<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>

      <rss version="2.0">		
        <channel>
          <title>WashingtonWatch.com - Comments for H.R. 1964, The Freedom of Choice Act</title>
          <link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills</link>
          <description></description>
          <managingEditor>info@washingtonwatch.com</managingEditor>
          <generator>http://www.pjdoland.com/chai/?v=0.1</generator>
          
<item>
<title>Comment by Ademantus (October 16, 2008, 16:46:29)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1964.html#45173</link>
<description>(1) Abortion is the intentional killing of unborn human beings. 
(2) Intentionally killing unborn human beings is intrinsically evil. 
(3) Therefore, abortion is intrinsically evil. 
Human beings come into existence at the point of conception, for at that point a being with a unique DNA exists, and begins to develop. The person develops 'on his or her own' indicating an internal principle which directs its development. Unborn human beings are simply young human beings....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">45173@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:46:29 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Mary (October 16, 2008, 13:08:01)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1964.html#45165</link>
<description>Yea Fred!!! Not only would a raped woman have to deal with the horriable trama of the rape the rest of her life but why add the guilt of murdering an inocent child on top of it. Giving up the child for adoption could help in the healing after such a tramatizing experience....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">45165@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 12:08:01 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Jerry Frady (April 7, 2008, 18:31:22)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1964.html#32050</link>
<description>Those supporters of that bill seem
to be without consciences when it
comes to slaughtering innocent babies. I wonder how many of them
would go ballistic if someone killed their pet dogs or cats. Whether cannines or felines or the
other, the pets are the same. Liberals love to talk about &quot;feti-
cide&quot; rather than &quot;infanticide, but pragmatically the result is the same. Pre-, partial- or post-
birth abortion are frauds designed
to cheat innocent babies out of 
their &quot;right to life.&quot; Do I smell
a noxious &quot;sociopathic&quot; ordor here? This bill &amp; S-1173 will codify abortion and revoke any local and state laws prohibiting
it....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">32050@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2008 17:31:22 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Chad (March 19, 2008, 15:22:25)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1964.html#31558</link>
<description>this act makes potential life sound like a hairstyle or just another dress to choose or not....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">31558@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 14:22:25 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by John (January 20, 2008, 21:57:53)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1964.html#29390</link>
<description>I just can't understand why people fight so hard to have the
so called &quot;right&quot; to kill a baby! You would think they would want to protect a child. Maybe they have never felt the joy of holding a newborn baby....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">29390@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jan 2008 20:57:53 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Fred (January 16, 2008, 16:09:31)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1964.html#28925</link>
<description>Although pregnancy from rape is statistically rare, even in though cases putting the baby up for adoption has clear advantages for the baby while isolating the mother from the trauma associated with the child,  should that trauma remain after the baby is born....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">28925@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:09:31 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by jessica (December 11, 2007, 18:50:07)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1964.html#24499</link>
<description>would she be wanting to have to look at that child...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">24499@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2007 17:50:07 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by jessica (December 11, 2007, 18:48:06)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1964.html#24498</link>
<description>i do agree with this act/bill. the first amendment of the U.S. constitution says FREEDOM. for example would if the women was raped, would she be wanting to have to at that child every day of the rest of her life and have that memory drawn up from the back of her head every day and remember the pain. not to rude but i sure as hell wouldn't....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">24498@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2007 17:48:06 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Bill (December 6, 2007, 18:26:27)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1964.html#24297</link>
<description>Look it it this way (leaving religius beliefs out):  At the moment of conception, the fertilized egg has a unique DNA (different from the mother or father) Therefore this is a NEW LIFE on a continuous path to birth.  Abortion then is the kelling of a human life....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">24297@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:26:27 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Troy (November 5, 2007, 23:08:32)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1964.html#22836</link>
<description>Abortion is terrible. the person you kill might grow up to be a nice person that saves lives. Why would you kill?...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">22836@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2007 22:08:32 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Jeane (November 1, 2007, 15:34:56)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1964.html#22697</link>
<description>The democrats raise such a fuss about the war in Iraq where grown ups are getting killed trying to protect our nation, but they don't think anything about killing babies.

I want Roe vs Wade abolished.  Abortion needs to be abolished, done away with and never thought of again.

Freedom of Choice - We can choose evil, murder, insanity, porno, drugs, wickedness.  Does it ever stop?...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">22697@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:34:56 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by mark pullen (September 28, 2007, 02:21:02)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1964.html#21836</link>
<description>the freedom of choice act would 
bring back  partial birth abortion 
which is exactly what the piece of crap barbara boxer wants because she will benefit from the tax dollars that would pay to blatantly kill babies at any stage of pregnancy. Her and Hillary Clinton belong on the same island to gether so they can get pregnant by pigmes and they can take turns spearing each other in the stomach so they can kill something.
the only people that believe in this act are the ones that are alive. Why dont they ask thier kids if they would of cared if they were aborted at birth....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">21836@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2007 01:21:02 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Mike (August 27, 2007, 21:16:06)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1964.html#20970</link>
<description>Ironically, when the national legality of abortions was established by Supreme Court decree, abortion proponents were happy to accept the Court's authority. Now that the Supreme Court has ruled that Congress has the ability to prohibit one type of abortion, those same abortion proponents are NOT happy to accept the Court's authority - thus this bill....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">20970@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 2007 20:16:06 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by shawn (May 10, 2007, 19:16:17)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1964.html#15552</link>
<description>should be an amendment to the constitution! Like the life act is trying to do....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">15552@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 May 2007 18:16:17 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
        </channel>
      </rss>
  		