Social Republican Lawmaker believes IVF is for Chumps and wants to ban it

[Rhood]

Republican Representative Matt Rosendale was bashed over social media on Tuesday after saying that the practice of in vitro fertilization (IVF) is "morally wrong."

The Montana lawmaker delivered the remark after announcing a proposed amendment to the Department of Defense (DOD) Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2025 that would defund "assisted reproductive technology that includes any infertility treatments or technologies including IVF to ensure human life is protected."
“While I feel for couples that are unable to have children, the practice of IVF is morally wrong, and I refuse to support any legislation that condones its use,” Rosendale said in a statement. “My amendment will strip funding for this practice, which is responsible for the destruction of life to the tune of hundreds of thousands of children a year. If you are opposed to abortion, you should be opposed to the practice of IVF, which destroys twice as much life as Planned Parenthood yearly.”

A Republican’s IVF-Ban Amendment Is the Last Thing the GOP Needs Right Now

The “life begins at conception” true believer is serious—and he’s not alone.

slate.com

 

[Rob Battisti]

Sounds like a real moron

 

[Only Here for Attachments]

These clowns are handing November to the Democrats on a silver platter. Almost feels like a psy-op.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Kind of hard for the GOP to present a moderate position on abortion in response to the left wing voter turnout as a result of Dobbs when you have guys like this who won't even accept IVF as legitimate. When it comes to reproductive rights in regards to abortion and IVF it really looks like its all or nothing.

These clowns are handing November to the Democrats on a silver platter. Almost feels like a psy-op.

Why is it hard to believe its his sincerely held belief especially when it logically follows from the claim that life begins at conception?

 

[Rob Battisti]

Kind of hard for the GOP to present a moderate position on abortion in response to the left wing voter turnout as a result of Dobbs when you have guys like this who won't even accept IVF as legitimate. When it comes to reproductive rights in regards to abortion and IVF it really looks like its all or nothing.

Why is it hard to believe its his sincerely held belief especially when it logically follows from the claim that life begins at conception?

Oh, I think this guy believes it. I believe he’s an idiot.

 

[Scheme]

"Ban", aka not using taxpayer dollars to fund it. Very misleading title. No where in that article does it state that he wants IVF made illegal. Just that he doesn't want taxpayer money paying for them.

Of course, such intensive research would require actually reading past the headline and going all the way down to the first paragraph of the article.

 

[Only Here for Attachments]

Why is it hard to believe its his sincerely held belief especially when it logically follows from the claim that life begins at conception?

That's the thing, it seems ridiculous on the face but then could totally be sincere. 2024 in a nutshell.

 

[Scheme]

That's the thing, it seems ridiculous on the face but then could totally be sincere. 2024 in a nutshell.

Someone opposing something morally and then not wanting that same thing funded by the government is "ridiculous"?

 

[RemyR]

What a fucking idiot. The whole anti IVF thing just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[LeonardoBjj]

- I get perplexed how those politicians get vote.

We had a guy here, sugesting cutting the trees on the hills to dtyop landslide, because was the weight of the trees that provocated them agording to him!

You cant get a job as armored truck guard without having the basic education completed, but can become a politician!

 

[44nutman]

"Ban", aka not using taxpayer dollars to fund it. Very misleading title. No where in that article does it state that he wants IVF made illegal. Just that he doesn't want taxpayer money paying for them.

Of course, such intensive research would require actually reading past the headline and going all the way down to the first paragraph of the article.

“My amendment will strip funding for this practice, which is responsible for the destruction of life to the tune of hundreds of thousands of children a year. If you are opposed to abortion, you should be opposed to the practice of IVF, which destroys twice as much life as Planned Parenthood yearly.”
From his words, he seems totally rational about it. Is it wrong to help people have children when they have difficulty having children.

This is where the GOP always fucks up. You could get away without the abortion issue killing you in the election, then you have a so called Christian who makes asinine statements like above, and then the GOP becomes moderate voter repellent. Those GOP dumb fucks never learn. Too bad we have the absolute dregs of each party with the loudest voices. The problem is the GOP voices tend to be much louder and garner more support from others in their party.

 

[TankAbbott4Eva]

Sounds like a real moron

Also sounds like someone who never struggled for fertility

 

[chardog]

What a fucking idiot. The whole anti IVF thing just doesn't make any sense to me.

I dont know man, everything is a grift these days, why is it an issue?












probably funding

 

[RoastBeast]

"Ban", aka not using taxpayer dollars to fund it. Very misleading title. No where in that article does it state that he wants IVF made illegal. Just that he doesn't want taxpayer money paying for them.

Of course, such intensive research would require actually reading past the headline and going all the way down to the first paragraph of the article.

I think it's both. Unless his comments about it are taken out of context, it sounds like he wants it to be outlawed but his legislation just outlaws using taxpayer funds for it, which I'm good with.

Americans should be outraged at how badly their tax money is wasted.

 

[Sinister]

Republicans: "We need more Americans so bad we are willing to roll back a right to force people to have more Americans!! Without more Americans our economy and this, our Country collapses (sometimes meaning "gets more brown). Plus I'm Pro Life!!"

Normal people: "Okay so IVF should be heavily invested in to assure that Americans who want to make more Americans, but perhaps biologically cannot...can easily use it to make more Americans, yes? Because we're so very Pro Life now?"

Republicans: "Uh...f*ck that noise!! Hell naw, no public funding for that mess, and eventually we might outlaw it!!"

 

[44nutman]

I think it's both. Unless his comments about it are taken out of context, it sounds like he wants it to be outlawed but his legislation just outlaws using taxpayer funds for it, which I'm good with.

Americans should be outraged at how badly their tax money is wasted.

The tax part is not a problem, which most Americans agree with but when he compares IVF to abortion then that is when he becomes an idiot.
There is a reason the GOP is trying to walk back some of these comments from their members. People who wants kids but have medical issues that make it difficult to have kids should not be demonized. They probably already have emotional issues because they are having trouble getting pregnant and then you have to listen to this asshole comparing you to someone that had an abortion. Fuck this dude , because he is an utter asshole and him using the tax angle just gives him an excuse to espouse his asshole views.

 

[PhitePhan]

Republicans: "We need more Americans so bad we are willing to roll back a right to force people to have more Americans!! Without more Americans our economy and this, our Country collapses (sometimes meaning "gets more brown). Plus I'm Pro Life!!"

Normal people: "Okay so IVF should be heavily invested in to assure that Americans who want to make more Americans, but perhaps biologically cannot...can easily use it to make more Americans, yes? Because we're so very Pro Life now?"

Republicans: "Uh...f*ck that noise!! Hell naw, no public funding for that mess, and eventually we might outlaw it!!"

The issue is killing all the fertilized embryos in the process. If you believe that abortion (killing an embryo) is murder, then it follows consistently that IVF is murder as well, because IVF produces many more fertilized embryos than will be used, and the rest are killed.

 

[Stump]

I think it's both. Unless his comments about it are taken out of context, it sounds like he wants it to be outlawed but his legislation just outlaws using taxpayer funds for it, which I'm good with.

Americans should be outraged at how badly their tax money is wasted.

what do you mean? do you think it's a waste of tax money to allow people to have children who couldn't without medical intervention?

Where exaclty is your line on this? What about wheelchair ramps? Are you okay with tax dollars spent on educating people with sign language or braile?

 

[Fedor>Cain]

The tax part is not a problem, which most Americans agree with but when he compares IVF to abortion then that is when he becomes an idiot.
There is a reason the GOP is trying to walk back some of these comments from their members. People who wants kids but have medical issues that make it difficult to have kids should not be demonized. They probably already have emotional issues because they are having trouble getting pregnant and then you have to listen to this asshole comparing you to someone that had an abortion. Fuck this dude , because he is an utter asshole and him using the tax angle just gives him an excuse to espouse his asshole views.

It's wild to hear Republicans screech about taxes while being totally cool with giving corporations all of the subsidies they ask for.

Republicans: IVF is a waste of tax payer money

Also Republicans: Bring on Trump's inevitable trade war that will no doubt ream all our assholes

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

"Ban", aka not using taxpayer dollars to fund it. Very misleading title. No where in that article does it state that he wants IVF made illegal. Just that he doesn't want taxpayer money paying for them.

Of course, such intensive research would require actually reading past the headline and going all the way down to the first paragraph of the article.

If it wasn't for misleading threads, the left would make no threads at all.