Abortion is Not Health Care

Why is there any debate at all over whether or not abortion should be included in a health care bill.  I don't want the bill to pass so I'm glad this is a sticking point, but I still don't understand why it's an issue.  Abortion is not health care.  By insisting that it is included in this bill, they are equating an UNWANTED pregnancy with diabetes, heart disease, broken bones, cancer, etc.  It's ridiculous.  A woman who finds herself preganant and doesn't want a baby does not need an abortion for medical needs.  It's her personal choice of how to deal with her situation (and I believe the wrong one), but it's not a health care issue.

If we were to cover abortions would we cover other completely elective with no medically substantiated necessity procedures?  Are we going to cover tummy tucks and face lifts?  If we cover abortion are we going to cover infertility treatments?  Just because abortion is legal does not mean that it qualifies as health care under this type of legislation.

I know it's a horror that a woman will actually have to take responsibility for her own actions and pay for her own abortion.  Perhaps we can explain to her how buying a box of condoms (and actually using them) is much cheaper.

The more I've thought about this the more frustrated I've become.  There has been talk about charging fat people more for their health care because they'll cost more, well does that mean we charge sluts more for their health care coverage as well?  If a man or woman is premiscuous that has the potential to cost us a lot more money.  We'd have the treatment of the preganancy, veneral disease and AIDS.  The pharmacological costs of AIDS is astronomical so, according to Democrat philosophy, should anybody who has multiple partners within a single year have to pay more for their health coverage than somebody who doesn't?  They're a higher risk after all, and it's all due to their life choices.

This whole thing is just absurd.  The bottom line here is that, other than in a case of threats to the life of the mother, there is no MEDICAL reason for an abortion.  We should only be covering services that there is a medical reason to perform.  "I got knocked up and don't want no kid," is not a medical reason.

Government Mandated Abortion Coverage

One of the issues being debated on the national healthcare issue is whether or not abortion should be covered under the plan. But it goes even further than that to a requirement that ALL plans cover abortions. So the government will force companies to offer abortion coverage to their members. So what's wrong with this? It's a medical procedure, right?

Here's how I see it, because I'm sure you're just dying to know. Any abortions that are truly medically necessary due to a threat against the life of the mother is between the woman and her doctor and that can be argued as a medically necessary procedure. However, an abortion just because a woman got knocked up and doesn't want a baby is not a medically necessary procedure. It is a completely elective procedure that treats neither an illness nor an injury, and that's what the healtchare coverage should be about. Preventative check-ups and the treatment of an illness or injury.

If the government is going to dictate the coverage of abortion, are they also going to dictate the coverage of infertility treatments? If you can receive treatment for being pregnant and not wanting a baby can you also receive treatment for not being pregnant and wanting a baby? And why stop there? If we're going to cover elective surgeries, paying to have things done just because of what you want and not what you need (nobody NEEDS to have an abortion as a form of birth control) then are we also going to cover cosmetic services? I can argue that I would be a lot healthier with liposuction and a tummy tuck, so will that be covered under the new government plan? That's a great way to control the costs.

How can the government mandate that private companies offer a procedure that is not medically necessary and may be against what the company stands for? Think about this for a minute. The government would be forcing the Catholic Archdiocese to cover abortion. The government would be forcing catholic hospital organizations and churches of all denominations to offer abortion coverage to their employees. They will be forced to offer something they find morally reprehensible, and for what reason? This is not a treatment of illness or injury but a totally elective procedure.

The argument is being made that abortion is legal in this country and it is a medical procedure, but so is a boob job, rhinoplasty, a face lift, etc, but these are not covered under most medical plans. Why should the rest of us pay for the irresponsibility of another. If the woman didn't want to have a baby, there are other forms of birth control out there that she should have used. So now not only does she not have to deal with the consequences of her actions in the form of the pregnancy, but she won't even have to bear the cost of the abortion herself.

It is insanity to require coverage of a procedure who's only purpose is to extinguish human life and call it healthcare.

Obama's Commencement Speech All About - Himself

I just read through the text of Obama's speech at Notre Dame and I was amazed at how little of it was about the students and how much of it was about himself. He even managed to work in a plug for his book.

He starts out thanking them for the honorary degree and mentioning how Arizona didn't give him one. Then he goes into exactly why the students need to support his socialist agenda as they move further into adulthood. How they need to save the planet from the damage we have done to it. He talks about how terrible we are as people and why his policies are needed to make us all nice to each other again. And then he gets into the abortion discussion. And here is where I got really disgusted.

He does a lot of talk about how two sides of an issue should be able to work together without characterizing each other. This is really rich coming from the administration that labels pro-life people as potential terrorists. Then he says "So let us work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions, let's reduce unintended pregnancies." This from the man who said if his daughters got pregnant he wouldn't want them "punished" with a baby. Also from the same progressive party that said you can't legislate morality and legislated immorality instead. Then he says "Let's make adoption more available." This was downright insulting. There are waiting lists years long to adopt. American couples are going overseas to adopt children because here, we kill them instead of adopting them out. Then comes, "Let's provide care and support for women who do carry their children to term." I'm sorry, but wasn't Obama a vocal supporter of denying health care to baby's born in spite of an abortion attempt? So was this a plug for his universal health care bill? I think so.

This goes on and then moves into how big of an impact the catholic church had on him. I guess this was after his mother had him in the Muslim school in Indonesia. Then the speech returns to being all about him and his policies. But my favorite line, in the midst of all his discussion about himself and how what he's doing is right for the world, is this line, "It should temper our passions, cause us to be wary of too much self-righteousness." This man, as he makes a commencement speech about himself instead of the graduating students, has the gall to ask them to be wary of too much self-righteousness. What a laugh.

This wasn't a commencement speech, it was an indoctrination speech. Everything in there was about him and his policies and why they needed to support and promote them. Couldn't the man have put his campaign aside for a moment and made a speech about somebody other than himself? Apparently not.