'No easy way out' for Democrats on abortion

The sudden spasm of intense debate over abortion on Capitol Hill this week threatens not only to stall the passage of health care legislation, but also to shatter the delicate cease-fire that has governed the abortion issue during the Obama era.

[Disgusted]

"As the debate over health care moves to the Senate, Democrats find themselves in the unaccustomed position of taking clear sides on an issue they've often dealt with through avoidance and rhetorical sleight of hand. "

Truer words were never spoken!!!!!

[Esteeh]

From what I understand, abortions for women who were raped, were victims of incest, or have a life threatening medical reason to abort ARE covered under the public option. Only elective abortions are NOT covered.

I'm not going to get into yay or nay as I am pretty ambivalent on the subject, except for when it does concern rape/incest victims and those whose life are threatened by the pregnancy. This amendment covers that.

So at the core of this, most democrats are blatantly and casually for abortion via irresponsible sexual relations. The women's rights part (that actually matters) has been taken out of the equation, so what are they defending exactly? The right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy for any reason whatsoever?

I applaud the democrat who is proposing the amendment!

[Niki]

1) Taxpayers already pay for things we "don't want to pay for". For example, vacations and private jets for congress people.

2) It's not like women go, "Hm.. I want to have an abortion...", then get pregnant to have one. Sometimes it's the only way to go, to not ruin two or three lives, and to not add to unemployment, or the "lower-class" populations.

3) There is insurance and health care for people who have contracted HIV and AIDS; we don't penalize them for having unprotected sex.

[JoeMerlot]

To those who see no problems with government involvement in Health Care, this is a perfect example and is just one area where freedom will be lost and health care decisions politicized as a result of governmen involvement. I just don't understand how the outright hatred of business or anyone who lives well can blind people to the level that they don't see the very obvious and dangerous impact of government run health care. I continue to agree that Health Care affordability is a problem and that health care reforms are needed and I continue to advocate traditional government policy and regulation as the most effective means to address affordability. We need a robust package of reforms that include everything from interstate regulation and tort reform to coverage mandates and underwriting reforms and non profit designations. A governmet take over of Health Care will do nothing other than raise costs and limit freedoms. I know there are many that feel that the costs will be reduced and are willing to accept the limitations on their choices to acheive that goal. Make no mistake that the current proposal WILL increase the cost of private insurance and WILL increase the cost of Medicare Supplimental insurance for seniors and WILL cause federal budgetary damage in the long term. These are known facts, not predictions and anyone who has read the 18 page summary of the Baucus bill would realize that. So this is talking about banning abortions. Next will be an assault on obesitity, alcholsim, tobacoo usage. Once the federal government controls health care, our coverage will be dictated by the political machine. I'm certainly not signing on to that.

[Niki]

4) Under some insurance companies now, elective isn't covered.

So, don't take away women's rights, and keep it how it is with elective uncovered, and required or recommended should be covered; it's still a medical condition.

[here we go]

Niki wrote:

1) Taxpayers already pay for things we "don't want to pay for". For example, vacations and private jets for congress people.
2) It's not like women go, "Hm.. I want to have an abortion...", then get pregnant to have one. Sometimes it's the only way to go, to not ruin two or three lives, and to not add to unemployment, or the "lower-class" populations.
3) There is insurance and health care for people who have contracted HIV and AIDS; we don't penalize them for having unprotected sex.

1) And there are a lot of things that people want that isn't paid for by the taxpayer.
2) Pregnancy is 100% preventable. Abortion is elective about 90% of the time. No one is talking about outlawing abortion. Women will still have ALL of the choices they do now. In addition, if a woman really doesn't want to take responsibility for herself or her actions and use precautions, she can purchase a rider with her money to cover all the abortions she cares to have.
3) Are you proposing those with AIDS or HIV NOT be covered?

[Peter]

The liberal whackos can't tell the difference between abortion being prohibited and simply not being able to make your neighbor pay for one.

[Mr Secant]

weird wrote:

<quoted text>
So because we pay for vactions and jets for congressmen, we should also pay for helpless babies to be murdered?
Have you ever watched an abortion on video or in person? I bet you're one of those fools who are for animal rights, too. But go ahead and slaughter a helpless child - wouldn't want to "inconvenience" the irresponsible parent's lives.
There is a special place in h.e.l.l. reserved for people like you.

It taken long for 'Weirdo' to show up. Hell is a place in your mind, just like everything else YOU believe in. Why would anyone watch an abortion? Do you use a mirror and watch crap come out of your derriere too?

[Jim R]

Niki wrote:

1) Taxpayers already pay for things we "don't want to pay for". For example, vacations and private jets for congress people.
2) It's not like women go, "Hm.. I want to have an abortion...", then get pregnant to have one. Sometimes it's the only way to go, to not ruin two or three lives, and to not add to unemployment, or the "lower-class" populations.
3) There is insurance and health care for people who have contracted HIV and AIDS; we don't penalize them for having unprotected sex.

Re 3)..We should !

[Mr Secant]

It wouldn't bother me if Democrats decided to forgo abortion in Health Care reform. They should also make it illegal for people to smoke, eat fatty foods, drink alcohol or drugs and if your found to have them in your system, no health care!

[StribDeathWatch]

It's all window-dressing for political cover for those Dems in more conservative districts; there is no fundamental disagreement between Dems on the endgame. When this monster is forced upon us, all abortion will be taxpayer funded. This is just more pro-Dem media spin while the idiot overlords cut their deals.

[Cole]

Mr Secant wrote:

It wouldn't bother me if Democrats decided to forgo abortion in Health Care reform. They should also make it illegal for people to smoke, eat fatty foods, drink alcohol or drugs and if your found to have them in your system, no health care!

I agree, and then we can have the government control when we sleep, what we can watch on tv, hear on the radio or read in the papers. The government should control how many children we have, how many servings of meat we can eat (if any), how many glasses of water we drink a day, and what kind of shoes we wear. If we do anything that is not up to par with the great government, we should not be able to suckle from the teat of our government. Praise government, the answer to everything!

[mutt]

Republicans only answers are to blame Democrats for all the problems they create. Take away abortions and healthcare, exactly how much does it cost to have a baby in the hospital? Or are only rich people allowed to procrastinate in your world? How much does it cost to raise a baby? I think that abstinence is the answer, but that wasn't even happening in the bible. Hell it wasn't even happening in the Palin household. Realism is not part of the Conservative mindset. You guys do nothing but contradict yourselves. I suppose SSC and Medicare are evil as well. Aren't these socialist programs that were created by Republicans? Go rape a woman, get her pregnant, then force her to have your little baby and pay for it as well. Bunch of freakin lunatics!

[Mr Secant]

Cole wrote:

<quoted text>
why would we allow another person to reach up another woman's uterus and tear a child's limbs from their body then vacuum the pieces out like crumbs on a floor. Why would, in some cases, we induce labor, have the legs stick out and rip them out of the uterus, leaving the child's head inside the woman until it can be vacuumed and forever forgotten. I believe our President argued to keep practices like this for late term abortions. You know, when the child has hair, finger/toe nails, sex organs, and such.
Just because you don't watch it, with or without a mirror, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It's not just something 'made up in our minds'.

You abortion cons are the sickest, most vile human beings on the planet. Do you sit around on the weekend and wait delivery for the next video to satisfy your lust for abortions? Many things happen in life, but to watch video's of abortions is something that takes a very 'special' individual. Really, really bizarre..

[Hockey Bob]

The *ONLY* reason the christian taliban wish to outlaw abortions, is to force women to have more children - whether they want them or not - thereby creating more easily manipulated fodder for their sky-buddy-worshipping machine. It's the same reason they're so afraid of gay marriage... why, if the gays are allowed to marry, they won't be having any children for us to corrupt in our parochial schools! OH NOES!

(These are the same woo-addled brainiacs that send their minions to fraud colleges like Liberty and Bob Jones University, where they fill them with years of christian dogma and rigid indoctrination; they then send these creobots out into the real world job market, where some of them eventually end up as pharmacists, who then refuse to fill your totally legal and necessary prescriptions, because they are offended by your need for legal birth control.)

You have every right to believe in whatever incredulous, unproven, and unprovable garbage religion you want. It becomes a huge problem the instant it impacts any aspect of my life. Keep it in your house of worship, and there's no problem. Once you try to export it into my life, there will be hell to pay.
(See what I did there?)

[Peter]

Hockey Bob wrote:

The *ONLY* reason the christian taliban wish to outlaw abortions, is to force women to have more children - whether they want them or not - thereby creating more easily manipulated fodder for their sky-buddy-worshipping machine. It's the same reason they're so afraid of gay marriage... why, if the gays are allowed to marry, they won't be having any children for us to corrupt in our parochial schools! OH NOES!
(These are the same woo-addled brainiacs that send their minions to fraud colleges like Liberty and Bob Jones University, where they fill them with years of christian dogma and rigid indoctrination; they then send these creobots out into the real world job market, where some of them eventually end up as pharmacists, who then refuse to fill your totally legal and necessary prescriptions, because they are offended by your need for legal birth control.)
You have every right to believe in whatever incredulous, unproven, and unprovable garbage religion you want. It becomes a huge problem the instant it impacts any aspect of my life. Keep it in your house of worship, and there's no problem. Once you try to export it into my life, there will be hell to pay.
(See what I did there?)

Exactly, don't "export it" into anyone else's life. Pay for it yourself.

[Truth Missle]

JoeMerlot wrote:

To those who see no problems with government involvement in Health Care, this is a perfect example and is just one area where freedom will be lost and health care decisions politicized as a result of governmen involvement. I just don't understand how the outright hatred of business or anyone who lives well can blind people to the level that they don't see the very obvious and dangerous impact of government run health care. I continue to agree that Health Care affordability is a problem and that health care reforms are needed and I continue to advocate traditional government policy and regulation as the most effective means to address affordability. We need a robust package of reforms that include everything from interstate regulation and tort reform to coverage mandates and underwriting reforms and non profit designations. A governmet take over of Health Care will do nothing other than raise costs and limit freedoms. I know there are many that feel that the costs will be reduced and are willing to accept the limitations on their choices to acheive that goal. Make no mistake that the current proposal WILL increase the cost of private insurance and WILL increase the cost of Medicare Supplimental insurance for seniors and WILL cause federal budgetary damage in the long term. These are known facts, not predictions and anyone who has read the 18 page summary of the Baucus bill would realize that. So this is talking about banning abortions. Next will be an assault on obesitity, alcholsim, tobacoo usage. Once the federal government controls health care, our coverage will be dictated by the political machine. I'm certainly not signing on to that.

People will have the right to choose if they want to be part of the government option, but don't let that get in your way of the facts. Of course, your guy Baucus has so many staffers tied to pharmecutical companies and insurance companies that if he were a councilman or local politician he would be facing bribery charges. He also has recieved $1500 a day in political contributions from the health care industry since 2003. Every word out of your mouth is contrived BS, designed and delivered to cause fear and alarm were none exists. The health care reform legislation is designed to help the people of America and your proposals do nothing but help the status quo enrichen themselves while denying coverage.

[Truth Missle]

Peter wrote:

<quoted text>
Exactly, don't "export it" into anyone else's life. Pay for it yourself.

"Export it", what does that mean?

[Joe Merlot]

here we go wrote:

<quoted text>
1) And there are a lot of things that people want that isn't paid for by the taxpayer.
2) Pregnancy is 100% preventable. Abortion is elective about 90% of the time. No one is talking about outlawing abortion. Women will still have ALL of the choices they do now. In addition, if a woman really doesn't want to take responsibility for herself or her actions and use precautions, she can purchase a rider with her money to cover all the abortions she cares to have.
3) Are you proposing those with AIDS or HIV NOT be covered?

This is really a reply to all. Do you really want people such as the poster above to have a say in your health care choices? If you are covered by a "public option" or if we eventually go to single payer, they absolutely will have a say in your care choices. Don't know about you all, but I'd prefer that not happen.

[Peter]

Truth Missle wrote:

<quoted text>
"Export it", what does that mean?

Hockey Bob went on a rant about not wanting restrictions on abortions. He used to words "export it". My point was, cool, have your abortion rights, but make it sans your right to make someone else pay for it. The Left can't tell the difference between losing abortion rights and merely losing the right to make someone else pay for it.