|
08-23-2012, 04:26 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Los Angeles County, CA
29,097 posts, read 24,567,394 times
Reputation: 6128
|
|
|
A common claim made by abortion supporters is that abortion is a medical decision - and that government should not interfere with that decision.
The same people however tend to be strong proponents of PPACA -which amounts to government interference in medical decisions - as it requires that health insurance be government approved and requires people to have health insurance or pay a financial penalty.
The use of marijuana is also often a medical decision - yet its medicinal use is banned in most states
So - what makes abortion so different when precedents for government involvement with medical decisions have been set - and even supported by abortion supporters?
|
|
08-23-2012, 04:35 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Sango, TN
24,869 posts, read 23,152,355 times
Reputation: 8660
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
A common claim made by abortion supporters is that abortion is a medical decision - and that government should not interfere with that decision.
The same people however tend to be strong proponents of PPACA -which amounts to government interference in medical decisions - as it requires that health insurance be government approved and requires people to have health insurance or pay a financial penalty.
The use of marijuana is also often a medical decision - yet its medicinal use is banned in most states
So - what makes abortion so different when precedents for government involvement with medical decisions have been set - and even supported by abortion supporters?
|
The mandate is an awful thing, and I find it disgusting.
But whats the alternative that makes people pay for healthcare that is mandated that they get?
Republicans don't have one, just keep paying for those emergency room visits for everyone.
Its either a universal healthcare system, where people are taxed to pay for it (you can limit what it will and won't pay for), or mandates.
You decide. |
|
08-23-2012, 04:36 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,068 posts, read 13,025,265 times
Reputation: 9788
|
|
|
I don't like the affordable care law. Something needs to be done to help control medical costs, but I don't think this was the right solution.
Medical marijuana should be allowed, in fact I believe that marijuana should be legal period.
|
|
08-23-2012, 04:38 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Los Angeles County, CA
29,097 posts, read 24,567,394 times
Reputation: 6128
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose
I don't like the affordable care law. Something needs to be done to help control medical costs, but I don't think this was the right solution.
Medical marijuana should be allowed, in fact I believe that marijuana should be legal period.
|
A post of yours where I agree with you 100%.
I think that is a first!
Reps coming. |
|
08-23-2012, 04:55 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: California
35,090 posts, read 38,685,632 times
Reputation: 32324
|
|
|
It's two seperate issues. Access and affordability vs what you can and can't do.
|
|
08-23-2012, 05:02 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Michigan
5,369 posts, read 5,069,652 times
Reputation: 1633
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
A common claim made by abortion supporters is that abortion is a medical decision - and that government should not interfere with that decision.
The same people however tend to be strong proponents of PPACA -which amounts to government interference in medical decisions - as it requires that health insurance be government approved and requires people to have health insurance or pay a financial penalty.
The use of marijuana is also often a medical decision - yet its medicinal use is banned in most states
So - what makes abortion so different when precedents for government involvement with medical decisions have been set - and even supported by abortion supporters?
|
Medical decisions should be made by medical personal.
Insurance is not a medical decision. It is a payment system. |
|
08-23-2012, 05:25 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,068 posts, read 13,025,265 times
Reputation: 9788
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
A post of yours where I agree with you 100%.
I think that is a first!
Reps coming.
|
Yep. See, us agnostic lesbians aren't all bad.
However, I also believe that ALL medical decisions should be made by the patient with guidance of their doctor. And I do mean ALL. including abortion, and end of life decisions (euthanasia if wanted in terminal cases) |
|
08-23-2012, 05:27 PM
|
|
|
|
Location: Sango, TN
24,869 posts, read 23,152,355 times
Reputation: 8660
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose
Yep. See, us agnostic lesbians aren't all bad.
However, I also believe that ALL medical decisions should be made by the patient with guidance of their doctor. And I do mean ALL. including abortion, and end of life decisions (euthanasia if wanted in terminal cases)
|
I agree, but the federal government shouldn't be in the business of mandating that those should be legal, or illegal.
Should be up to the states. |
|
08-23-2012, 05:32 PM
|
|
|
|
31,367 posts, read 35,114,367 times
Reputation: 14982
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
A common claim made by abortion supporters is that abortion is a medical decision - and that government should not interfere with that decision.
|
Trying to shoe horn another one of your abortion screeds is just a red herring, something that you have an uncanny penchant for doing.
Anyway, government regulations, like the rules that insurance companies use to determine reimbursement don't, I REPEAT, don't have anything to do with your medical decision, just what either is willing to pay for. If you an your doctor decide to pursue a particular course of action, nothing in the Act, or in existing insurance legislation prohibits you from pursuing whatever legal treatment that you and your doctor desire.
Nice try, but another awful fail. |
|
08-23-2012, 05:38 PM
|
|
|
|
876 posts, read 669,687 times
Reputation: 377
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
A common claim made by abortion supporters is that abortion is a medical decision - and that government should not interfere with that decision.
The same people however tend to be strong proponents of PPACA -which amounts to government interference in medical decisions - as it requires that health insurance be government approved and requires people to have health insurance or pay a financial penalty.
The use of marijuana is also often a medical decision - yet its medicinal use is banned in most states
So - what makes abortion so different when precedents for government involvement with medical decisions have been set - and even supported by abortion supporters?
|
True! Plu,s if the government should not be involved in a woman's right to choose, then why are they helping to pay for the abortions? If women truly want the government out of their uterus, then those women should stay out of tax payers pockets. You can't have it both ways. "Don't tell me what to do! Just help me pay for it when I decide." That makes no sense. |
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.
