public funding[W:334]

[mpg]

This question is not for people who believe that abortion should be illegal, and it only refers to elective abortions without rape or incest. Public funding can refer to federal, state or local government funding.

 

[nota bene]

Re: public funding

Aren't life-threatening conditions, e.g. ectopic pregnancy, already "publicly funded" when necessary? I ask because I'm not sure of the answer. I assume that they are but don't know.

 

[Excon]

Re: public funding

Abortion should be mandatory for anyone who can not show that that they can provide for all the needs of a child. Financially, emotionally, mentally, etc...

 

[DifferentDrummr]

Re: public funding

Just to qualify, since this wasn't a poll option:

IMO, if the abortion is medically advisable (or necessary, of course), and the patient does not have adequate insurance or means to pay, then the abortion should be publicly funded.

 

[mpg]

Re: public funding

Just to qualify, since this wasn't a poll option:

IMO, if the abortion is medically advisable (or necessary, of course), and the patient does not have adequate insurance or means to pay, then the abortion should be publicly funded.

It wasn't a poll option because it's a different topic.

 

[DifferentDrummr]

Re: public funding

It wasn't a poll option because it's a different topic.

Does this mean you expect responders to choose between 100% of abortions being publicly funded and 0%? How does that make sense?

 

[mpg]

Re: public funding

Does this mean you expect responders to choose between 100% of abortions being publicly funded and 0%? How does that make sense?

That is NOT the topic of this thread. Read the OP.

 

[Peter King]

Re: public funding

if it is purely an abortion clinic then it should not be publicly funded. If abortion is part of a service of a clinic that does not have a primary function of providing abortions, then that clinic can be publicly funded.

 

[DifferentDrummr]

Re: public funding

That is NOT the topic of this thread. Read the OP.

Medically advisable/necessary abortions ARE a subset of the ones you described in your OP. Unless, of course, you wrote something you didn't mean, in which case no one can help you with that. We aren't telepaths.

 

[Excon]

Re: public funding

Under my premiss of mandatory, of course it should be funded, as it benefits the State.

 

[mpg]

Re: public funding

Medically advisable/necessary abortions ARE a subset of the ones you described in your OP. Unless, of course, you wrote something you didn't mean, in which case no one can help you with that. We aren't telepaths.

Perhaps I misused the term "elective". I meant to make this thread about abortions that aren't medically necessary.

 

[Conservative65]

Re: public funding

Just to qualify, since this wasn't a poll option:

IMO, if the abortion is medically advisable (or necessary, of course), and the patient does not have adequate insurance or means to pay, then the abortion should be publicly funded.

Why should those of us told to butt out of what a woman does with her body be forced to fund something we are told is none of our business? I have a better solution. Let those who want to voluntarily fund it for her do so.

 

[Conservative65]

Re: public funding

if it is purely an abortion clinic then it should not be publicly funded. If abortion is part of a service of a clinic that does not have a primary function of providing abortions, then that clinic can be publicly funded.

If the abortion is supposed to be the sole choice of a woman having it, then the cost of that abortion is the sole responsibility of the mone making the choice.

 

[Lursa]

Re: public funding

This question is not for people who believe that abortion should be illegal, and it only refers to elective abortions without rape or incest. Public funding can refer to federal, state or local government funding.

Abortions due to rape or incest, even to save the mother's life or in cases of severe birth defects are all elective.

Is the govt....or you...now judging the justification for the procedure? That certainly sounds like a disaster if applied more broadly in healthcare/

 

[Lursa]

Re: public funding

Perhaps I misused the term "elective". I meant to make this thread about abortions that aren't medically necessary.

To save the mother's life, if the fetus is healthy....makes a choice to kill/allow one or the other to die.

I know you would like this to be a black and white issue, but it is not.

 

[Lursa]

Re: public funding

This question is not for people who believe that abortion should be illegal, and it only refers to elective abortions without rape or incest. Public funding can refer to federal, state or local government funding.

I can recognize it as an elective...no, no public funding.

However this also means that electives like maternity care should also not be funded. Deciding to get pregnant is a choice.

OTOH, I support any and all funding for abortion because in the long run, it saves taxpayer $$ in costs such as welfare, food stamps, publicly funded daycare, foster care, juvenile delinquency, court and prison costs.

Edit: it also benefits society in more than $$ since none of us want to be involved in the repercussions of children raised in homes where they have higher incidences of not finishing school, fewer opportunities in life, more chances of being abused or neglected, a predisposition to continue the cycle, etc.

 

[Lursa]

Re: public funding

That is NOT the topic of this thread. Read the OP.

His questions/clarifications are reasonable and the issue is far from black and white as much as it seems you would like it to be.

 

[DifferentDrummr]

Re: public funding

Why should those of us told to butt out of what a woman does with her body be forced to fund something we are told is none of our business? I have a better solution. Let those who want to voluntarily fund it for her do so.

Because the free market demonstrably doesn't work for health care.

 

[Conservative65]

Re: public funding

Because the free market demonstrably doesn't work for health care.

It isn't about he free market. It's about someone telling others that what she does with her body is her sole choice then asking those she told to butt out to help her financially.

The free market works wonderfully for me related to healthcare. I'm having knee replacement surgery in a few weeks and it will costs me a grand total of $750 out of pocket maximum. Because it doesn't work in other cases is not justification to make it more costly on those of us for which it does.

 

[DifferentDrummr]

Re: public funding

It isn't about he free market. It's about someone telling others that what she does with her body is her sole choice then asking those she told to butt out to help her financially.

The free market works wonderfully for me related to healthcare. I'm having knee replacement surgery in a few weeks and it will costs me a grand total of $750 out of pocket maximum. Because it doesn't work in other cases is not justification to make it more costly on those of us for which it does.

That's not the free market: it's what you people love to call "socialism." (I like your double standard, too, by the way!)

 

[Conservative65]

Re: public funding

That's not the free market: it's what you people love to call "socialism." (I like your double standard, too, by the way!)

Socialism is what you propose. I propose personal responsibility, something people like you don't understand and rarely practice.

I have no double standard. I happen to be in a healthcare situation that works well. Because you or others may not be is not my problem.

 

[DifferentDrummr]

Re: public funding

Socialism is what you propose. I propose personal responsibility, something people like you don't understand and rarely practice.

When people like you discuss "personal responsibility," they mean it should apply only to other people.

I have no double standard. I happen to be in a healthcare situation that works well. Because you or others may not be is not my problem.

Public health is everyone's problem, whether you want to pretend it isn't or not. Contagious diseases aren't a myth.

 

[mpg]

Re: public funding

His questions/clarifications are reasonable and the issue is far from black and white as much as it seems you would like it to be.

I tried to make this thread about specific abortions rather than all abortions, but I used the wrong terminology. I already admitted this, but even then, the OP made it clear that this thread is not about all abortions.

 

[mpg]

Re: public funding

To clarify, this thread is not about abortions that are medically necessary and it is not about abortions that involve rape or incest.

If you believe that those types of abortions should be legal, do you also believe in paying for them with tax dollars at the local, state OR federal level?

 

[Lursa]

Re: public funding

To clarify, this thread is not about abortions that are medically necessary and it is not about abortions that involve rape or incest.

If you believe that those types of abortions should be legal, do you also believe in paying for them with tax dollars at the local, state OR federal level?

I dont understand. Why are you judging the reasons for the abortions? Rape or incest dont affect the mother's physical health. It kills the unborn for reasons that some people rationalize which I do not understand. So you are justifying it by including it like it's 'acceptable.'

Is killing the unborn acceptable or not? If it is for rape, why not so that the mother doesnt have to lose her hourly job and not have to go on welfare to feed her disabled mother? And maybe be kicked out on the street with nowhere to live?

You want this to be black and white, but it's not. Even the way you phrase it, you show your desire to control other people by placing conditions on *other people's healthcare.*