“The U.S. Senate rejected a GOP amendment on Thursday that would have overridden President Obama’s mandate that most employers, including religious nonprofits, and all insurers provide free contraception, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs for women. The measure failed by a 51-48 vote.”

The Republicans are bad, but not as bad as Democrats. They’re both war parties and fiscal destroyers. But it’s the Democrats who revel in supporting abortion without restrictions. When the Partial Birth Abortion bill came to a final vote in the House in 2003, 218 Republicans and only 63 Democrats voted to outlaw the procedure. There were 137 Democrats who voted to make the procedure legal. Only 4 Republicans supported the procedure.

The latest Healthcare mandate that requires religious institutions to pay for contraception is another case in point that Democrats look at life issues in a cost-analysis way. Here are the comments of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius on the subject: “The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for the cost of contraception.” She went on to say that the estimated cost is “down not up.”

Not having children is a cost benefit. Remember this the next time your children misbehave. “You know, I could have aborted you. It would have saved your mother and me a lot of money.”

Since it’s more cost effective to have fewer children, then we should do everything we can to support a lower cost procedure. By mandating birth control – abortion included – in the end we’ll be better off financially.

Let’s apply the same logic to Social Security. When the SS system was first implemented, there were nearly 45 people paying into the system for each person drawing a benefit. In a few years, the number paying in will be 3 for each person receiving payments from the system. SS is in fiscal crisis mode like everything else. What has contributed to the disparity? Abortion. Since 1973, each year 1.5 million babies have been aborted. That’s nearly 60 million Americans. This doesn’t count the number of children who would have been born to these 60 million.

The Obama administration is pushing an anti-life agenda like no other.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told the House subcommittee, “The rule which we intend to promulgate in the near future around implementation will require insurance companies, not a religious employer, but the insurance company to provide coverage for contraceptives.”

Tim Murphy, a Republican from Pennsylvania, had this exchange with Sebelius:

Murphy: “So you are saying, by not having babies born, we are going to save money on health care?” Murphy asked.

Sebelius: “Providing contraception is a critical preventive health benefit for women and for their children.”

Murphy: “Not having babies born is a critical benefit. This is absolutely amazing to me. I yield back.”

Sebelius: “Family planning is a critical health benefit in this country, according to the Institute of Medicine.”

Like most liberals, Sebelius avoided answering the question.

The Democrats argue that contraception saves the insurance companies money. If contraceptives save the greedy insurance companies, then why weren’t the greedy insurance companies offering the stuff free all along?

There is a hidden agenda in all of this. Remember talk of “death panels” and how the media dismissed the charge? If having children is based on a cost-benefit analysis, then what does this say for the elderly? “Well, you’re mother has lived long enough. We don’t think it will be cost effective to grant her health insurance to have her knee replaced.”

The Democrats are supporting a culture of death in the name of “reproductive freedom.” It’s no wonder that we’re seeing an unusual spike in acts of violence among the young. They’re being told that life is cheap, in fact, of no real consequence. How long can our nation continue with this anti-life worldview?