I believe that presently the federal government does not pay for abortions, or at the very least there are some restrictions on using public monies for this purpose. The reason is the moral objection a large percentage of the population has to abortion.
So would any "single-payer" program include it, or exclude it?
2007-08-06 00:10:00 · 7 answers · asked by American citizen and taxpayer 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I agree that Rudy's abortion stance is a big problem for the Republicans. It might slpit the party. I wish it were not so. Maybe Hillary's war stance will cause similar trouble for the Democrats. I don't know.
2007-08-06 04:30:08 · update #1
Any insurance program that paid for abortions would not pass Congress.
2007-08-06 02:18:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
what proportion modification could be mandatory earlier you will possibly settle for that no illegals have been lined? One? Six? Thirty 4? you extremely want a central authority issued identity card? This from a party that hates the belief of massive government understanding all and being waiting to maintain on with you around? You do understand that what we would choose, to have all voters carry and bring on call for a countrywide identity care. How else might a healthcare worker understand who to handle, and who to bypass away on the shrink? As to abortion, you look to think of all of us think of its a reliable concept that a countrywide healthcare plan not conceal non-obligatory abortions, it is not so. however although, the Hyde modification already prohibits federal money from getting used for abortions. back, what proportion rules do you're able to restate an identical element earlier you will settle for it? And why the computerized assuption that a criminal technique could be nice if skipped over of the final healthcare device? i might quite pay the $3 hundred fee of an abortion that eighteen years of welfare for the child.
2016-10-09 07:56:28 · answer #2 · answered by duffina 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Unfortunately, abortions are legal. The government could not refuse to pay for them. With a government-run program, nothing would be excluded.
2007-08-06 00:13:47 · answer #3 · answered by regerugged 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
if Rudy Giuliani is president it would........" As mayor of New York City, Giuliani approved government funding for abortion and opposed a ban on partial-birth abortion, saying he wanted to "preserve the option for women." He also donated money to Planned Parenthood, a group that advocates for abortion rights.
2007-08-06 00:15:55 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
A health insurance should cover all health issues. If you object to abortions, don't have one. Respect other peoples lives and decisions, if you want others to respect yours. That pesky freedom thing again.......
2007-08-06 00:25:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
If democrats have it heir way. Minnesota already does pay for abortions.
2007-08-06 00:13:18 · answer #6 · answered by JonB 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You have decided to make your entire Q&A private
This means that I will have no access to my answer after it is posted for editing or deletion
For this reason I have decided not to give a sensible answer this question
Lots of Love
2007-08-06 00:17:09 · answer #7 · answered by Big Nobby 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋