lordjedi said:
shimy said:
state constitution vs federal law, how is there a conflict there?

Here's the relevant article http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A00E5DF113EF933A2575BC0A960958260

And here's the relevant portion:

The constitutional provision, Amendment 68, was approved by voters in 1989. At the time, its ban on public money for abortions except when a mother's life was endangered was in harmony with Federal law.

But in 1993, Congress extended abortion benefits to poor women who were victims of rape or incest.

In addition, there are those people who don't think tax money, which is essentially what Medicaid is, should be used for abortions period. People like me don't really like it when our tax dollars are used to kill an unborn child.

It all comes down to States rights vs Federal rights. Once again, the Federal govt needs to get its hands out of where it doesn't belong.

so you condon his actions there and feel that this girlsmoney should have been taken after being raped by her step father and being extemely young. You're part of the UNITED states, not a union of states. I would think that any federal law would override a state law. That being said, I would tend to agree with you if it was all abortions, however, its rape, incest, and mothers life, I think those are justified. Thats just my opinion though.

My comment might be a little ignorant I know there are certain matters that are part of a states jurisdiction and other that are federal. I just have very strong feelings for this cause on the fundemental level its such a moral outrage. This girl was already going to have problems as it was, making her carried a baby for 9 months, afterwards it just seems like you would effectively be distroying her life(mentally), for the life of an unborn child, which it could be argued would fall under the original decree.