Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Anti-life crowd outraged that the unborn are cared for.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Anti-life crowd outraged that the unborn are cared for.

    September 27, 2002 at 8:25:05 PDT

    Unborn Children to Get Health Care
    By LAURA MECKLER
    ASSOCIATED PRESS



    WASHINGTON- The Bush administration said Friday that it would classify developing fetuses as unborn children as a way of extending prenatal care to low-income pregnant women, brushing aside complaints that the move is a backdoor way of undercutting abortion rights.

    The change allows states to extend health insurance to fetuses - or even embryos - from the moment of conception by enrolling them in the State Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP).

    It specifically allows coverage for all fetuses even if their mothers are immigrants who are ineligible for government help. CHIP does not cover any illegal immigrants and only covers legal immigrants who have been in the country for five years. But babies born in the United States are citizens and therefore eligible for assistance.

    Because CHIP is aimed at kids, it does not typically cover parents or pregnant women, although states can get permission to include adults if they ask for it. Under these new rules, it will be a routine matter for states to add unborn children to their CHIP programs.

    "It represents a speedy new option for states that want to do more to ensure that women get critical prenatal care that will increase the chances that their children are born healthy," Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson said in a statement Friday.

    He also praised the benefits of prenatal care and called the change a "common-sense, compassionate measure."

    The final regulation, first proposed in January, will be published Wednesday in the Federal Register.

    Women's and abortion rights groups were outraged by the move, calling it an effort to give the fetus legal status and therefore undermine Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision guaranteeing women the right to abortion.

    "To me it's a very offensive backdoor way to get coverage for a fetus," Laurie Rubiner of the National Partnership for Women and Families, said Friday.

    The administration says it has nothing do to with abortion.

    "This has to do with prenatal care, which is undisputedly very important for the health of mother and the health of the child," HHS spokesman Bill Pierce said Friday. "It's about that issue and that issue alone."

    Rubiner said she was particularly outraged that the administration would cover the developing fetus carried by a legal immigrant while supporting the ban on direct benefits for her.

    "It's so offensive to immigrant women to say we don't care about you, but if you're pregnant, we'll give your fetus coverage - but never you," she said.

    States can already cover pregnant women under their CHIP programs, though they need to get a waiver from the federal government. Two states - New Jersey and Rhode Island - have waivers to cover them.

    The new plan does not include any new money for the coverage. Rather, states that want to participate would simply add to their existing programs in which they share the cost of coverage with the federal government.

    Thompson has said he also supports legislation pending in the Senate that would allow states to automatically add pregnant women to CHIP, much as poor pregnant women are eligible for Medicaid.


  • #2
    I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the "anti-life" part of your title is going to attract people saying that this is a troll fairly quickly.
    I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
    For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

    Comment


    • #3
      I thought it was a good response to Che and others calling pro-life people "anti-choice".

      Comment


      • #4
        Maybe both sides should just call the other side by it's preferred name instead of being oh-so-cute.
        "Spirit merges with matter to sanctify the universe. Matter transcends to return to spirit. The interchangeability of matter and spirit means the starlit magic of the outermost life of our universe becomes the soul-light magic of the innermost life of our self." - Dennis Kucinich, candidate for the U. S. presidency
        "That’s the future of the Democratic Party: providing Republicans with a number of cute (but not that bright) comfort women." - Adam Yoshida, Canada's gift to the world

        Comment


        • #5
          'anti-life' and 'anti-choice' are not compatible Lincoln, so yes it is a troll.

          To say that you are 'anti-choice' implies that you don't beleive a woman can choose to have an abortion, since that is wrong, murder. So, you are aginst women having a choice on abortion, because you believe is a crime, and people don't get a choice to commit crime.

          To say one is anti-life implies that one approves of murder and does not care- but many who suport abortion don't se it as murder because they don't share the belief you do, that human life begins at conception. So, they are in no way for murder- simply disagree with you on what can be defined as 'murder'.

          To call you anti-choice is consistent with your own beliefs again, commiting murder is not something one gets to chose), while calling people who support abortion anti-life is not consistent wth their actual beliefs (that abortion does not constitute murder).

          Basic troll Lincoln
          If you don't like reality, change it! me
          "Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
          "it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
          "Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Stefu
            Maybe both sides should just call the other side by it's preferred name instead of being oh-so-cute.
            Heresy!

            BTW, Lincoln, the term I'm more familiar with is "pro-death" or even "pro-murder." Anti-life is just so ambiguous.
            <p style="font-size:1024px">HTML is disabled in signatures </p>

            Comment


            • #7
              Actually, I prefer the term anti-woman. It's more to the crux of the matter.

              Seriously though, who the heck are National Partnership for Women and Families? I've never heard of them. I can't see this as a bad thing, though one wonders why they simply don't just autmoatically add pregnant women to begin with. The critics are correct, it is a backdoor way to try and establish legal rights for unborn children, but it's still a good thing.
              Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...

              Comment


              • #8
                Why do both sides have to split the good ideas between them? It's probably an attempt to undermine abortion rights, otherwise the legislation could just provide a means of prenatal care for the mother, without providing the benefits directly to the fetus/embryo. Regardless of the abortion issue it's a good thing to provide prenatal care to those who can't afford it.

                It does look like a purely political means of attacking the pro-choice side though. It's rather ingenious actually, as to oppose this legislation would look like opposition to being kind hearted. Usually the health care issue works the other way, with Liberals supporting helping those who can't help themselves, and Conservatives saying "screw em". Stupid politics. At least something good is coming of it in this case.

                Comment


                • #9
                  'anti-life' and 'anti-choice' are not compatible Lincoln, so yes it is a troll.


                  Actually they are compatible. Those that are against abortion believe in choice in other spheres, just like those that are for abortion believe in life in other spheres.

                  Admit it, he just used a term that makes you uncomfortable, even though you have no problem with the term in the opposite way. And you were calling some other people hypocrites?
                  “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.â€
                  - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    No, calling a pro life person "anti-choice" is inflamatory because we would like the unborn to have a choice while the anti-life people would deny that choice because they cannot hear the voice of the one they are going to kill. If someone is going to extinguish an innocent life then perhaps they are anti-life after all...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I'm anti-life. It has nothing to do with the abortion issue.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        EVERYTHING YOU BELIEVE IS WRONG!
                        Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Bah. Mere semantics. Whether you call it "baby" or not, just check into that clinic and get it all suckity-sucked away. Why be a big girl's blouse about it?
                          The genesis of the "evil Finn" concept- Evil, evil Finland

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Aeson
                            Why do both sides have to split the good ideas between them? It's probably an attempt to undermine abortion rights, otherwise the legislation could just provide a means of prenatal care for the mother, without providing the benefits directly to the fetus/embryo. Regardless of the abortion issue it's a good thing to provide prenatal care to those who can't afford it.

                            It does look like a purely political means of attacking the pro-choice side though. It's rather ingenious actually, as to oppose this legislation would look like opposition to being kind hearted. Usually the health care issue works the other way, with Liberals supporting helping those who can't help themselves, and Conservatives saying "screw em". Stupid politics. At least something good is coming of it in this case.
                            I agree. And people say that Bush is stupid. He exposed his opposition as the hypocrites that they are and did a good thing for children in the process.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I drink pennyroyal tea.
                              Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X