Stupak, maybe this aint so bad!

[Gman2]

So, all those entities, that used to provide healthcare for the indigent, and unlucky, can cease all operations, but a woman's birth choice.

BUT, I would fight tooth and nail, to include ANY danger to the mother, as grounds, to fund federally. Or rape, incest. This could work out well.

Doctors, also, could donate a part of the time, they now donate to such unlucky, can now donate to a woman's birth choice.

[Aramchek]

1. there are currently no government subsidies for abortion, the Bill doesn't change that

[tekisui]

2. It should have. We had a chance to stand up for women's rights.

[Aramchek]

5. you would prefer Healthcare Reform fail just because it won't pay for abortions??

[tekisui]

15. Did I say that?

It is just another example of weak Democratic leadership.

[tonysam]

3. That begs the question as to why people are so up in arms over this

when it's been legal for over 33 years thanks to the Hyde Amendment.

[Aramchek]

4. some people want any reason to be upset about this bill. this apparently will do.

if it was stripping existing subsidies, that would be one thing.
but it isn't. you won't hear any of them mentioning this, however.

[dflprincess]

7. This amendment is designed to extend that ban to private insurers

as well as public plans. That's what makes it different and that's what makes it even worse.

[Aramchek]

11. you are confused. read the bill.

abortion coverage is not allowed in government subsidized plans, but that doesn't stop anyone from buying a separate plan with their own money which covers abortion.

[dflprincess]

13. Private plans that accept a subsidy for any member

who may have opted for them through the exchange will not be permited to cover abortion services - even if the majoriy of people in that particular plan are not subsidized. This makes it more difficult for any plan in the exchange (assuming it ever happens) to offer those services.

[bain_sidhe]

9. Yes it does

It's not like the Hyde Amendment. Hyde prevents the federal government from PAYING for an abortion.

The Stupak amendment prevents you from buying insurance that includes abortion coverage with YOUR OWN MONEY because some moralizing prick thinks abortion is wrong.

The closest analogy I can think of is, it's like the government saying that no insurance policy in the exchange can cover lung cancer caused by smoking, because some people find smoking repugnant.

EXCEPT - the coverage they banned is ONLY used by women, and generally in what is, at least for them, an emergency. I can't think of any similar health concern that only applies to men.

And this restriction on what policies in the exchange can cover matters to every woman, because over the years, more and more employers will be able to access the exchange, too. At the start, it's only a few of the smallest employers that can offer the exchange in lieu of private insurance. Each year, a larger group of employers will be given access to the exchange.

[Aramchek]

14. no, it doesn't. read the bill

It doesn't allow you to have abortion coverage in a plan payed for with subsidies,
but allows you to purchase a separate plan covering abortion with your own funds.

check it out>>> http://www.docstoc.com/docs/15284081/Stupak-Amendment-to-HR-3962-Rev-108

[Warpy]

6. The only reason a woman ever gets an abortion

is because the unwanted pregnancy is endangering her life.

Think about it. An unwanted pregnancy can wreck a career, finances, a social support system as well as threatening health and life.

That's why Stupak is so bad. That's why I will be donating to any opponent who turns up in the primary.

That man is the deadly enemy of half the population of this country.

Notice he doesn't think Viagra is against god's will.

[Lefty48197]

8. I've met Bart Stupak and I know his constituents.

I know them well. His only political opposition will be from the farthest of the far right wing gun totin bible thumpin fascists on the planet. Go ahead and donate to that guy if you want, but I'll cancel out your donation.

[Warpy]

10. A less powerful fetus fetishist Democrat

would still be preferable.

Do note that I am not going to support any Republican.

[Lefty48197]

12. Thank you for clarifying and I apoligize

if I implied that you actually would support the Republican candidate. The people of Michigan's U.P. and northern counties like to keep their one representative for loooooooong periods of time and they like that rep. to gain lots of seniority and power. Dominick Jacobetti held that seat for many many years and attained God-like status for his ability to bring federal dollars to Michigan's Appalacia. Bart Stupak is now bringing those dollars to his constituents, and I think it's a pretty safe bet that he'll hold that seat for another 25 years if he wants to.