Community | July 23, 2009 | 34 comments

Pro-lifers attack possibility of public option coverage for abortions

source: http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/feature/2009/07/23/abortion_healthcare/

Image
WakeUpPeople
Think debate over the president's healthcare plan is contentious? You ain't seen nothing yet. Cue center stage the divider of all dividers, the heart of the country's culture war -- it's ... drum roll ... abortion. There is no mention of the issue in the critical healthcare bills currently being considered in Congress, but abortion foes argue that the legislation would allow, maybe even require, federal funding to cover abortions and make the procedure both more accessible and more common. Despite this recent chatter, Obama didn't explicitly speak to the issue of abortion during Wednesday's press conference on the healthcare overhaul. (Although he did obliquely emphasize "choice.")

"This is a president who says he wants to reduce abortions," says Douglas Johnson, director of the National Right to Life Committee. "But the actual policies that this administration is promoting will result in massive public subsidies for abortion and result in a massive increase in the number of abortions" -- because poor women who previously lacked insurance might suddenly have a real choice about carrying their pregnancy to term.

Conservatives would also have us believe that federal money would be directly funneled to abortion. The truth, however, is just as Politico's Ben Smith put it: "The 'government option' or 'public plan' is only administered by the government; the actual services will be paid with the same mix of private money and vast new subsidies that will pay for private plans, some of which now cover abortion."

Still, some Democrats have suggested a "common ground" approach: Let insurers decide what coverage they offer, just as they do now. Abortion coverage would neither be required nor prohibited. A more popular Democratic solution is to have an independent medical panel determine which procedures should require coverage. This approach is dissatisfying to abortion-rights supporters and opponents alike: One group assumes abortion will be covered, the other assumes it won't -- and neither is happy about said assumptions.

Certain conservatives are going as far as to call for a clear ban on funding in the pending legislation. If they succeed, a whole lot of women will lose medical benefits under Obama's plan: Roughly 86 percent of employment-based insurance plans covered abortion in 2002, according to the Guttmacher Institute. As Laurie Rubiner, vice-president for public policy and advocacy at Planned Parenthood, told Politico: That goes against "the first principle of health care reform, which is: Don’t make people worse off under health care reform than they are today."
  1. groups:
    Community,   Current Democrats,   Feminism
  2. tags:
    US Politics,  Health Care Reform,  Public Option,  Pro-Life,  1 more
  3.     
    |

34 comments // Pro-lifers attack possibility of public option coverage for abortions

  • kennymotown
    • 0
      kennymotown  

    • kylsport, you have gotten it wrong again, so its ok for the Bush administration to have killed ! million Iraq civilians or at the very least caused their deaths with this unprovked war but abortion is wrong that is fucked up thinking.

    • 2 years ago
  • nursediesel
    • 0
      nursediesel  

    • Abortion is between a doctor and the patient. Period. No one else should be involved in the decision, unless the patient wants some one with her.
      I have problem's with women using abortion as birth control, and many do when free clinics make it so easy.
      Abortions have never stopped occuring, and we will never stop it because there will always be some one out there willing to do it for money. It's better to be done by a doctor than a butcher.
      I also have a problem with late term, delivering most of the infant and then kiling it, that just isn't right to me.
      And trust me, having an abortion at any age always comes back to haunt you.

    • 2 years ago
  • kennymotown
  • locutus
  • GodsnLiberals
  • locutus
  • kennymotown
  • Saladin
    • 0
      Saladin  

    • Always with the double standard for them.

      Abstinence only education? Perfectly ok, not an insane, unscientific, religious nutjob minority view at all to force on the country with federal funds.

      But actually funding a medical procedure they see as "evil?" RAW RAW RAW DON'T SPEND OUR MONEY.

      Not even when the mother would die if she didn't have one.

    • 2 years ago
  • div
    • 0
      div  
    • Saladin:

      oh yeah, of course. and forget birth control or other means to PREVENT pregnancy. Seriously, they only want women to die. Fetus', however, get a green card to life.

    • 2 years ago
  • metalcookiesxy70
  • Valence
    • 0
      Valence  

    • I'm Pro-Choice because everyone has their own reason.

      Not matter how selfish it might sound a Child is better off left unborn if he are she is going to grow up in an environment that will lead that child to a path that will destroy his and or others lives to a point of no return.

      Yes that child could be given up for adoption but not everyone has that option,Pro-lifers need to understand that.

    • 2 years ago
  • titvol
  • div
  • titvol
  • unimatrix0
  • GodsnLiberals
  • Valence
    • 0
      Valence  
    • Valence:

      "How in the hell could you possibly have any clue whatsoever where the paths a child takes might lead as they age?"

      Bad environment,no money,no education,barely any family figure. :/ i'd think thats a recipe for something bad.

      "in that case..wear a fucking condom or pull your dick out before you cum inside that bitch..

      problem solved..you dont have to start life at all.."

      :/ Pulling out isn't a very effective measure.

      Yes wearing a condom is :/ but what about those that don't wear a condom.

      Just like you don't like people all in your business,they don't want you all in their business when it comes to their choices.

    • 2 years ago
  • metalcookiesxy70
  • unimatrix0
    • 0
      unimatrix0  

    • Pro life is a misnomer; most pro lifers could care less about people in need; they only care about a fetus.

      Pro life is really pro fetus.

      The pro fetus crowd is a hyper religious bunch lacking any true moral compass; they are mere simpleton's deluded by religious superstition and ignorance.

      They are a dangerous minority. Their rhetoric is ugly and the logical implication of their position is terrorism.

    • 2 years ago
  • GodsnLiberals
  • GodsnLiberals
  • GodsnLiberals
  • unimatrix0
    • 0
      unimatrix0  
    • unimatrix0:

      GnL,

      if you really believed abortion is murder I would think you would do more to stop the murder of innocent people.

      Indeed, if I thought innocent people were being murdered I would go to jail in order to stop such an atrocity.

      The fact that you and 99% of the people who claim abortion is murder are not actively trying to stop such a horrible thing leaves you and your cohorts morally suspect.

      Either you really do not value human life, hence you do nothing to stop abortion, or you really believe that abortion is not murder, and you and your cohorts are just drama queens and busybodies.

      Take your pick.

    • 2 years ago
  • bailey78
  • titvol
  • GodsnLiberals
  • Kylsport
  • metalcookiesxy70
  • masterzip
    • 0
      masterzip  

    • is abortion a medical procedure or not?
      For some....they will never see it as medical, that is why they accuse doctors of murder.
      For others...it is...as they understand that everything having to do w/ reproductivity and fertility is all monitored by a doctor dispensing medicine and health for the patient.
      The government has chosen to not fund this type of medical care because the law is written with religious peoples minds in hand. The earth is still flat.
      So here,..we have a law that covers some peoples beliefs, and not others.....
      no wonder this is such a contentious issue....

    • 2 years ago
  • neocongo
    • 0
      neocongo  

    • I wish these wing nuts would be pro-active about getting a life. They are a classic example of a manipulated constituency that is going to get zero legislation passed on the abortion issue. Did Reagan, Bush, or MiniBush accomplish anything other than getting votes off of them?

    • 2 years ago
  • bailey78
  • Kylsport
    • 0
      Kylsport  

    • If a woman wants to kill her baby, let her. If she hates it that much, she is going to find a way. Just don't make me pay for it. I don't believe in child sacrifice for the greater good, which is what it is. In the ancient days, children were sacrificied to appease the gods for the greater good. Today, we don't sacrifice them to the gods, but we sacrifice them for the greater good - i.e. population control and the economic well being of the country, or the simple selfish inconvenience for the parent.

    • 2 years ago
  • kennymotown
    • 0
      kennymotown  
    • Kylsport:

      I thought you read the bible a lot Kylsport, wasn't god the great aborter? If you don't want an abortion don't get one and in the meantime stay the hell out of a woman's choice. And the government paying for an abortion what's wrong with that the government is always killing already born kids in Iraq and Afghanistan, and you had no problem with that President.

    • 2 years ago
  • Kylsport
    • 0
      Kylsport  
    • Kylsport:

      My choice has nothing to do with a woman, and neither do my tax dollars, for that matter. I still don't want to be taxed knowing that my hard-earned tax dollars are going to infanticide.

      Kenny, oh, Kenny...you don't strike me as a bible thumper and therefore I am not going to ask you to show me where in the bible such is said. Next the big lie you you have bought into from past propaganda dating back to the PLO, Americans are not killing children. If you could see beyond your own agenda, you would know that statements such as these were designed to draw sympathy. I mean, who doesn't want to see children die.

      You still fail to stick to the original argument, by utilizing a weak analogy. If I were to draw a conclusion based on what you have given me, you're telling me I should approve abortion since Americans are killing children in Iraq. Wow, that is a fncked up way of thinking. Do you like living with yourself?

    • 2 years ago
more from Community:
from the community

top videos