yep, one of my famous "A pox on both their houses" posts.
On the front page of the Oregonian today, I see a very interesting article about abortion coverage in the new healthcare plan (unfortunately, they seem not to have put "Abortion covered widely by insurance", an article from the McClatchy newspaper service written by James Oliphant, on the web). In there I find some very interesting ideas:
1. From an alternate article on the subject: "What the amendment, offered by Democrat Bart Stupak, really does is bars the use of federal subsidies to fund abortions. It bans the proposed new government health insurance plan from covering abortions in all but the most extreme cases (rape, incest and when a mother's life is threatened). And news reports say that policies purchased with federal subsidies from private insurers will have the same restrictions. Women could purchase an abortion insurance rider if they felt they needed the coverage (or pay out of pocket for an abortion)."
2. This amendment only covers plans in the new "Health insurance Exchange".
3. Many private health care plans, currently cover abortion.
So, to the Republican Catholics who read this, I say, if you currently have employer sponsored health care that is using YOUR premiums to cover abortions, what exactly is the moral difference between that and a government using YOUR taxes to cover abortions? The main difference I can see is choice- are you willing to cancel your employer-sponsored health insurance on this principle?
And to the pro-choicers who are all up in rage about this: Nobody who has abortion coverage now, will see it dropped because of this amendment, and you're an idiot if you think it is going to be. The rider will be available to any prochoicer who thinks ahead- not that many of them do since they've utterly failed to make the connection between *having sex, as a prayer to the gods for fertility* and *having children* to begin with. Not that it is any great loss to you *DINKs* to pay $400 for a night of sex in comparison to us *breeders* who spend the next 18 years paying an average of $700/month for the same act, and no insurance covers parenthood.
Bunch of hypocrites and idiots who want to keep me, specifically, from getting new legislation that would allow me into the insurance market to begin with.