I normally do not cite the work of Kathleen Parker positively (she's sorta the Conservative Maureen Dowd, far as I can tell), but this editorial is worth reading. I--along with some of you--was really pretty confused by all the abortion talk surrounding the healthcare bill--and I honestly couldn't figure out all the ins and outs of the different bills, why some saw the Senate version as more favorable to federally funded abortions, why the President's Executive Order was so criticized by some, and why the Pro-Choice movement so vehemently opposed the House Bill, the Stupak Amendment and the President's Executive Order. Read Parker's column--it is a fairly straightforward explanation of a complex set of facts.
As you know, I'm not much of a social conservative. I have some views on abortion that are pretty mainstream, but mostly, I'm tired of it coloring so many different policy questions. That said, the more I learn about THIS BILL, the more I realize that social conservatives who fought the bill as hard as they did--did so from a position of strength. They are on the right side of this one--not from a policy perspective so much, but from the perspective of stating positively and plainly that this bill does in fact create the conditions for federal funding of abortions. President Obama signed and Executive Order that HE AS A CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR knows is meaningless.