Abortions....should tax dollars pay for them?

Question

regardless of your religious or moral beliefs, most of us can agree on this statement:
Abortion is an elective surgery for a condition that is (easily) prevented. (rape aside since that only accounts for 1% of all abortions).

If you look at this table you will see that in NY medicaid pays for about 1/3 of abortions. Is it ok for tax dollars to fund abortion?
http://www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/vital_statistics/2004/table24.htm

Answer 1

god no

unless it couldn't be avoided (like cancer, broken bones, etc etc) it shouldn't be payed for

things that shouldn't be paid for:

lipo,
aids
abortions
stds

Answer 2

Well, it depends on the situation. The people who often get state funded abortions are often poor to begin with. If you make them have the kid - then the mother goes on welfare and that's far more expensive. Now I think there should be a LIMIT to the number of state funded abortions someone can get. I've heard there is a small percentage of women that have more than one. Personally, I think one should be enough to get the point across. So maybe they should, in the very least, impose a limit. At the same time - then you're in the same boat of having to pay for those kids with those few women who might be using it as a form of birth control.

Answer 3

Let me tell you a story. My uncle and his wife have 6 kids. They lived on welfare. For YEARS. They kept having kids they couldn't take care of so they could get more WIC, welfare, and housing. At one point, they had a house paid for by the state that was better than what I was living in. And I was working and making great money. Finally, NYS welfare reform started to kick in, and they didn't get all that help anymore. So my mom and I took in 3 of those kids. My question is, abortion or state funded sterilization? Which is worse? If my tax dollars go to pay for an abortion for a woman who is already overwhelmed with kids she can't take care of, so be it. In the long run, it's less of a drain on those of us who do pay taxes in this state. Yes, abortion is elective surgery. But do we need more kids being abused and neglected, put into foster care or crappy state run facilities waiting to never be adopted, being a burden on the tax payer? Which is worse, really? People don't seem to think about the effect of growing up in poverty, being neglected like my cousins were, when they discuss abortion. With all they've been through and will continue to go through, medically and emotionally, with abusive, alcoholic, neglectful parents, poor as hell, and 2 with birth defects, maybe they would have been better off not having been born at all.

Answer 4

I have no problem with women having abortions who really need them.

I do not and have never liked the attitude "I don't need birth control, If I get pregnant I'll just get an abortion". I believe birth control should be given out free to anyone who wants it.

I would much rather have tax money used for abortions than used to have to pay for the continued upkeep of the ever growing number of unwanted children.

Answer 5

That does appear as if a waste. i ought to verify the element of interpreting the venture right here if it could help shrink the occurrence of HIV (which may be the two tragic and costly). My wager is that's being studied in Vietnam given which you do not have as many legal loopholes which you will possibly have right here with privateness and consent themes. At any fee, the venture grew to become into initiated in July 2008, during Bush's term, meaning it grew to become into probable proposed while Republicans had administration of the Congress. that's this kind of themes that discredits conservatives while they attempt to pin it on Obama (and that i'm no longer asserting you're doing that). Why wasn't this difficulty raised throughout the Bush years?

Answer 6

Abortion is legal. Denying abortion to the poor is discrimination. There are plenty of cold hearted pragmatic reasons to support it, and plenty of narrow minded reasons to deny it, but as long as its legal denying it to the poor will be a civil rights issue.
If the termination of an unwanted pregnancy is the worst thing that happens with your tax dollars this year then... well... you're definatly not living in the United States of America.

Answer 7

Not only that, but an abortion can written off on your federal income tax as well.

And I'm going to go with no. I don't think it should.


I also have to take issue with this 'unwanted baby' thing that so many people are saying.
First off all (yes, I'm going to say it) it is a baby. And they are more than wanted. In the United States, the waiting period for adopting babies is currently at around 4 years.
Someone wants the baby.

Answer 8

Well, I think if you are on Welfare already, then yes the govt should pay for your abortion. I'd rather pay for the abortion than the unwanted child that will undoubtedly be impregnated or impregnate someone else who will in turn need more welfare.

I think if you are on Welfare, you should have to be on birth control. Like Depo Provera or there's one for men too, but I don't know what it's called.

Answer 9

No, it is not okay. You're right, it is an elective "surgery". It is terrible for the government to force people to pay taxes toward something that is against their moral beliefs (that includes war). The public should not be required to pay for people's abortions.

Answer 10

How about tax funds supporting combat? As a pacifist, I have no choice in the sense that I cannot not pay my taxes, but I do choose to live in this country rather than another.

I

Answer 11

Yes... it is a personal decision and a medical procedure that should be afforded equally, rather than based on personal income. Why should the wealthy have this choice and lower income young women be denied the same choice?