Hot Topic (8/1): Should government funding cover abortions?

[Cafe GroupAdmin]

 Associated Press
July 31, 2009

Washington -- An anti-abortion amendment to a sweeping healthcare overhaul bill was rejected by a House committee late Thursday -- a dramatic reversal that came just hours after the measure had been approved.

The amendment said that healthcare overhaul legislation may not impose requirements for coverage of abortion, except when a woman's life is in danger or her pregnancy resulted from rape or incest. It was approved in the Energy and Commerce Committee, with conservative Democrats joining Republicans to support it.

Hours later, committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman (D-Beverly Hills) invoked House rules that allowed him to bring up the amendment for a second vote, despite Republican objections.

This time, one conservative Democrat -- Rep. Bart Gordon of Tennessee -- changed his vote from "yes" to "no." And a second conservative Democrat who hadn't voted the first time -- Rep. Zack Space of Ohio -- voted "no."

It was enough to take down the amendment on a 30-29 vote.

The committee voted on various amendments late into the night and will resume today, when it is expected to vote on the full bill.

* * *

How do you feel about government funds being used for abortion?

Do you think the government should put requirements for coverage of abortion?  (For instance, only allowing coverage "when a woman's life is in danger or her pregnancy resulted from rape or incest"? )

[itsallabtthem84]

How do you feel about government funds being used for abortion?

I think that if it was funded due to being rape or incest then I would not care.

Do you think the government should put requirements for coverage of abortion?  (For instance, only allowing coverage "when a woman's life is in danger or her pregnancy resulted from rape or incest"? )

Yes they should.

[nysa76]

How do you feel about government funds being used for abortion?

My knee jerk reaction is absolutely not!  But thinking about it for a second, past the emotional aspect of it, I think it best left to doctors while it is a legal practice.  I don't agree with it.  I won't have one.  There's a lot of not very nice thoughts that come to mind when I think about abortion, but the reality is that it is legal.  It's similar in view to circumcision, meaning they are both touchy subjects.  Not always medically necessary, but legal and a parent's choice.  No matter who agrees with it or not.

[morningdove831]

How do you feel about government funds being used for abortion?

I don't feel government funds should ever be used for abortion.  But I also realize my sometimes conservative views are not always popular.  :)

Do you think the government should put requirements for coverage of abortion?  (For instance, only allowing coverage "when a woman's life is in danger or her pregnancy resulted from rape or incest"? )

I can see only allowing coverage when a woman's life is in danger.  But in cases of rape or incest (with the exception of a small child, like the case in Brazil), the child should be given up for adoption to a loving family if the mother feels she cannot care for the child, NOT aborted.  That child didn't ask to be put in the situation.  If I were raped and felt I couldn't care for the child, I would find a family who could.  But then again, I believe life begins at conception. 

 

[Lizardannie1966]

No, I don't think gov't funds should be used to cover abortions and if it is decided that it will, requirements should be in place as they would be for any healthcare provider. 

[bakebiscotti]

Yes, federal government funding should be available for all health issues

[Sportbominable]

NEVER! Abortion is never needed to save the life of the mother. The baby could be delivered by c-section and given a chance to survive while saving the mother's life at the same time. When are people gonna get that through their thick skulls?

[ta2dirishlass]

Yes. It is legal and available and I would much rather a woman have an abortion than raise a child in a house of abuse and resentment. Read: one abortion, not five or six.

[athenax3]

Quoting nysa76:

How do you feel about government funds being used for abortion?

My knee jerk reaction is absolutely not!  But thinking about it for a second, past the emotional aspect of it, I think it best left to doctors while it is a legal practice.  I don't agree with it.  I won't have one.  There's a lot of not very nice thoughts that come to mind when I think about abortion, but the reality is that it is legal.  It's similar in view to circumcision, meaning they are both touchy subjects.  Not always medically necessary, but legal and a parent's choice.  No matter who agrees with it or not.

This.

[bakebiscotti]

Of course it is used to save the life of the mother sometimes.  Blood pressure issues occur in every term of pregnancy.  I had HELLP syndrome and it could very well have caused me to have an abortion.  There are many, many reasons for abortion that involve the health of the mother from BP issues to cancer, to chronic diseases where medications that would harm or kill a fetus . 

Quoting Sportbominable:

NEVER! Abortion is never needed to save the life of the mother. The baby could be delivered by c-section and given a chance to survive while saving the mother's life at the same time. When are people gonna get that through their thick skulls?

[mandygm]

We actually covered this topic in my Biomedical Ethics class a couple of weeks ago. I believe that if the abortion is medically necessary, than, yes it should be covered. Otherwise, no. There are women out there that use abortion as a form of birth control, and there has to be limits to the number of times a woman can have it done. There has to be better counciling offered, and education...