad.com/stix_blog/images/2007/05/04/church_state_poster.jpg

trim that's true, but abortion isn't just a religious issue. It can very easily be argued upon ethical grounds. I personally am not religious and do not think I would consider ever having an abortion. I haven't completely decided how I feel about the issue in general though, but probably pro-choice. Don't support abortion blindly because religious people don't.

Also, I'm not sure why abortions should be subsidized by taxpayer money. It would make sense if America already had universal healthcare... but why can't the free-market take over delivering abortive services?

i know its not completely a religous issue, but peoples views are partly to do with that. This is not an issue in england so i havn't really thought of an oppinion on it specifically, but in my view what people want to do with their own bodies is up to them

I'm not in favor of this act if it does what SPAO says it is intended to do. I am not in favor of partial birth abortion, but i will not delve into all the anger and emotion that is the abortion argument. If a woman chooses to get an abortionn that is her choice, the tax payers should not be forced to pay for it. If she is a minor, then it gets a little more sketchy, but i am generally in favor of requiring parental consent, everything else the minor does requires consent, even when it comes to her body.

Personally, I don't support abortions at all, especially only if the girl gets to choose (half of the guys too) but in the cases where parents could potentially beat/kill/disown their kids I say go for it

My understanding is that partial birth abortions are allowed if there is a reason. I don't think anyone is waiting til their third trimester and then saying "on second thought". For example, sometimes abortions fail the first time (ie only seriously damaging the fetus, not killing it), at that point you really need to finish the job.

I'm not sure about the extent of the subsidy, but I can tell you that in Ontario(so that would be universal healthcare) your first abortion is free, and after that you need to fork out the cash.

This isn't a church and state issue at all. You don't need to be religious to be ethical I hope.

I'm very upset about foca.

FOCA was the single reason I had considered voting for someone that was not Obama.

I absolutely do not want to be actively subsidizing something that I do not believe is ethical. If people want to make the choice, fine, and I think that they should be able to do so without having to resort to potentially dangerous street abortions.

Another potentially interesting thing about FOCA that I read somewhere is that supposedly, doctors can get fined if they refuse to perform abortions. Think of what that would do to Catholic hospitals, among other things...

in britain doctors are not allowed to allow outside influences (i.e religion, personal views) to effect their medical decisions

Only part I don't agree with is lifting the restriction on minors. As long as minors' medical care is the legal and financial responsibility of the parents, the parents' consent should be required for *any* non-emergency medical procedure.

If they are at danger at home, that is a matter for the family courts.