Feminists everywhere are rejoicing, I’m sure.
CNS News did some investigating, and Ed Morrissey came up with this analysis:
At least ostensibly, this is an unfunded mandate on the states, which run the exchanges. What happens when no insurer in the state offers abortion coverage? At the moment, 87% of all abortions are purchased outside of third-party payers, so this is not an academic question. Do the feds intend to shut down an exchange that doesn’t offer an abortion plan? Or do they expect the states then to cover abortions instead?
… Once Congress stops re-enabling the Hyde Amendment, the mandates in Reid’s Section 1303 will force the federal government to supply the coverage for abortion where state exchanges have none. It will give the federal government an entree into broader health-insurance offerings, and that will have one ironic effect: it will crowd out those few private insurance plans that offer elective abortion coverage. Where Stupak’s opponents insisted that his language would create a “price signal” that would encourage private insurers to abandon abortion coverage, this would all but guarantee the same result, as private insurers would get undercut by the federal plan that would come into play.
This is nothing more than a mandate for federally-funded abortions. How long would it take a court to make that same determination? I suspect that Planned Parenthood and NARAL already have their legal counsel preparing for it.
It’s not exactly a surprise that the health care bill would include funding for abortion. Feminists have been howling about the Stupak amendment, the abortion lobby has been furious. Liberals were bound to cave in to their demands, and they were bound to try to hide it from the federal public. It is typical of liberals. And it’s infuriating to anyone with any kind of morals or respect for the sanctity of life. It’s bad enough that abortion is celebrated as some kind of right in this country, like it’s glorious for a woman to be able to go and kill her baby. Feminists in particular revel in it, like it’s some kind of sacred cow. Apparently, you have to be a member of the “I <3 Abortion" club in order to be a feminist in today's world. There are currently about 1.3 million abortions performed a year, and this isn't good enough for feminists. They not only want abortion to be free and legal, they want it to be paid for by Americans whether they like it or not. It has to be taxpayer-funded. It's important that we all understand this. It's not good enough for feminists just to have abortion be legal and freely accessible. Any woman who wants to can get an abortion. And there is already $300 million a year in taxpayer subsidies for Planned Parenthood. There's plenty of federal funding for abortion, but feminists always want more. It isn't enough for abortion to be legal, it isn't enough for it to be federally subsidized. How much do they want? Does every single abortion performed need to be taxpayer funded so that any woman who wants one never has to pay for it out of her own pocket? It's a disgusting state of affairs. Half the country is morally opposed to abortion. But liberals are a special group of people. If they believe in something, then everyone must be for it and it must be federally mandated and subsidized. If they don't believe in something, then no one should believe in it and it must be totally banned. And so, thanks to this mental outlook and the carping of the feminist/abortion lobby, we are now looking at forcing half of the people in this country to fund something to which they are virulently opposed. Burn up that switchboard today. You can find contact information for your senators here.
Of course they want abortion funded, for more reasons than one.
Like anything else, abortion is a BUSINESS. Suppose that tens of millions of women suddenly decided, of their own free will, NOT to have abortions or to take actions necessary to prevent undesired pregnancies (NB: this is their CHOICE).
Well, in that case, the demand for abortions would collapse and most abortion clinics would go out of business across the country, leaving only a few clinics where women could kill their unborn children safely and legally. To liberals, “access” doesn’t mean having to travel to another state to get an abortion. If they had their way, abortuaries would be as common as Walgreens.
They not only subsidize abortions through Planned Parenthood, government-funded fetal stem cell research channels hundreds of millions of dollars to abortion doctors, keeping them in business. Of course, the abortionists donate some of that back in campaign contributions to protect their rents. There is actually CONCERN among the pro-abortion lobby because fewer and fewer doctors are learning how to do the killing. They are in a lobbying campaign to have more doctors take up the practice.
I predict that in 100 years or less, abortion will disappear due to a combination of things: advancement in birth control, increased responsibility, change in moral attitudes, changes in laws protecting the unborn. I can’t wait until this is no longer an issue. But until that happens, hundreds of millions of children will die at the hands of people whose sworn duty is to care and nurture them: doctors and mothers.
Abortion is the greatest act of barbarism in human history. After abortion disappears, future women will look back in history the same way we now look back at slavery and say, “My God, what did we think we were fighting for?”
I have met four women in my life who told me they had had an abortion. All four said the experience had wounded them emotionally. One of them said she wanted to have children, but her boyfriend did not.
Here’s the irony: When I asked each of them why they decided to have the abortion(s), they all began their explanation with exactly the same four words:
“I had no choice.”
When an abortion advocate tells you they are NOT pro-abortion but rather pro-choice, pose this question to them:
You are serving as an “escort” to make sure that a 16 year old girl has access to a safe and legal abortion clinic. You are making your way through a crowd of anti-abortion protesters. Some are angry, most are praying or pleading. One protester, a woman in her 40s, says to the young girl, “Please, honey, don’t do this. Let me help you keep your baby.”
Upon that, the girl breaks free from the escort’s grip and disappears into the crowd with the woman. The crowd cheers and shouts praise to God. You are left standing there, alone.
Ok, pro-choicer, how do you feel about the girl’s choice?
Stop there and enjoy their stunned silence. After the initial shock wears off, enjoy their sputtering, knee-jerk responses like, “Well, the girl was coerced” or “They won’t really help her.”
They will ignore the fact that the reason the girl may have wanted the abortion in the first place is the feeling that she had no other choice and that no one was willing to help her, particularly the escort. They consider the choice to have an abortion as made in full freedom and after careful thought; it is a CEMENTED DECISION. To them, a choice not to have an abortion or a change of heart is inherently risky, hasty, uninformed, or coerced by opposition or circumstances. To them, the only EVIDENCE of “choice” and “access” is the abortion actually taking place.
1 Comment