I don't want my tax dollars going to war funding, but we all can't have what we want I guess.
2007-07-18 03:01:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bobbie 6
·
2⤊
3⤋
i think that if you are going to have an abortion, then you should pay for it, it shouldn't be an "option" of health insurance.
most teens think they are invincible and nothing will happen to them until it happens. do i think abortions should be used as a method of birth control? NO. i also think that preaching abstinence will only work for a lesser %. everyone has horomones and many have the lack of a proper upbringing to help them with decisions.
but i believe the right to have one shouldn't be taken away. either way, you live with that decision for the rest of your life.
keeping a child you can't care for properly, adopting the child out and not knowing if he/she is being cared for properly by the adoptive parents or living with the fact that you had an abortion. haunting decision don't you think?
we shouldn't be passing judgement on others until we have walked in their shoes.
2007-07-18 09:10:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by cheshiregirl0472 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
this is a good thing on all levels...
more reproductive rights
equal treatment for people of all incomes
and it will save money in the long run (an abortion is cheaper than welfare or foster care)
I can sympathize with anti-choice people who don't want to be apart of abortions, but we all pay taxes and sometimes they go to things we dislike. I don't like tax dollars going to the war. sometimes we have to take the good with the bad.
cvq3842 - he said he didn't support it because of the language of the bill. study government, many bills get thrown out just because of the language. otherwise he said he would have signed it.
this is politics, a good idea can be thrown out because of some misplaced words
consenting to sex is not consenting to parenthood.
birth control fails, many are responsible and they continue to be responsible by getting an abortion if its the best option they have
(abortion should rarely be the best option but too often is)
2007-07-18 03:57:50
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
did you examine the area of his plan from obamas website, he replaced it back. It now states that small business enterprise's could supply coverage to its workers and the government will reimburse them 25% of what they pay for each worker. If a small business enterprise would not grant well being safeguard its workers, then they are going to be fined the 1st time and their business enterprise lisence would be bumped off the 2nd time. it quite is for business enterprise's with a million to a hundred workers. it quite is from his website. Now, I actually have a small business enterprise of 33 workers. With the expenses of each and every thing skyrocketing and gasoline being the main important consumable of my business enterprise, My workers already make better than I do in a million year. This well being plan will take me out of the ball activity. 33 workers would be status interior the unemployment place of work over this one, no longer to point his tax improve to me. i do no longer take kindly to being "compelled" into some thing I cant cope with to pay for. i come across this disgusting and in simple terms yet another form of removing the middle classification in united states of america that's what obamas church preaches approximately. Goto their website and spot merchandise 4 the place it states totally the objective of their church and perspectives is to dismantle the middle classification in united states of america.
2016-10-08 23:52:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Over the next few years, the U.S. will decide the direction of national health care. Abortion and other social issues may swing the balance against the liberals. I don't like the government running the hospitals or abortion clinics.
2007-07-18 03:07:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by Menehune 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
If you really look at it your tax dollars are not specifically going for abortion. Also, your tax dollars are not paying for some one else's health care plan. I myself am againist abortion for me, but you cannot make it illegal because once it is illegal that is it, no exceptions. God forbid a 14yr girl is a victim of sexual assualt and gets pregnant she would have to carry the baby....there would not be any loop holes b.c. it would be illegal. Its better just to leave certain things alone.
2007-07-18 03:13:44
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
They have to support any health plan they create providing abortion,to do otherwise would be the Democrat party version of political suicide. I think however that since abortion is a very touchy subject for many Americans that they would have a very hard time getting a health care plan passed that pays for abortions,if they did that I sincerely believe that all they would manage to do is cause the longest filibuster in the history of Congress.
AD
2007-07-18 03:08:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
4⤋
Their policy positions just show their complete lack of respect for the human rights of the unborn--not to mention many taxpayers. It's odd that Obama, who claims to offer hope to America, offers no hope for the unborn--just a federally funded slaughter. And Edwards, who claims to care so much about the downtrodden, wants to accelerate the destruction of the weakest members of our society. They both just gave me another reason to oppose their election.
2007-07-18 17:12:50
·
answer #8
·
answered by Richard M 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
I read everyones answer before me and I have to say if you don't agree with abortions don't get one. I am a man and I do NOT think ANY man should tell a woman what they can and cannot do with thier bodies.
I think this is a great question and the people who cannot separate the abortion issue from the health insurance issue miss the point in my view.
The point is that if we have a national health insurance system ALL healthcare is free. Including abortions, STD checks, etc. Now, some people are too uptight to realize that young people have sex (MY GOD!) so they think young people are going to be abstinante hahah.. what a joke!
Young people are only going to have MORE sex.. That is the trend anyways.. We need abortions.. As sad as it is.. And if we have free healthcare why wouldn't abortions be included?
I say if it doesn't have the ability to touch the Earth it isn't truely alive, it isn't a baby, and it isn't protected under US law. Sorry right wing wackos.. Abortion is here to stay.. Go say a prayer..
2007-07-18 03:17:44
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
5⤋
of the three big democrats, i think clinton actually has the most sound policy on the subject.
whether or not i agree with health insurance paying for abortions, it's not going to get people elected.
on the subject of abstinence only education, however, the data show it's not working. it's not even that abstinence only and contraceptives are equal--schools that teach abstinence only produce students who are less likely to use condoms, more likely to spread disease and unwanted pregnancy.
2007-07-18 03:06:12
·
answer #10
·
answered by brian 4
·
7⤊
1⤋
It is unsettling but I think that if private health insurers provide coverage for abortion than its only fair that the US health insurance do the same for the sake of consistancy. I also believe that since it is such a sensitive topic their should be requirements on how one qualifies for federal abortions (i.e rape)
2007-07-18 03:11:23
·
answer #11
·
answered by Bye-Partisan 3
·
3⤊
2⤋