Monday, November 09, 2009

Last I Heard...

Last I heard, abortion was legal in this country. Whether you approve of it or not, it's legal. If you don't think it should be legal, then try and get the law changed. I repeat; abortion is legal.

So now, the woman-hating, bible-thumping, anti-health-care-reform, right-wing assholes have attached an amendment to the Bill that would deny ANY insurance company from covering ANY abortion. Not just stating that taxpayer funds will not be used to pay for abortions (which is the way it has been for years), but placing controls on insurance companies and dictating what they will (and will NOT) cover. Let's not forget that these are the SAME PEOPLE who are rounding up so-called "grass roots" activists to say things like "Keep the Government out of Health Care!" I guess they want the government to control certain parts of Health Care. The part that permits reproductive freedom to women!

One of them even had the balls to suggest that women purchase separate "abortion insurance," incurring extra charges. I wonder how that will go? Will women say, "Oh, gee. Someday I might need an abortion, so I guess I should buy insurance for that?"

These jerks KNOW that women don't go thinking they are going to need an abortion sometime in the future. Women who get abortions do so for a variety of reasons, none of which includes planning one!

What if somebody attached an amendment to the health care reform Bill that forbade insurance companies from covering injuries resulting from hunting accidents?

They are trying to put people on the spot. They have ALWAYS hated that Roe vs Wade allowed reproductive freedom to women, and, now that people are beginning to demand health insurance reform, some bright spark is saying, "OK, let's see what people are willing to give up to get it!"

On what grounds do they insert this amendment? 'Scuse me...did you say on RELIGIOUS grounds? Do we not have separation of church and state in this country?

Once again, I am chewing nails and spitting rust!


  1. I dont think that part will pass. It doesnt apply for private insurance in any case. Only insurance companies that receive Federal subsidies. I am SURE that they are going to make an amendment for health risks to the mother. At least I would hope so.

  2. I just read that two of the three versions of the Bill include insurance coverage for "prayer treatments!"

    According to Ronni Bennett,

    We can only hope that the Senate has a better handle on Roe v. Wade and that a woman's right to choose will prevail, but don't count on it. Last week, I was surprised, shocked even, to discover that two of the three bills that will be merged into one in the Senate would raise faith healing to the level of clinical medicine.

    The provision would prohibit discrimination against “religious and spiritual health care” and would require insurers to consider covering such non-medical procedures as prayer treatments such as those used in the Christian Science Church.


    URL for the above quote

  4. But, Melissa, the working poor will be the ones who require the subsidies in order to have coverage at all!

  5. I was surprised when checking things out on this subject to find how many private insurers are quietly happy to pay for abortions- but of course they would be. It does come down to money, after all, and it sure is cheaper for them to pay for an abortion at 2 months than the health care of a kid for 18 years! Let alone Down's Syndrome or what-have-you. I bet they'll be discreetly fighting AGAINST this type of language on that basis alone. The prayer thing? Wow, the bones they are willing to throw at the Right for 1 or 2 measly votes! The courts will knock that out, if it doesn't curl up on its own. That Lieberman is threatening to filibuster is no great surprise- he's a senator from CT. after all, where are most of those rascals based? Yeah, CT!

  6. An abortion is an elective procedure. Elective procedures are not covered by insurance agencies. Although abortions are legal, I do not think insurance agencies need to cover the procedure. The majority of abortions are not performed on rape victims; but, performed on careless teenagers and adults who won't take the responsibility of their own actions. Do not participate in a child-making activity if you are not ready for the possibility of a child. Abortion should be legal for the rare cases in which a fetus needs to be aborted for the sake of the mother or the child, but abortion should not be less than $500 given to anybody who wants to get rid of their one night stand accident. I'm sure with all laws that there will be plenty of amendments, which will include coverage for health risks. However, health risks and mental trauma(rape) should be the only reason to authorize covering an abortion on insurance.

  7. Many covered procedures are elective, if, by elective, you mean something that the patient elects to have. Chemo, amputations, knee replacements. If we followed your definition of what is covered, emergency procedures would be all anyone could get.

  8. And, while you are busy making moral judgments, are you refraining from sex except for times when you wish to conceive?

  9. Oh, and by the way...I consider RAPE to be a lot more than "mental trauma!"

  10. I apologize for sounding snotty, Anonymous, but it is possible to use a name, either as a signature at the bottom of your comment, or by clicking the "Name" button and putting one in. You do not have to have a Google account or a blog of your own to do that.

    I see by my sitemeter that you might well be somebody I know in real life, as you searched for my blog by using my full name and the costume shop.

    I am a lot more polite with people who give me some sort of name. Even a made-up one.

  11. Anonymous- A lot of insurance agencies do currently cover abortions. Abortions are cheaper for them than paying for a hospital delivery. I'm being careful to not make a judgment here, one way or the other. Just saying... I think a lot of people really don't know exactly what is covered and what isn't in their own plans. Like I said before, I was fairly surprised, too.

    I do recall that when my husband had a brain aneurysm the neurosurgeon involved had to yell at our insurance co. on the line about whether or not they'd cover it! He ended up yelling at them, in my presence, "Well, would you like to deal with this in court, post-mortem?!?!" That made them decide to cover it. At well over $140,000+ (then! Double that at least, now!) it would have ruined us financially. Bottom line is all they care about. They might well have denied the coverage (they wanted him to wait for 6 weeks for an MRI- only reason he got one so quickly is 'cuz my physician Dad had privileges at another hospital- my husband would have DIED before the 6 weeks was up!) and taken their chances with a settlement. Bottom line, bottom line, bottom line. The less naive people are about that one, the better.

  12. My one disagreement with your argument is when you state "One of them even had the balls to suggest..."
    That's not "balls", which suggests bravery. That's COWARDICE trying to keep women in a burka. Send the young people to fight and die in a war to force "freedom" on another country, but don't allow it in our own. If the fat old men sitting in DC and in the capitals around the world chose to fight the wars they declare, we'd all be living in a much better place. Wars would sure as hell be over sooner if they even started at all! ...t

  13. T, you are absolutely right! I should have said "gall!"