Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sexist! You don't think it takes two? You need to go back to some sort of sex ed that is not abstinence only!
Both are totally responsible. And they should make the penalty much more severe for the fathers that dont help out.
But you made me think of it a different way.
So two strangers meet somwhere one night. They have a few drinks, get hot and heavy and dont use a condom and the guy doesnt pull out. She gets pregnant. They get an abortion.
Now lets say one night a guy (or girl) is out drinking. He/she gets drunk and decides to drive home. They get a DUI. Where's the reset button for that scenario?
Anyways, abortion SHOULD be covered, if not so called "convenience" abortions, medically necessary abortions should be covered.
Yes. There is a drastic difference between a medically necessary abortion and a "convenience" abortion. A convenience abortion IMO is akin to plastic surgery, so it should not be covered.
A medically necessary abortion, OTOH, should be (assuming this "reform" is passed; I don't want any of it passed anyway, but that's a different topic).
Last edited by afoigrokerkok; 07-15-2009 at 01:30 PM..
Self inflicted gun shot wound? The dumbass should have to pay for it. Thrill seekers? (extreme skiers, surfers, dirtbikes, base jumping, etc) They should have to pay for it.
I see you want everyone's bad decisions to be paid for by the public. Do you also think criminals fines/etc should be paid for? Someone gets busted for robbing a car...should they not get in trouble the 1st time? Should tax payers pay all the fines? Damage? etc?
I am just posing a question. As to criminal matters, they should not be paid for as they are crimes. If something is a crime you should not be doing it no matter what smoking and gun ownership are not crimes. Additional in that case should people who have all those conditions or do those things be exempt from paying related taxes for such services since they do not receive them?
I am just posing a question. As to criminal matters should not be paid for they are crimes if something is a crime you should not be doing it no matter what. In that case should people who have all those conditions or do those things be exempt from paying related taxes for such services since they do not receive them?
It gets tricky. And I obviously havent thought everything through. BUT......
...they should pay. Who said they wouldnt receive any services ever? I'm just saying if someone is doing something really dumb we need to let them take responsibility for it. That doesnt mean some other time they could just get in an actual accident, just anything resulting from stupid actions should be placed on that individual.
I pay taxes for people with kids in public schools. I dont have kids. My parents decided to have me and paid taxes while I was in school. Do I get to opt out?
Nineteen House Democrats write to Speaker Nancy Pelosi to say that healthcare reform must avoid ushering in government-funded abortion.
June 25, 2009
Dear Honorable Pelosi:
As the debate on health care reform continues and legislation is produced, it is imperative that the issue of abortion not be overlooked. Plans to mandate coverage for abortions, either directly or indirectly is unacceptable.
We believe in a culture that supports and respects the right to life and is dedicated to the protection and preservation of families. Therefore, we cannot support any health care reform proposal unless it explicitly excludes abortion from the scope of any government-defined or subsidized health insurance plan. We believe that a government-defined or subsidized health insurance plan, should not be used to fund abortion.
Furthermore, we want to ensure that the Health Benefits Advisory Committee cannot recommend abortion services be included under covered benefits or as part of a benefits package. Without an explicit exclusion, abortion could be included in a government subsidized health care plan under general health care. The health care reform package produced by Congress will be landmark, and with legislation as important as this, abortion must be addressed clearly in the bill text.
Furthermore, funding restrictions save lives by reducing the number of abortions. The Guttmacher Policy Review, a leading pro-choice research organization noted "that about one third of women who would have had an abortion if support were available carried their pregnancies to term when the abortion fund was unavailable."
Thank you for taking the time to consider our request. By ensuring that abortions are not funded through any health care reform package, we will take this controversial issue off the table so that Congress can focus on crafting a broadly-supported health care reform bill.
Respectfully yours,
Reps. Dan Boren (D-OK); Bart Stupak (D-MI); Colin Peterson (D-MN); Tim Holden (D-PA); Travis Childers (D-MS); Lincoln Davis (D-TN); Heath Shuler (D-NC) Solomon Ortiz (D-TX); Mike McIntyre (D-NC); Jerry Costello (D-IL); Gene Taylor (D-MS); James Oberstar (D-MN); Bobby Bright (D-AL); Steve Driehaus (D-OH); Marcy Kaptur (D-OH); Charlie Melancon (D-LA); John Murtha (D-PA); Paul Kanjorski (D-PA); and Kathleen Dahlkemper (D-PA).
I believe abortion funding has the potential to be a real roadblock in the path to healthcare reform.
What say you?
I am a Democrat, I don't believe public funds should be used to pay for abortion. I believe first trimester abortions on demand should be given to a woman who request them but then she needs to break out her checkbook.
I can see why people of certain faiths that don't believe in abortion are saying, money they pay toward taxes should NOT be used to pay for a procedure they find so abhorent. I personally find abortion abhorent as well. While I think it should be available, I don't believe that the community should have to pay for it.
If pro abortion groups want to gather funding to help such women that can't afford it then that is one avenue that is open to them. Churches do this now for people in need of food and help with clothes, furniture, money to pay utilities, no reason pro abortion groups can't do the same.
Yes. There is a drastic difference between a medically necessary abortion and a "convenience" abortion. A convenience abortion IMO is akin to plastic surgery, so it should not be covered.
A medically necessary abortion, OTOH, should be (assuming this "reform" is passed; I don't want any of it passed anyway, but that's a different topic).
Please define medically necessary abortion, I don't doubt that they exist, I just think doctors are willing to stretch that definition for their patients peace of mind.
I have been wanting to do some research to see what conditions require this and don't even get me started about partial birth abortion of fetuses that are actually viable to live outside the womb who are killed anyway.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
