Uh-oh...

re: #1 Sharmuta

RINOs.

RNC Alternate Health Care Proposal:Abortion: "Free for those who can afford it, very expensive for those who cannot."*

* this is a Withnail and I reference.

I wonder what else they cover.

Oh look, "death panels."

re: #3 iceweasel

RNC Alternate Health Care Proposal:Abortion: "Free for those who can afford it, very expensive for those who cannot."*

* this is a Withnail and I reference.

And in "the public square" for the poor!

/

Nineteen ninety-one, and they're just noticing it now.

Oh, the humanity!

Ohhh, I would love to see what they do with this...

Now personally, I would not like to see women stripped of their coverage, but it would amuse me to see GOP hypocrites try to explain this to their more fanatical base.

hahaha, you can't make this up

Certainly no one in the RNC has ever actually taken advantage of that coverage. Right? And of course none of them would allow their dependent family members to use the coverage. Right?

As if.

re: #3 iceweasel

Mega-zingy up-dingy for knowing "Withnail and I". I would ask you to marry me, but...

Do you have a sister?

The Republican National Committee’s health insurance plan covers elective abortion – a procedure the party’s own platform calls “a fundamental assault on innocent human life.”

Federal Election Commission Records show the RNC purchases its insurance from Cigna. Two sales agents for the company said that the RNC’s policy covers elective abortion.

re: #4 Gus 802

I wonder what else they cover.

Oh look, "death panels."

Pass the popcorn.

I'm shocked but somewhat pleased to see many progressive posters agreeing with conservatives that allowing health care to be controlled by the political process is a horrendously bad idea.

"We are taking steps to address the issue."

Bet that will go over well. They're going to re-write their contract with Cigna to reflect a puritan's view.

Might as well cut off contraception, elective plastic surgery, sexual enhancement drugs, and so on.

And no coverage for in vitro fertilization?

re: #13 Gus 802

"We are taking steps to address the issue."

Bet that will go over well. They're going to re-write their contract with Cigna to reflect a puritan's view.

Might as well cut off contraception, elective plastic surgery, sexual enhancement drugs, and so on.

And no coverage for in vitro fertilization?

No way in hell they're going to give up their Viagra.

re: #11 Irish Rose

Pass the popcorn.

I couldn't resist looking. I think most all health insurance companies have a policy on end-of-life care not unlike (cough) the original legislation that caused such a hubbub.

This is exactly why I don't think abortion will ever be fully outlawed again. The Religious right is hypocritical - they make this their biggest issue, but secretly want to keep the option just in case their family needs it.

re: #12 SixDegrees

I'm shocked but somewhat pleased to see many progressive posters agreeing with conservatives that allowing health care to be controlled by the political process is a horrendously bad idea.

This private, employment-linked insurance. Where's the process?

re: #13 Gus 802

"We are taking steps to address the issue."

Bet that will go over well. They're going to re-write their contract with Cigna to reflect a puritan's view.

Might as well cut off contraception, elective plastic surgery, sexual enhancement drugs, and so on.

And no coverage for in vitro fertilization?

Funny you should say that...Digby has a great post on this today:

I have a moral objection to paying for any kind of erectile dysfunction medicine in the new health reform bill and I think men who want to use it should just pay for it out of pocket. After all, I won't ever need such a pill. And anyway, it's no biggie. Just because most of them can get it under their insurance today doesn't mean they shouldn't have it stripped from their coverage in the future because of my moral objections. (I don't think there's even been a Supreme Court ruling making wood a constitutional right. I might be wrong about that.)

Many of the men who are prescribed this medication are on Medicare, so I think it should be stripped out of that coverage as well. And unlike the payments for abortion, which actually lower overall medical costs (pregnancy obviously costs much, much more) banning tax dollars from covering any kind of Viagra would result in a substantial savings

re: #14 Irish Rose

No way in hell they're going to give up their Viagra.

That would cause an immediate 50% droop in RNC personal satisfaction ratings.

re: #17 Decatur Deb

This private, employment-linked insurance. Where's the process?

I'm not talking about the policy. I'm talking about the reaction to it.

re: #16 Thanos

Even if the SCOTUS overturns Roe vs.Wade, which is highly unlikely, what state would do the same?

re: #19 Cato the Elder

That would cause an immediate 50% droop in RNC personal satisfaction ratings.

They would raise their trunks in outrage.

re: #18 iceweasel

Right. Of course one could say that without that it could lead to clinical depression in some patients.

;)

re: #16 Thanos

This is exactly why I don't think abortion will ever be fully outlawed again. The Religious right is hypocritical - they make this their biggest issue, but secretly want to keep the option just in case their family needs it.

Many, and by many, I mean quite a few (and I have met three personally) doctors who perform abortions have treated women who came from the picket lines only to go right back to preaching hell and Jesus after the procedure.

Of course they all saw themselves as "special cases," and all the other women as sinners.

re: #18 iceweasel

(I don't think there's even been a Supreme Court ruling making wood a constitutional right. I might be wrong about that.)

Ha!

re: #22 Decatur Deb

They would raise their trunks in outrage.

With the aid of mechanical trunk-pumps for the aged among them.

re: #23 Gus 802

Right. Of course one could say that without that it could lead to clinical depression in some patients.

;)

In Galen's day that was called the "droopsy".

re: #25 Stanley Sea

(I don't think there's even been a Supreme Court ruling making wood a constitutional right. I might be wrong about that.)

Ha!

Check the Intercourse Commerce clause.

re: #21 soxfan4life

Even if the SCOTUS overturns Roe vs.Wade, which is highly unlikely, what state would do the same?

You're kidding, right?

re: #25 Stanley Sea

(I don't think there's even been a Supreme Court ruling making wood a constitutional right. I might be wrong about that.)

Ha!

Row v Wood?

///(horrible, I know)

re: #24 LudwigVanQuixote

Many, and by many, I mean quite a few (and I have met three personally) doctors who perform abortions have treated women who came from the picket lines only to go right back to preaching hell and Jesus after the procedure.

Of course they all saw themselves as "special cases," and all the other women as sinners.

Sadly, LVQ, I have personal knowledge of similar stories.

When an unplanned and unwed pregnancy occurs, it's very very difficult to move forward. I'm in no way condoning the hypocrisy; I'm pointing out that there are sadly many many people who do not have the moral strength to live what they preach.

The way I see it is there are three bottom lines on abortion:

1. I'm sorry, if the embryo does not yet have a developed human brain, the embryo is not a human yet, and therefore it is not murder. Life does not begin fro the moment you get her bra unhooked.

2. Possession being 9/10 of the law, puts men at a moral disadvantage in any debate on the topic/

3. If I had a young teenaged daughter who became pregnant, I would likely rather she chose to go to college and have a better future.

re: #24 LudwigVanQuixote

Many, and by many, I mean quite a few (and I have met three personally) doctors who perform abortions have treated women who came from the picket lines only to go right back to preaching hell and Jesus after the procedure.

Of course they all saw themselves as "special cases," and all the other women as sinners.

One woman's abortion is another's D & C.

re: #10 Cato the Elder

Mega-zingy up-dingy for knowing "Withnail and I". I would ask you to marry me, but...

Do you have a sister?

{ { { Cato } } }

I LOVE Withnail and I!

Fun fact (if TMI): Jimmah and I both love it.

... and the conservative blogosphere falls silent while they try desperately to spin their talking points behind the scenes.

Should be an interesting day on the blogs tomorrow.

re: #35 Irish Rose

... and the conservative blogosphere falls silent while they try desperately to spin their talking points behind the scenes.

Should be an interesting day on the blogs tomorrow.

It will be a "well we bought group coverage and it was already included, it's not our fault" kind of thing.

re: #36 LudwigVanQuixote

It will be a "well we bought group coverage and it was already included, it's not our fault" kind of thing.

Blame it on the editor.

re: #24 LudwigVanQuixote

Many, and by many, I mean quite a few (and I have met three personally) doctors who perform abortions have treated women who came from the picket lines only to go right back to preaching hell and Jesus after the procedure.

Of course they all saw themselves as "special cases," and all the other women as sinners.

Those doctors ought to be made aware that they're tiptoeing right up to the line of violating doctor/patient privilege. Such a disclosure is little different from the case discussed at length here recently (Arkansas?) that would require doctors to provide extensive medical histories of patients receiving abortions to the state, which would then post them on a website. It's all too easy, especially these days, to knit together seemingly disparate bits and pieces of personal information and be able to identify the person they all belong to with at least a high degree of certainty.

You might want to have a word with them and remind them of their responsibility to respect patient confidentiality.

re: #31 reine.de.tout

Sadly, LVQ, I have personal knowledge of similar stories.

So do I.

re: #33 Stanley Sea

One woman's abortion is another's D & C.

Yes. And when the theocrats and socons are calling the shots, even D &C's get relabeled as 'abortion', even when they involve such procedures as removing a fetus which is already dead.

(Cf "partial birth abortion" being successfully renamed 'abortion', then 'partial birth', then outlawed.)

re: #32 LudwigVanQuixote

...
3. If I had a young teenaged daughter who became pregnant, I would likely rather she chose to go to college and have a better future.

Yes, of course you would.

But there is an option other than abortion, for those in this situation. It is one of the hardest things a person will ever do, and would be to have the baby, and place the baby with a couple for adoption.

Just sayin' there are options apart from abortion.

Newsmeat results for H Edward Hanway, CEO of CIGNA.

Mostly R's. He even contributed to Santorum once.

Classic.

OT: AP sources: Insurance probed in census taker death

LEXINGTON, Ky. – A census taker found hanging from a tree had named his son as his life insurance beneficiary, and investigators are looking into whether the father manipulated the death scene to make a claim possible, law enforcement officials told The Associated Press Thursday.

In an interview with AP, Josh Sparkman said he found paperwork for the private life insurance policy among his father, Bill Sparkman's, personal files but wasn't sure of the amount or when it was taken out. He said authorities have told him nothing about the case or produced a death certificate, which is usually needed to make an insurance claim.

Two law enforcement sources, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss the case, said investigators are trying to determine if Bill Sparkman manipulated the death scene, so his son could collect.

Sparkman's naked body was found Sept. 12 near a family cemetery in a heavily wooded area of southeastern Kentucky. One of the witnesses who found the body said the 51-year-old was bound with duct tape, gagged and had an identification badge taped to his neck. Homicide, suicide and an accident were all being considered as a manner of death, authorities said. Life insurance policies typically do not cover suicide.

"If it's deemed suicide, there's no point in even looking at insurance," Josh Sparkman said. "There's no such thing as suicide insurance. The money is not the concern. I just want to know what happened to my dad."

Josh Sparkman, 20, who is unemployed, said he's convinced his father could not have committed suicide, even though law enforcement officials who spoke on condition of anonymity say they are looking closely at that possibility and increasingly doubt he was killed because of his government job.

There were no defensive wounds on Sparkman's body, and while his hands were bound with duct-tape, they were still somewhat mobile, suggesting he could have manipulated the rope, the officials said. Sparkman was found hanging from the tree yet in contact with the ground.

[...]

Sparkman said his father last updated his will in 1993, listing Josh as the heir to the estate, including the London, Ky., home valued at $80,000, according to Laurel County property records. Friends chipped in to help gather the money for one monthly mortgage check, but Sparkman said he remains behind on other payments.

"My dad never really cared about material things," he said. "It's not what mattered to him. His friends, his family — that's the kind of stuff you care about. He would do without to see someone in his family do better."

The son said he noticed no changes in his father in the weeks before his death that would suggest he was upset about anything. In their final phone conversation, his father mentioned he was still trying to land a full-time teaching job but remained upbeat, he said.

re: #38 SixDegrees

Actually no they are not. They gave no names or dates or any information that could identify the patients involved. It is no different then a doctor saying that she had treated an Asian patient, or once had a patient who was an attorney.

re: #21 soxfan4life

Even if the SCOTUS overturns Roe vs.Wade, which is highly unlikely, what state would do the same?

A lot. See above for a mention of the state that attempted just recently to publish personal information of each and every patient receiving an abortion on a state-run website, with disclosure of the information by their doctors mandated by state law.

However, in the event that Roe were ever overturned, my guess is that you'd see Congress enact legislation explicitly legalizing abortion in a matter of weeks.

re: #42 Gus 802

Newsmeat results for H Edward Hanway, CEO of CIGNA.

Mostly R's. He even contributed to Santorum once.

Classic.

oooh, GOOD find!
This is going to be good...

re: #40 iceweasel

Been hearing that since Reagan was elected. Bush, Dole, Bush, and McCain were all going to appoint the right Justice to end women's right to choose, and yet it is still the law of the land. That was why I said no state would outlaw it. Just my opinion, being a male my only comment on the whole subject is I am glad my Mom wasn't a big prochoice person.

re: #41 reine.de.tout

And that is fair. However, the statistics on people who want to adopt do not come anywhere close to the number of pregnancies aborted.

When I see wealthy people from the GOP lining up to adopt two or three children, and voting to spend huge amounts of money on caring for wards of the state, giving them education, shelter and healthcare, I will be more inclined to see that as a viable option in general.

Interesting, from the same article:

There is no indication that any RNC employee has used the abortion coverage, but Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards said it’s “no surprise” that the RNC is offering it.

“It’s an employer that wants to provide standard health benefits for its employees,” she said. “That’s why the Stupak amendment goes too far in taking away benefits that women have today, and that’s why women won’t allow the Stupak amendment to become law.”

The Stupak amendment, named for sponsor Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), was adopted by the House before it passed the health care bill on Saturday night. It prohibits a government-backed health care plan from offering abortion services and bans the use of federal subsidies for individuals to buy into health care plans that provide abortion coverage.

re: #32 LudwigVanQuixote

The way I see it is there are three bottom lines on abortion:

1. I'm sorry, if the embryo does not yet have a developed human brain, the embryo is not a human yet, and therefore it is not murder. Life does not begin fro the moment you get her bra unhooked.

2. Possession being 9/10 of the law, puts men at a moral disadvantage in any debate on the topic/

3. If I had a young teenaged daughter who became pregnant, I would likely rather she chose to go to college and have a better future.

Why is adoption not a more popular choice?

re: #46 iceweasel

oooh, GOOD find!
This is going to be good...

He's supposed to retire this year. At 57.

Lots of Pinnochios with this story.

re: #48 LudwigVanQuixote

And that is fair. However, the statistics on people who want to adopt do not come anywhere close to the number of pregnancies aborted.

When I see wealthy people from the GOP lining up to adopt two or three children, and voting to spend huge amounts of money on caring for wards of the state, giving them education, shelter and healthcare, I will be more inclined to see that as a viable option in general.

There is a large shortage of babies for adoption.

There's a reason why it's called elective abortion.

If you don't want one, you don't have to have one. This is not China.

But the RNC wants us to be China in reverse.

Really, I'm laughing so hard here. What are their options? Rewrite the policy? Won't fly with the RNC ladies. Leave it as is but insist that the great unwashed get no choice in the matter? Catcalls of "hypocrisy" and "double standard" from the rooftops.

RNC, you've been fucked. Are you gonna keep the baby?

Are men required to buy that coverage too? re: #38 SixDegrees

Those doctors ought to be made aware that they're tiptoeing right up to the line of violating doctor/patient privilege. Such a disclosure is little different from the case discussed at length here recently (Arkansas?) that would require doctors to provide extensive medical histories of patients receiving abortions to the state, which would then post them on a website. It's all too easy, especially these days, to knit together seemingly disparate bits and pieces of personal information and be able to identify the person they all belong to with at least a high degree of certainty.

You might want to have a word with them and remind them of their responsibility to respect patient confidentiality.

The doctor has not one whit violated doctor/patient privilege, as long as no identifying information concerning who, specifically, had the abortion etc. is disclosed.

It's perfectly permissible for a professor, for instance, to observe in conversation that, say, christian evangelical students have been known to cheat and that he's observed that himself. Or for a lawyer to observe that he's defended guilty-as-charged drunk drivers who were Mormon, or Muslim, or whatever.

General and statistical observations that are not tied to an identifiable individual are not privileged and private.

re: #44 LudwigVanQuixote

Actually no they are not. They gave no names or dates or any information that could identify the patients involved. It is no different then a doctor saying that she had treated an Asian patient, or once had a patient who was an attorney.

They've said that they performed abortions on people they had seen protesting both before and after the procedure. The "regulars" who protest at a particular office are typically a very small group, and are ordinarily well known to those working in the clinic simply for security reasons. The point is, it isn't anything like identifying them as Asian - they're identifying them as belonging to the very small group known personally to the doctor.

It's really no different from the law discussed. Those records, though detailed, didn't name the people involved, either. But it really don't take much information to track a person down these days, and finding out that someone is a member of a very specific protest group seen at a very specific location is a huge narrowing of the population at large.

re: #52 Spare O'Lake

Babies yes, Children no. Not even close.

Speaking of the RNC Pro-Life poster girl:

Palin: McCain aides kept me 'bottled up'

The rumors are true, according to Sarah Palin: The McCain-Palin campaign was not a happy family. In Palin's new memoir, "Going Rogue," she confirms reports of tension between her aides and those of the 2008 Republican presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain. The vice presidential candidate confirms that she had wanted to speak on election night, but was denied the chance and says she was kept "bottled up" from reporters during the campaign.

Palin also writes harshly of CBS anchor Katie Couric, whom she describes as "badgering" and biased. Palin's series of interviews with Couric were widely regarded as disastrous, leaving the impression of an ill-informed candidate who was unsuited for the job.

Palin shares behind-the-scene moments when the nation learned her teen daughter Bristol was pregnant, how she rewrote the statement prepared for her by the McCain campaign — only to watch in horror as a TV news anchor read the original McCain camp statement, which, in Palin's view, glarmorized and endorsed her daughter's situation.

Palin laments that she wasn't allowed to bring up loads of family members to the stage while McCain gave his election night concession speech, the vice presidential candidate having found out minutes earlier that she wouldn't be permitted to give her own speech

Starting to sound like sour grapes.

re: #57 Sharmuta

Speaking of the RNC Pro-Life poster girl:

Palin: McCain aides kept me 'bottled up'

Starting to sound like sour grapes.

Just because someone said to "put a cork in it".

re: #57 Sharmuta

Speaking of the RNC Pro-Life poster girl:

Palin: McCain aides kept me 'bottled up'

Starting to sound like sour grapes.

She should team up with Carrie Prejan for a road show. They can call themselves "The Sisters of Perpetual Victimhood."

/

re: #50 Spare O'Lake

Why is adoption not a more popular choice?

Well, I am not an expert on it, I can only say that according to this,

[Link: www.abortionno.org...]

there were 1.37 Million abortions performed in the US in 1996 alone.

This Wapo article claims

[Link: www.washingtonpost.com...]

The number of abortions performed in the United States dropped to 1.2 million in 2005 -- the lowest level since 1976, according to a new report.

So let's say it is on the order of 1,000,000 pregnancies per year terminated in this country.

And the adoption statistics are on the order of 100,000 per year.

[Link: statistics.adoption.com...]

Simply put, if adoption is to be a viable option as a matter of policy, it is off by a factor of ten.

re: #59 Gus 802

She should team up with Carrie Prejan for a road show. They can call themselves "The Sisters of Perpetual Victimhood."

/

Get them a bus, and you'd have a whole new meaning to holy rollers.

re: #54 lostlakehiker

Are men required to buy that coverage too?

The doctor has not one whit violated doctor/patient privilege, as long as no identifying information concerning who, specifically, had the abortion etc. is disclosed.

It's perfectly permissible for a professor, for instance, to observe in conversation that, say, christian evangelical students have been known to cheat and that he's observed that himself. Or for a lawyer to observe that he's defended guilty-as-charged drunk drivers who were Mormon, or Muslim, or whatever.

General and statistical observations that are not tied to an identifiable individual are not privileged and private.

See above; it seems to me that a good deal of specific information is being released here. As already noted, it isn't a direct violation of privilege, but it's very close, and it makes potential identification a great deal easier if someone is gathering such information.

re: #61 Sharmuta

Get them a bus, and you'd have a whole new meaning to holy rollers.

Now all they need is a color scheme for the bus. How about painting it like a Confederate flag? RSM can drive the bus.

/

Nothing at Drudge, nothing at Hot Air, nothing at Malkins', nothing at AoS... nothing except silence...

re: #48 LudwigVanQuixote

And that is fair. However, the statistics on people who want to adopt do not come anywhere close to the number of pregnancies aborted.

When I see wealthy people from the GOP lining up to adopt two or three children, and voting to spend huge amounts of money on caring for wards of the state, giving them education, shelter and healthcare, I will be more inclined to see that as a viable option in general.

As things now stand, adoption procedures are very expensive, and the pool of children up for adoption is rich in special-needs situations that many would-be adopters are not able to cope with. If there were fewer abortions and less expense and uncertainty about adoption, there would be more easy-to-adopt babies and more takers. Enough more to absorb the increase? To a point, probably, but not enough to absorb all the babies that would be born if the statistics stayed just as they are except that in place of the abortions now performed, we had live births with the mother putting the baby up for adoption.

The marginal adoptive prospects of the next child born who would otherwise have been aborted are quite favorable.

re: #57 Sharmuta

Speaking of the RNC Pro-Life poster girl:

Palin: McCain aides kept me 'bottled up'

Starting to sound like sour grapes.

Very much so. She's also claiming that the McCain camp sent her a bill for the vetting process preceding her selection as VP candidate, a claim those involved say is utterly untrue. It sounds as though she's confusing or conflating bills she received from her lawyer on other matters with the vetting process.

I'm betting that, despite the claim of having received a bill, there won't be any actual paperwork backing up this claim.

re: #60 LudwigVanQuixote

So let's say it is on the order of 1,000,000 pregnancies per year terminated in this country.

And the adoption statistics are on the order of 100,000 per year.

[Link: statistics.adoption.com...]

Simply put, if adoption is to be a viable option as a matter of policy, it is off by a factor of ten.

Using your numbers, a humane policy would then be to encourage a 10% reduction in abortions.

re: #67 Spare O'Lake

Using your numbers, a humane policy would then be to encourage a 10% reduction in abortions.

You mean 90%. And then what happens to those babies once they are born?

re: #66 SixDegrees

I'm surprised she thinks the McCain statement on Bristol glamorized anything. I don't recall thinking that at all. Does anyone else?

re: #64 Irish Rose

Nothing at Drudge, nothing at Hot Air, nothing at Malkins', nothing at AoS... nothing except silence...

*giggle*

re: #63 Gus 802

Now all they need is a color scheme for the bus. How about painting it like a Confederate flag? RSM can drive the bus.

/

The Dupes of Hazzard?

re: #69 Sharmuta

I'm surprised she thinks the McCain statement on Bristol glamorized anything. I don't recall thinking that at all. Does anyone else?

I recall thinking that Palin glamorized Levi as a stand-up guy. Funny how that worked out.

My view on it, and I'm aiming for LGF feedback on this:

It seems like the main crux of the right wing argument against the current form of healthcare reform has been along the line of: its too expensive, its a government takeover, and it'll have bureaucrats making decisions that doctors should make.

This amendment seems to be exactly the last two points. Presently, abortion is a legal procedure (the validity of that is a debate for a different day). This amendment is the government intervening in a decision that should theoretically be made between a patient and her doctor.

Even if the ring wingers are on board for that goal, should they not be a little concerned at the precedent its setting? Its setting up the gov't as a non-neutral entity before the bill is even passed.

re: #67 Spare O'Lake

Using your numbers, a humane policy would then be to encourage a 10% reduction in abortions.

Assuming of course, that 100,000 couples want to adopt and there are no children available. As opposed to the current system, where there are still children remaining after those 100,000 adoptions.

(Assuming when you say we reduce abortion by 100,000 that you mean we should have those children adopted).

Perry in Texas goes full frontal Beck:

[Link: www.statesman.com...]

re: #75 Thanos

Thanks. I'll need brain-bleach to get rid of that image.

re: #73 EastSider

(snip)is a debate for a different day). This amendment is the government intervening in a decision that should theoretically be actually is made between a patient, her insurance company and her doctor.

Tampered with that for you.

re: #71 iceweasel

Ahh yes, Daisy Duke...

For me it was Serena (Jane Seymour) on the original BSG and Princess Leah in that metal bikini...

For my little brother, it was Daisy Duke that made girls go from icky to fascinating...

A medical history is very nearly a fingerprint. Who, after all, has had his wisdom teeth out on Jan 14, 1998, and a toenail fungus treated on Sept 12, 2005? That, already, would probably narrow it down to exactly one person.

I would hope that the doctor would stay away from divulging information sufficient to narrow the numbers down sharply. On the other hand, if you forbid doctors to say anything at all about what they know, in general, of life as seen from their perspective, because any such information can be plugged into a vast machine that winnows and sifts until everyone is identified, then you've just gagged them.

My guess is that every reasonably frequent poster here could be identified without recourse to search warrants, just by collating the times we post, the details of our personal lives to the extent we divulge them, and our writing styles. If we want any shred of privacy to continue to exist, it will have to be founded in a prohibition of this sort of sifting and collating, rather than a prohibition on divulging facts which by all prior law and common usage were no violation of any confidentiality obligation.

What right wing anti-choice think tank also provides 'abortion services' to its employees?

Focus on the Family

As it happens, Focus on the Family provides its employees health insurance through Principal, an insurance company that covers "abortion services." A Focus spokeswoman confirmed the fact that the organization pays premiums to Principal, but declined to comment on whether that amounts to an indirect funding of abortion.

Even if the specific plan Focus uses for its employees doesn't include abortion coverage--and I'm assuming it doesn't--the organization and its employees still pay premiums to a company that funds abortions. If health reform proposals have a fungibility problem, then Focus does as well. And if they don't think they do have a fungibility problem, then it would be interesting to hear why they think the set-up proposed in health reform legislation is so untenable.

re: #80 iceweasel

Well they have to provide for secretaries and pages that would be embarrassing too!

re: #75 Thanos

Perry in Texas goes full frontal Beck:

[Link: www.statesman.com...]

Socialist
Modern
Utopian
Reformed
Farce
School

I thought most, almost all, private insurers covered abortions for obvious reasons.

re: #73 EastSider

This amendment seems to be exactly the last two points.

I think the word that applies here is "hypocrisy". A common ailment among politicians and other humans.

re: #75 Thanos

Perry in Texas goes full frontal Beck:

[Link: www.statesman.com...]

one step at a time comrade...

re: #82 Gus 802

Socialist
Modern
Utopian
Reformed
Farce
School

Reports of my demise have been greatly exaggerated.

re: #74 McSpiff

Assuming of course, that 100,000 couples want to adopt and there are no children available. As opposed to the current system, where there are still children remaining after those 100,000 adoptions.

(Assuming when you say we reduce abortion by 100,000 that you mean we should have those children adopted).

I just guessed. Actually, the missing statistic is the number of prospective adoptive couples/parents who cannot get babies to adopt - whether that is 100,000 or more or less is not yet part of this discussion.

re: #79 lostlakehiker

A medical history is very nearly a fingerprint. Who, after all, has had his wisdom teeth out on Jan 14, 1998, and a toenail fungus treated on Sept 12, 2005? That, already, would probably narrow it down to exactly one person.

I would hope that the doctor would stay away from divulging information sufficient to narrow the numbers down sharply. On the other hand, if you forbid doctors to say anything at all about what they know, in general, of life as seen from their perspective, because any such information can be plugged into a vast machine that winnows and sifts until everyone is identified, then you've just gagged them.

My guess is that every reasonably frequent poster here could be identified without recourse to search warrants, just by collating the times we post, the details of our personal lives to the extent we divulge them, and our writing styles. If we want any shred of privacy to continue to exist, it will have to be founded in a prohibition of this sort of sifting and collating, rather than a prohibition on divulging facts which by all prior law and common usage were no violation of any confidentiality obligation.

The problem I see, again, is that these doctors are saying they've seen these people protesting, presumably at their clinics, both before and after the procedure. That's a very specific bit of information - it probably narrows the number of potential women down to something on the order of a couple dozen, since as noted earlier those protesting at particular locations are often "regulars." Toss in a few more bits of easily obtainable information - age, for example, easily estimated at a glance - and you narrow the field even farther. It wouldn't take long at all to narrow it to a couple, or one.

We were bitching about the state law in question revealing similarly non-specific information. I see exactly the same problem involved here. It's one thing to say that there are protesters who have had abortions; it's quite a different thing to say that, as a doctor, I've personally performed abortions on protesters who've I'd seen outside my clinic both before and after the procedure.

re: #86 Sharmuta

Reports of my demise have been greatly exaggerated.

Did you catch the latest South Park? They have Cartmann doing a Beck.

re: #89 Gus 802

Yes- I watched it a little while ago. Funny stuff.

All I care about is the RNC's stand on Fox canceling another Joss Whedon show.

re: #90 Sharmuta

Yes- I watched it a little while ago. Funny stuff.

It was. I'm surprised other shows of comedians don't do more parodies of Glenn Beck. He's practically written the material for them already.

re: #68 LudwigVanQuixote

You mean 90%. And then what happens to those babies once they are born?

No, I would just like to see enough females encouraged to choose to give birth to enough babies to fulfill the outstanding demand for adoptions. Wouldn't that be a win-win?

re: #73 EastSider

My view on it, and I'm aiming for LGF feedback on this:

It seems like the main crux of the right wing argument against the current form of healthcare reform has been along the line of: its too expensive, its a government takeover, and it'll have bureaucrats making decisions that doctors should make.

This amendment seems to be exactly the last two points. Presently, abortion is a legal procedure (the validity of that is a debate for a different day). This amendment is the government intervening in a decision that should theoretically be made between a patient and her doctor.

Even if the ring wingers are on board for that goal, should they not be a little concerned at the precedent its setting? Its setting up the gov't as a non-neutral entity before the bill is even passed.

I think the important point is that the GOP doesn't think taxpayers should be forced to pay for something many taxpayers believe to be exceedingly immoral. Abortion gets lumped into the health care debate, but abortions are rarely medically necessary, they are more of a socio-economic issue.

Are you still allowed to be pro-life and post on this board, or will that get you 21 dings down?

re: #13 Gus 802

"We are taking steps to address the issue."

Bet that will go over well. They're going to re-write their contract with Cigna to reflect a puritan's view.

Might as well cut off contraception, elective plastic surgery, sexual enhancement drugs, and so on.

And no coverage for in vitro fertilization?

My coverage doesn't cover my birth control. I work for a Catholic school, mind you.

re: #67 Spare O'Lake

re: #60 LudwigVanQuixote

So let's say it is on the order of 1,000,000 pregnancies per year terminated in this country.

And the adoption statistics are on the order of 100,000 per year.

[Link: statistics.adoption.com...]

Simply put, if adoption is to be a viable option as a matter of policy, it is off by a factor of ten.

Using your numbers, a humane policy would then be to encourage a 10% reduction in abortions.
68 LudwigVanQuixote Thu, Nov 12, 2009

You mean 90%. And then what happens to those babies once they are born?

I think he means ten percent. The other 90 percent don't get born. They die before birth, just as they now die. As to the 10 percent, they are born, they get adopted, and they experience whatever fate chance and destiny and their own decisions work out to.

Adoption is not a viable substitute for abortion. If abortion were banned, we would have to see a decrease in pregnancies and a rise in orphanages just to make the numbers work out. We'd also need a police state and closed borders with razor wire fences and land mines, because otherwise, girls would be taking vacations in Canada, Mexico, etc. and coming back suddenly thin.

This shouldn't happen and it's not going to. What could happen is that the number of abortions could drift down some, the use of birth control could drift up, more fathers could marry the girl they got pregnant and raise their children, and more of the children born to mothers who made really bad choices in men could be adopted or placed with orphanages. And abortion would remain one of the choices.

re: #92 Gus 802

It was. I'm surprised other shows of comedians don't do more parodies of Glenn Beck. He's practically written the material for them already.

Well- John Stuart and SNL have done parodies already. Perhaps the Onion will have one soon. Then there's Our Glenn Beck Lizard...

re: #96 SanFranciscoZionist

My coverage doesn't cover my birth control. I work for a Catholic school, mind you.

Then at least they read the flippin' policy.

re: #98 Sharmuta

Well- John Stuart and SNL have done parodies already. Perhaps the Onion will have one soon. Then there's Our Glenn Beck Lizard...

John Stuart's was pretty funny.

re: #34 iceweasel

{ { { Cato } } }

I LOVE Withnail and I!

Fun fact (if TMI): Jimmah and I both love it.

re: #93 Spare O'Lake

No, I would just like to see enough females encouraged to choose to give birth to enough babies to fulfill the outstanding demand for adoptions. Wouldn't that be a win-win?

Like all other products, Americans now get their adoption babies from China.

re: #16 Thanos

This is exactly why I don't think abortion will ever be fully outlawed again. The Religious right is hypocritical - they make this their biggest issue, but secretly want to keep the option just in case their family needs it.

I don't know if I'd say the RR is hypocritical--it's that the center right is caught doin' the pretzel, between wanting to keep the RR's support, and not actually wanting to lose legal abortion.

re: #93 Spare O'Lake

No, I would just like to see enough females encouraged to choose to give birth to enough babies to fulfill the outstanding demand for adoptions. Wouldn't that be a win-win?

OK I see what you are saying. I do not have statistics though for how many children are up for adoption in this country however. My guess is that there are more children then families willing to adopt.

I bet that policy also guarantees absolute medical privacy to all those who choose to avail themselves of the no-cost abortions, too...

It seems only right...

/

re: #36 LudwigVanQuixote

It will be a "well we bought group coverage and it was already included, it's not our fault" kind of thing.

Huh. MY employer knows what's covered by my group coverage.

re: #95 nightlight

Are you still allowed to be pro-life and post on this board, or will that get you 21 dings down?

There are lots of prolifers here and they get updinged by prochoicers like me as well as by anyone who appreciates a cogent and articulate and polite argument, even when we don't agree with it.

re: #94 KingKenrod

I think the important point is that the GOP doesn't think taxpayers should be forced to pay for something many taxpayers believe to be exceedingly immoral. Abortion gets lumped into the health care debate, but abortions are rarely medically necessary, they are more of a socio-economic issue.

But that's a really dangerous precedent to set.

Who decides what's immoral? And, lets not forget, right now the procedure is legal.

The government pays for lots of things that people disagree with. Even if you're against abortion, you have to be concerned that this bill gives the government the right to decide was is and is not moral and what to pay for. A decision that should be between a doctor and a patient.

re: #96 SanFranciscoZionist

My coverage doesn't cover my birth control. I work for a Catholic school, mind you.

That would make sense given the policy from the Holy See. Trying to figure out how the RNC is going to spin this. I think if the re-write their policy it will be a political liability in the long run. Especially with independents. They can maintain a pro-life policy but should allow other members to make their own decisions. Otherwise, why should the RNC stop with their coverage from CIGNA? They do after all, as I pointed out, have end-of-life policies including questionnaires. What will happen when Sarah Palin blogs this fact on her Facebook page?

re: #102 Cato the Elder

Like all other products, Americans now get their adoption babies from China.

It could be the mission of the next few generations of Americans to move
the American experiment to China. Really big numbers impress me.

re: #94 KingKenrod

I think the important point is that the GOP doesn't think taxpayers should be forced to pay for something many taxpayers believe to be exceedingly immoral. Abortion gets lumped into the health care debate, but abortions are rarely medically necessary, they are more of a socio-economic issue.

The socialized medical programs available in Europe are quite limited in the care they provide coverage for. Lots of medical procedures are available, but many aren't covered or aren't covered fully. So in addition to their tax-funded health care services, pretty much everyone also...buys medical insurance, a sort of "gap" insurance that covers the shortfalls that government programs miss.

Needless to say, this isn't an idea that will sit well with a populace that's been promised "free" health care and had the full-coverage plans offered by many employers held out as an example of what they'll be getting. But it does present a potential solution to the moral dilemma you pose: don't use taxpayer dollars to pay for abortion, and let the private sector pick up the slack with additional policies. These would probably be quite cheap - a few dollars a month, perhaps, given that the vast majority of girls manage not to get pregnant in the first place, yet most worry about it, so the stats work out in favor of low individual cost.

re: #106 SanFranciscoZionist

Huh. MY employer knows what's covered by my group coverage.

Wanna bet?

re: #40 iceweasel

Yes. And when the theocrats and socons are calling the shots, even D &C's get relabeled as 'abortion', even when they involve such procedures as removing a fetus which is already dead.

(Cf "partial birth abortion" being successfully renamed 'abortion', then 'partial birth', then outlawed.)

A friend of mine had a pregnancy that went horribly wrong. I can't recall what this condition is called, it's rare in the states, but instead of normal fetal development, you get weird cells that start to form into something that looks eerily like those decorative glass grapes people's grandmas decorate with.

She had to have a D&C, and felt awful, having been very excited about the presumed baby.

When she got the paperwork back, the doctor had described the procedure as an abortion, which really upset her.

Well then, Diana DeGette should love it.

Personally, caring about abortion funding - in terms of the House bill that just passed the House, is silly. It's trillions of dollars with huge tax increases and penalties. Abortion funding is like a grain of sand on the beach.

In the town where I live there are children of China, Kenya, Russia, India, Vietnam... you name the country, there are children from there. All are adopted.

Childless couples here are desperate to adopt children, and there aren't enough American children available.

Are you getting my drift?

re: #102 Cato the Elder

Like all other products, Americans now get their adoption babies from China.

OUCH!

re: #109 Gus 802

Trying to figure out how the RNC is going to spin this. I think if the re-write their policy it will be a political liability in the long run. Especially with independents. They can maintain a pro-life policy but should allow other members to make their own decisions.

I doubt they'll do anything. Fox News certainly isn't going to report this. The fundies at Focus on the Family certainly aren't going to make a stink about it because their insurance provides abortions too. Right wing blogs aren't going to cover this. The average wingnut cares much more about ACORN, socialism and whatever Glenn Beck tells them. My guess is they'll ignore it, the story will be forgotten by Monday.

re: #50 Spare O'Lake

Why is adoption not a more popular choice?

It's socially stigmatized, and emotionally wrenching. We could change some of that as a society, but we're not there yet.

re: #95 nightlight

Are you still allowed to be pro-life and post on this board, or will that get you 21 dings down?

Allowed? You can say pretty much anything you want, within Charles' extremely broad rules.

If you're referring to people agreeing with you, that's a different matter and depends on your position. It's entirely possible, for example, to be "pro-life" and still not insist on ramming an essentially religious position down the throats of the rest of the citizenry, and I doubt such a position would cause you any trouble at all here.

But many here take offense to the attitude of "I don't like abortion, so you can't have one!"

Focus On The Family too.

re: #113 SanFranciscoZionist

(snip)

When she got the paperwork back, the doctor had described the procedure as an abortion, which really upset her.

That's sad, and poor communication. I think even a naturally-occurring
miscarriage is called "spontaneous abortion". The term has nothing to
do with morality or politics.

re: #80 iceweasel

What right wing anti-choice think tank also provides 'abortion services' to its employees?

Focus on the Family

Wow. Now that is Big Ol' Hypocrisy in action.

re: #98 Sharmuta

Well- John Stuart and SNL have done parodies already. Perhaps the Onion will have one soon. Then there's Our Glenn Beck Lizard...

And then at the very end, Cartman bursts into tears and runs sobbing from the room.

re: #95 nightlight

Are you still allowed to be pro-life and post on this board, or will that get you 21 dings down?

You can be pro-life--lots of lizards are. You just shouldn't be a jerk. (Some lizards are that, but we do what we can.)

re: #117 Killgore Trout

I doubt they'll do anything. Fox News certainly isn't going to report this. The fundies at Focus on the Family certainly aren't going to make a stink about it because their insurance provides abortions too. Right wing blogs aren't going to cover this. The average wingnut cares much more about ACORN, socialism and whatever Glenn Beck tells them. My guess is they'll ignore it, the story will be forgotten by Monday.

Sounds about right.

re: #115 really grumpy big dog johnson

In the town where I live there are children of China, Kenya, Russia, India, Vietnam... you name the country, there are children from there. All are adopted.

Childless couples here are desperate to adopt children, and there aren't enough American children available.

Are you getting my drift?

There are American children "available" but they are older, blacker, and special needser (is that a word? well it is now)

re: #108 EastSider

But that's a really dangerous precedent to set.

Who decides what's immoral? And, lets not forget, right now the procedure is legal.

The government pays for lots of things that people disagree with. Even if you're against abortion, you have to be concerned that this bill gives the government the right to decide was is and is not moral and what to pay for. A decision that should be between a doctor and a patient.

I would argue the taxpayers decide what is immoral through an open political process - if enough taxpayers care enough and can convince their elected representatives to support their position. As they say, free speech is a right but that doesn't mean the govt has to pay you to speak. The same goes for abortion. The decision is between the patient and doctor, but the decision of "who pays" is a political one.

re: #112 Cato the Elder

Wanna bet?

Correction. My employer went to enough trouble to make sure that they were not paying for my birth control, or any other medications or procedures not approved of by the Church. They may not know everything.

re: #126 Alouette

There are American children "available" but they are older, blacker, and special needser (is that a word? well it is now)

Isn't cross-race adoption incredibly difficult?

re: #127 KingKenrod

I would argue the taxpayers decide what is immoral through an open political process - if enough taxpayers care enough and can convince their elected representatives to support their position. As they say, free speech is a right but that doesn't mean the govt has to pay you to speak. The same goes for abortion. The decision is between the patient and doctor, but the decision of "who pays" is a political one.

Good argument. +1.

re: #111 SixDegrees

The socialized medical programs available in Europe are quite limited in the care they provide coverage for.

This is simply not true.

There are elective procedures that are difficult to get in many of the systems, where you're right.

For actual needed medicine, however, calling the care in France or Britain or Sweden 'quite limited' is ridiculous.

re: #129 MandyManners

Isn't cross-race adoption incredibly difficult?

Not easy, but it can be done. A man from the synagogue I used to work at wanted to adopt, and refused to go out of country, on the grounds that there were children right here in California who needed homes. Being a single, gay man who wants to adopt in the United States is a bit like being Don Quixote, but he did eventually get there, and it was a cross-racial adoption.

There's resistance to it, though, which is incredibly stupid if it means that children don't grow up with families.

re: #132 SanFranciscoZionist

There are many who believe it is better for the child to be without a family than to be in the wrong type of family. I am not one of them.

re: #132 SanFranciscoZionist

Not easy, but it can be done. A man from the synagogue I used to work at wanted to adopt, and refused to go out of country, on the grounds that there were children right here in California who needed homes. Being a single, gay man who wants to adopt in the United States is a bit like being Don Quixote, but he did eventually get there, and it was a cross-racial adoption.

There's resistance to it, though, which is incredibly stupid if it means that children don't grow up with families.

Isn't there some sort of African-American social worker association that has really raised hell about the issue?

It is good to be pro-choice.
It is also good to be pro-life.
Efforts to resolve this dichotomy makes one favour religious and public policies which encourage pregnant women to choose life, but it must ultimately be the woman's choice.

re: #111 SixDegrees

The socialized medical programs available in Europe are quite limited in the care they provide coverage for. Lots of medical procedures are available, but many aren't covered or aren't covered fully. So in addition to their tax-funded health care services, pretty much everyone also...buys medical insurance, a sort of "gap" insurance that covers the shortfalls that government programs miss.

Nonsense. You plainly know nothing factual about European health care.

I recommend you get a passport and find out about the great big world outside the murky propaganda walls of America. Or just ask Jimmah.

re: #133 soxfan4life

There are many who believe it is better for the child to be without a family than to be in the wrong type of family. I am not one of them.

Their agenda is not the true welfare of the child.

re: #134 MandyManners

Isn't there some sort of African-American social worker association that has really raised hell about the issue?

I've heard something like that. Don't know much about it.

re: #134 MandyManners

Isn't there some sort of African-American social worker association that has really raised hell about the issue?

I'd imagine it falls under the same terms as blue laws and gays not being allowed to donate blood. Outdated crap that nobody would ever put in to law today but too afraid/lazy to take it out.

re: #138 SanFranciscoZionist

I've heard something like that. Don't know much about it.

I *think* I heard about during the Clinton years and a few times since.

The advert at the top of my thread is a "due date" calculator.

re: #126 Alouette

There are American children "available" but they are older, blacker, and special needser (is that a word? well it is now)

Needser? I'd say it's a perfectly cromulent word.

re: #127 KingKenrod

I would argue the taxpayers decide what is immoral through an open political process - if enough taxpayers care enough and can convince their elected representatives to support their position. As they say, free speech is a right but that doesn't mean the govt has to pay you to speak. The same goes for abortion. The decision is between the patient and doctor, but the decision of "who pays" is a political one.

I suppose the question then becomes how much power do you give the government (and/or the majority party).

What we've seen lately are good examples of both sides advocating for more governmental power when it suits their needs and recoiling when that same power is applied against there wishes.

-right wingers freaking out over wiretaps, appointments etc that were commonplace and not viewed as a big deal under bush.

-And left wingers pushing for government involvement in healthcare and then recoiling as that government control includes policies they are opposed to, which [roughly] reflect the will of the masses.

re: #131 Obdicut

This is simply not true.

There are elective procedures that are difficult to get in many of the systems, where you're right.

For actual needed medicine, however, calling the care in France or Britain or Sweden 'quite limited' is ridiculous.

Yes, that would explain why so many people in Britain and elsewhere purchase gap policies, or are receive them as a perq of employment from companies that offer them as enticements.

re: #53 Cato the Elder

RNC, you've been fucked. Are you gonna keep the baby?

Uh, Cato? You are aware that one can not get pregnant by fucking themselves, right?

/sorry, couldn't help it... seems that the only things Santa put in my stocking last year were masturbation jokes.

re: #135 Spare O'Lake

It is good to be pro-choice.
It is also good to be pro-life.
Efforts to resolve this dichotomy makes one favour religious and public policies which encourage pregnant women to choose life, but it must ultimately be the woman's choice.

Has any state ever had a public referendum (i.e. gay marriage initiatives in CA and ME recently) to determine the legality of abortion? My view is that its historically been argued in the courts, and to a lesser extent the legislatures.

re: #132 SanFranciscoZionist

Not easy, but it can be done. A man from the synagogue I used to work at wanted to adopt, and refused to go out of country, on the grounds that there were children right here in California who needed homes. Being a single, gay man who wants to adopt in the United States is a bit like being Don Quixote, but he did eventually get there, and it was a cross-racial adoption.

There's resistance to it, though, which is incredibly stupid if it means that children don't grow up with families.

I was adopted in California...I was adopted at 12 years old..No one wanted the Hoopster...I thank God every day somebody wanted me...And would show me love and I have a family now...
This is a very delicate topic for me..It was rough for me..I hated the world..I hated those who every shit canned me...But I found out about love and family..
Thank you God...Thank you my adopted mommy and Daddy...
Love know no bounds...My poor parents..I hated this world at one time..I was healed by love..
Those that reach out to us...They deserve our greatest thanks

re: #103 SanFranciscoZionist

I don't know if I'd say the RR is hypocritical--it's that the center right is caught doin' the pretzel, between wanting to keep the RR's support, and not actually wanting to lose legal abortion.

I disagree. The RR is hypocritical. This is why you have Larry Craigs, Todd Tiahrts, Randy Duke Cunninghams, and divorce rates highest in Red "Family Friendly" states.

Et tu, SoCon?

Jimmah, Ice: I just announced your impending nuptials on Facebook, and came up with the perfect word to describe your current status. You're blogaged.

Apropos of nothing but snark, have you noticed that American news announcers (after they discovered the word existed, sometime in the 1990s) pronounce the word nuptials as "nup-chew-alls"?

It's right up there with "noo-kyew-luhr".

re: #136 Cato the Elder

Nonsense. You plainly know nothing factual about European health care.

I recommend you get a passport and find out about the great big world outside the murky propaganda walls of America. Or just ask Jimmah.

Been there, heard the stories from the participants. Saw the bills, and the "gap" policy paperwork and cards.

Interestingly, the same insurance companies that dominate the American market also dominate the European "medigap" policy market, notably Aetna.

re: #144 SixDegrees

Yes, that would explain why so many people in Britain and elsewhere purchase gap policies, or are receive them as a perq of employment from companies that offer them as enticements.

That's probably a policy decision. In Italy, socialized and private systems
are interlaced. It's basically a "Private Option".

re: #147 HoosierHoops

(((Hoops)))

re: #139 Pepper Fox

I'd imagine it falls under the same terms as blue laws and gays not being allowed to donate blood. Outdated crap that nobody would ever put in to law today but too afraid/lazy to take it out.

Nah, IIRC it's some kind of shit about how whitey is gonna dilute the black race, or vice versa. It's a bunch of racist shit.

re: #134 MandyManners

Isn't there some sort of African-American social worker association that has really raised hell about the issue?

There was one in Texas that would have made it impossible for me to adopt my son (through the state) back in 1991; we did a private agency adoption.

{HOOPS}

re: #147 HoosierHoops

I was adopted in California...I was adopted at 12 years old..No one wanted the Hoopster...I thank God every day somebody wanted me...And would show me love and I have a family now...
This is a very delicate topic for me..It was rough for me..I hated the world..I hated those who every shit canned me...But I found out about love and family..
Thank you God...Thank you my adopted mommy and Daddy...
Love know no bounds...My poor parents..I hated this world at one time..I was healed by love..
Those that reach out to us...They deserve our greatest thanks

Please upding Hoop's post to the top 10.

the Thread Sleeps Tonight

Not sure how to describe this, I don't do 3D modeling, basically you can build 3D models with your webcam.

re: #146 EastSider

Has any state ever had a public referendum (i.e. gay marriage initiatives in CA and ME recently) to determine the legality of abortion? My view is that its historically been argued in the courts, and to a lesser extent the legislatures

Not so. It was en route to legalisation in many states before Roe v Wade was ever passed.

Between 1967 and 1973 one-third of the states liberalized or repealed their criminal abortion laws. However, the right to have an abortion in all states was only made available to American women in 1973 when the Supreme Court struck down the remaining restrictive state laws with its ruling in Roe v. Wade.

In 1967, Colorado became the first state to legalize abortion in cases of rape, incest, or in which pregnancy would lead to permanent physical disability of the woman. Similar laws were passed in California, Oregon, and North Carolina. In 1970, New York repealed its 1830 law and allowed abortions up to the 24th week of pregnancy. Similar laws were soon passed in Alaska, Hawaii, and Washington. A law in Washington, DC, which allowed abortion to protect the life or health of the woman, was challenged in the Supreme Court in 1971 in United States v. Vuitch. The court upheld the law, deeming that "health" meant "psychological and physical well-being," essentially allowing abortion in Washington, DC. By the end of 1972, 13 states had a law similar to that of Colorado, while Mississippi allowed abortion in cases of rape or incest only and Alabama allowed abortions only in cases where the woman's physical health was endangered. In order to obtain abortions during this period, women would often travel from a state where abortion was illegal to states where it was legal.

I'm now happily watching "Withnail and I" on YouTube.

Here's a scene with Glenn Beck from when he was drinking.

Gawd, he was fun in those days.

re: #146 EastSider

I'm not a lawyer but I don't think you can have a referendum once the Supreme Court decides. I do know that if Roe v Wade is overturned by the SC then there is no federal law guaranteeing abortion rights. In that case then each state would decide the issue. Some states like California already have a constitutional law stating abortion is legal. Again I am not a lawyer but just from what I have read

re: #147 HoosierHoops

{{HH}}

It's so nice to see how grateful & happy you are.
Sunny side up!

Have another hug!
{{HH}}

re: #152 Decatur Deb

That's probably a policy decision. In Italy, socialized and private systems
are interlaced. It's basically a "Private Option".

It keeps the portion of medical care the government must pay for through taxation limited, while allowing other services not covered by government programs to be made available through what, in America, would be regarded as a more "traditional" private insurance policy.

And as noted, it may be an interesting solution to avoiding the use of taxpayer dollars for a variety of controversial treatments, abortion among them.

re: #147 HoosierHoops

That was beautiful to read. Don't worry Hoops. We here all certainly like having the Hoopster too.

re: #164 SixDegrees

It keeps the portion of medical care the government must pay for through taxation limited, while allowing other services not covered by government programs to be made available through what, in America, would be regarded as a more "traditional" private insurance policy.

And as noted, it may be an interesting solution to avoiding the use of taxpayer dollars for a variety of controversial treatments, abortion among them.

Agreed. When the screaming subsides, I suspect we will wind up with
a system that will let us take incremental steps toward a mixed system
that fits our bent.

my dad was adopted by his childless aunt and uncle at 2 years old, his drunkard father ran off and his mom had to do something drastic...he had an older brother and a younger sister, but didn't know it, yet he was fond of his two country cousins especially the older boy...just as he was about to step onto a train in 1942 to fight the war, his 'mom' told him the truth about his status and that his cousins were in fact his brother and sister..weird times back then

OK, this is it, the apocalypse is upon us. I heard a country song that I really like...

I don't know what is happening to me...

Should I purchase a truck?

re: #161 Cato the Elder

I'm now happily watching "Withnail and I" on YouTube.

Here's a scene with Glenn Beck from when he was drinking.

Gawd, he was fun in those days.

Wheee! Love this movie...Nonsense! This is a FAR superior drink to meths!

re: #168 LudwigVanQuixote

OK, this is it, the apocalypse is upon us. I heard a country song that I really like...

I don't know what is happening to me...

Should I purchase a truck?

[Video]

It's not a truck if it's on cinder blocks--it's a mixed-media lawn installation.

re: #147 HoosierHoops

This needs two more updings to hit #1.
C'MON FOLKS.
You can do this!

re: #150 Cato the Elder

Jimmah, Ice: I just announced your impending nuptials on Facebook, and came up with the perfect word to describe your current status. You're blogaged.

Apropos of nothing but snark, have you noticed that American news announcers (after they discovered the word existed, sometime in the 1990s) pronounce the word nuptials as "nup-chew-alls"?

It's right up there with "noo-kyew-luhr".

Thanks Cato! Yes, or alternatively you could say we are 'blogtrothed'.

PS I've noticed a lot of people misspell "nuptials" as "nuptuals"- probably following on from that mispronunciation.

And this to Ice, Floral, Jimmah and others who share similar likes, is the successor to closer as a video...

re: #168 LudwigVanQuixote

OK, this is it, the apocalypse is upon us. I heard a country song that I really like...

I don't know what is happening to me...

Should I purchase a truck?

It starts with a pickup truck.

Then comes the dog.

Then the 12-gauge shotgun behind the seat.

Then you need a gun rack because reaching behind the seat is inconvenient.

Then a winch, a snowplow rig, a trailer hitch, a set of aluminum toolboxes, and some rope, nails, loose shotgun shells, and strike-anywhere matches rattling around on the floor. Among the beer cans.

It's really a wonderful lifestyle, but if you're not ready for it, stop listening now!

re: #172 Jimmah

Still, however it's spelled...
I wish you both joy and happiness.

re: #172 Jimmah

"Blogtrothed" sounds LOTR.

re: #174 Cato the Elder

see the video I just posted...

re: #157 Alouette

Please upding Hoop's post to the top 10.

Please Don't it's embarrassing .
I was born by a young girl in Firebaugh, Ca. on a summer ranch and given away to numerous foster homes..I was really a bitter little kid..I hated everyone and everything...No one liked me and trust me..I hated everyone...
I was adopted by the most coolest family in Yountville up in Napa Valley..
It wasn't easy for them...They held me..and loved me and taught me about life. I owe them EVERYTHING...They need an upding not me...This topic is harder than you will ever know...
I'll tell you a story
When I was like 5..My mom sent me a letter...The people told me this was a letter from your real mom..I couldn't read it but I took a bottle of nail polish and smeared it across the letter trying to somehow make a connection to her...I made a mess everywhere..That lady beat the hell out of me...
I knew then I hated this world and I didn't understand this world.
I am the luckiest Man in the world..It could have gone really bad without love...

re: #178 HoosierHoops

Oh, {Hoops}... Love is the most awesome force in the universe. I'm so glad you have it on your side.

re: #177 LudwigVanQuixote

see the video I just posted...

Nice.

Miranda is what Paris Hilton would look like if Paris were pretty and non-anorexic.

re: #178 HoosierHoops

I am just so pleased and grateful to have you as a friend.
Even if you're just an "imaginary blog friend".
You have enriched my life, and I thank you for it.

{{HH}}
Hey, how 'bout a hug for that Winston of yours too?
{{Winston}}

Notice to American Voting Public:

Your parties play with abortion like a pinata and do so knowing that the status quo (a right to an abortion with some capacity for states to regulate) ain't going away.

Whay do they do this?

To raise money.

Got it? This is about raising money.

"But but but what if Rowe v. Wade gets overturned? Then abortion will be illegal, won't it?"

Nope. If Rowe gets overturned then the states get the exclusive power to regulate abortion again. When they did states like California had a more liberal law which was signed into law by Governor Ronald Reagan (you mighta heard of him - he was a Goldwater Republican RINO back then).

"But but but abortion rights are always under constant threat and could evaporate at any moment because the Supreme Court could overturn Rowe v. Wade, right?"

While the Supreme Court could overturn Roe v. Wade, it needs 2 things to do it. The first is a compelling case involving either unsettled law or settled law that, when applied to the facts of that case, creates a compelling question of an injustice. That means that in all of the cases that have involved abortion since Rowe, some case with a unique set of facts has to come up that really haven't ever occurred before and which (in order to overturn - not modify - Roe v. Wade) highlights an injustice so grave that Rowe and its application is simply unworkable. Which brings up the second thing - stare decisis which roughly means "let prior decisions stand." As more and more cases are heard on an issue related to a prior ruling, that prior ruling gains strength. It gains strength with the passage of time and its repeated application to subsequent cases. Roe has been tested almost innumerable times. Each time the hurdle for throwing it out completely gets a little higher.

Conservative golden boy Chief Justice Roberts himself discussed Stare Decisis at his confirmation hearing and described Rowe as "settled law." Precedent doesn't get discarded just because an ideologue gets on the bench. Competent judges know that. Roberts knows that.

But just remember - those on both sides of the issue will get "action alerts" from both sides screaming that there is urgent action required (which only the giving of money can accomplish) on the cause of abortion.

Live a calmer life and save your money - ignore the activists on both sides. Especially if you live in a state that had abortion rights before Rowe. Nothing will be changing for you. Either way.

re: #178 HoosierHoops

One of the reasons I didn't upding to try to make it top post--it was a very personal thing you shared. Thanx. I was fortunate enough to be adopted before any memory of knowing anything other than the parents I was lucky to have.

It is awful to see how difficult it is for good people to adopt when anyone can have kids simply due to functioning plumbing.

re: #180 Cato the Elder

And not a talentless trashy ho...

Can I call Paris a ho and not have everyone come down on me?

re: #176 Decatur Deb

"Blogtrothed" sounds LOTR.

File under "alcohol induced neologisms" ;-)

Nite folks :)

re: #184 LudwigVanQuixote

And not a talentless trashy ho...

Can I call Paris a ho and not have everyone come down on me?

Facts are facts.

re: #112 Cato the Elder

Wanna bet?

You're kidding, right? My employer goes over the SPD with a fine-toothed comb, and can accept or reject certain items being covered as a way of managing cost. And we're with Cigna.

re: #173 LudwigVanQuixote

If she wasn't relentlessly promoted by Paris Hilton, I might have watched a video of hers before. Well managed talent, she looks like to me.
A little to metallic disco for my taste, but looks like she has the talent & drive to be a success.

re: #188 Floral Giraffe

Now, THERE'S a nice typo!
It's PEREZ Hilton, not Paris! Must be something deep in my psyche, going on! LOL!

re: #178 HoosierHoops

Please Don't it's embarrassing .
I was born by a young girl in Firebaugh, Ca. on a summer ranch and given away to numerous foster homes..I was really a bitter little kid..I hated everyone and everything...No one liked me and trust me..I hated everyone...
I was adopted by the most coolest family in Yountville up in Napa Valley..
It wasn't easy for them...They held me..and loved me and taught me about life. I owe them EVERYTHING...They need an upding not me...This topic is harder than you will ever know...
I'll tell you a story
When I was like 5..My mom sent me a letter...The people told me this was a letter from your real mom..I couldn't read it but I took a bottle of nail polish and smeared it across the letter trying to somehow make a connection to her...I made a mess everywhere..That lady beat the hell out of me...
I knew then I hated this world and I didn't understand this world.
I am the luckiest Man in the world..It could have gone really bad without love...

We're not trying to embarass you. We just want to express how wonderful it is for us to be connected, even over the Internet, to a miracle of love.

I am so glad you found a family. I am so grateful to your family, for the sacred thing they did, becoming yours.

Massive hug, 'kay?

re: #180 Cato the Elder

If I were going to lust after a country music woman it would have to be Michelle Branch.

This is the other recent country song I liked a lot.

re: #188 Floral Giraffe

She actually does have a voice that is really good. That surprised me. And honestly that video was sexy.

I don't see why some people think this is such a huge political coup for the Democrats. Even if there is abortion coverage in the RNC policy, you don't have to use it. And if a woman does decide to use the abortion, it's her choice. You know, like the pro-choice people do. Drinking and prostitution, in some areas, are legal in Nevada. If a Mormon or Baptist thinks those two activities are immoral, then don't do it. It's their pro-choice decision. I was raised Catholic, so I have a moral objection to abortion. But it is the law of the land now. I also don't want to pay for someone's elective procedures.

re: #193 caliphibian

because you know it's the same thing as getting a nose job?

Thank goodness no one will be arguing about whether breast implants should be covered, as Carrie Prejean has just reminded us that they are not mentioned in the Bible.

re: #195 zephirus

Huh?

re: #168 LudwigVanQuixote

Does 16 Horsepower count as country? Because they kick ass. :D

re: #195 zephirus

Thank goodness no one will be arguing about whether breast implants should be covered, as Carrie Prejean has just reminded us that they are not mentioned in the Bible.

Psalms 48:13. Mark ye well her bulwarks.

re: #30 iceweasel

Nah. Not horrible. Clever and punny.

re: #196 Floral Giraffe

Huh?

Carrie Prejean was a Miss California who became a darling of the Fundies for speaking out strongly against gay marriage and such. The first knock to her wholesome fundie image was her boob job, the second was racy pictures and the third was a sex tape.

re: #193 caliphibian

I don't see why some people think this is such a huge political coup for the Democrats. Even if there is abortion coverage in the RNC policy, you don't have to use it. And if a woman does decide to use the abortion, it's her choice. You know, like the pro-choice people do. Drinking and prostitution, in some areas, are legal in Nevada. If a Mormon or Baptist thinks those two activities are immoral, then don't do it. It's their pro-choice decision. I was raised Catholic, so I have a moral objection to abortion. But it is the law of the land now. I also don't want to pay for someone's elective procedures.

The 2008 Republican platform states:

We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment's protections apply to unborn children. We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion and will not fund organizations which
advocate it.

Let me translate for you--this party does not want me to have an abortion, and, in point of fact, supports altering the Constitution to prevent me from having one. Am I nuts to find it sort of interesting that they have no problem with the idea that the health coverage they provide their employees will pay, with RNC money, collected from Republicans and friends who support the language above, for an abortion? Is it nuts to see some sort of disconnect or hypocrisy at work here?

re: #184 LudwigVanQuixote

And not a talentless trashy ho...

Can I call Paris a ho and not have everyone come down on me?

Just as long as I can acknowledge the one fantastic project that Paris Hilton was involved in!

(also, did you catch the Carrie Prejean meltdown on Larry King? Must-see TV)

re: #196 Floral Giraffe

"You wrote that you don't regret getting breast implants. Have you ever wondered whether it might be incompatible with your Christian faith?

No, I don't think there's anything wrong with getting breast implants as a Christian. I think it's a personal decision. I don't see anywhere in the Bible where it says you shouldn't get breast implants."

[Link: www.christianitytoday.com...]

re: #200 LudwigVanQuixote

Carrie Prejean was a Miss California who became a darling of the Fundies for speaking out strongly against gay marriage and such. The first knock to her wholesome fundie image was her boob job, the second was racy pictures and the third was a sex tape.

You would think that their first clue that she might let them down would be that she was a pageant contestant in the first place, but there's a weird disconnect about tznius in the conservative Christian world that I don't fully understand.

However, the RNC takes no stand either for or against boob jobs, so I have no issue if they want to cover them for their employees.

re: #202 WindUpBird

Just as long as I can acknowledge the one fantastic project that Paris Hilton was involved in!

(also, did you catch the Carrie Prejean meltdown on Larry King? Must-see TV)

Dude, you have marvelously dark, twisted and counter culture tastes...

I knew I liked you!

re: #203 zephirus

"You wrote that you don't regret getting breast implants. Have you ever wondered whether it might be incompatible with your Christian faith?

No, I don't think there's anything wrong with getting breast implants as a Christian. I think it's a personal decision. I don't see anywhere in the Bible where it says you shouldn't get breast implants."

[Link: www.christianitytoday.com...]

Well, it doesn't, in fact, say anywhere in the Bible that you shouldn't have breast implants. So, well, I hope she wears them in good health.

re: #203 zephirus

re: #204 SanFranciscoZionist

re: #205 LudwigVanQuixote

Thank you all.
I don't follow some of this, UMMM media stuff...
LOL!

re: #194 LudwigVanQuixote

because you know it's the same thing as getting a nose job?

re: #196 Floral Giraffe
Not exactly. But it is the responsibility of the woman how she uses her body. I hear that all the time from the pro-choice women. And the government already has laws telling society how a woman can or can't use their bodies, like prostitution and statutary rape laws. But abortion is legal, I just don't want to pay for someone's.

re: #205 LudwigVanQuixote

Dude, you have marvelously dark, twisted and counter culture tastes...

I knew I liked you!

I blame my suburban upbringing!

re: #209 WindUpBird

I blame my suburban upbringing!

Me too. You suburban people are kind of creepy.

re: #202 WindUpBird

Who knew Vincent Gardenia could sing?

re: #198 Decatur Deb

Psalms 48:13. Mark ye well her bulwarks.

Ok, I had to look that up:
[Middle English bulwerk, from Middle Dutch bolwerk, from Middle High German bolwerc : bole, plank; see bhel-2 in Indo-European roots + werc, work (from Old High German; see werg- in Indo-European roots).]
Synonyms: bulwark, barricade, breastwork, earthwork, rampart, bastion, parapet

So you were referring to the "breastwork" synonym.

I bow to you.

re: #147 HoosierHoops

HAH!
And, HAH! Again!
May I just devolve to my lowest childhood epithet?

NEENER!

You're a really good guy & I am proud to call you my friend.
(Even if it's just over the intertubes!)

re: #212 zephirus

(snip)

So you were referring to the "breastwork" synonym.

I bow to you.

Grazie

re: #203 zephirus

I really don't care for Christianity or what its adherents think in regard to social issues, but based on that link you provided, I read this,

No one's perfect. You're not perfect, I'm not perfect. Everyone's made mistakes. So if people want to judge me and say that I'm not a good person because of something I did when I was young, that's their problem. But what really matters is who I am now.

and I must admit, I very much agree with Ms Prejean.

Link.

re: #206 SanFranciscoZionist

Stem cell research, credit default swaps and driving while texting are also not mentioned in the Bible.

re: #210 SanFranciscoZionist

Me too. You suburban people are kind of creepy.

I'm not there anymore, thankfully. I had to move a whole state away to escape the Dazed-And-Confused-esque experience of walking into a late night diner years after graduating high school and finding half my senior class there. I'm in Portland now, I appreciate living in a city, and not having to drive for an hour to see a concert.

The GOPs health insurance policy has been in effect since 1991 and NOW they are taking steps to correct it? I don't remember the GOP being pro-choice during any part of the 90s. Hypocrisy, irony, laziness, opportunism, etc etc.

re: #203 zephirus

"You wrote that you don't regret getting breast implants. Have you ever wondered whether it might be incompatible with your Christian faith?

No, I don't think there's anything wrong with getting breast implants as a Christian. I think it's a personal decision. I don't see anywhere in the Bible where it says you shouldn't get breast implants."

[Link: www.christianitytoday.com...]

Reading the comments so far, looks like she's lost the support of her fellow Christians.

re: #48 LudwigVanQuixote

And that is fair. However, the statistics on people who want to adopt do not come anywhere close to the number of pregnancies aborted.

When I see wealthy people from the GOP lining up to adopt two or three children, and voting to spend huge amounts of money on caring for wards of the state, giving them education, shelter and healthcare, I will be more inclined to see that as a viable option in general.

LVQ - we had people lined up to adopt our daughter's baby. At least 12 couples. And I'm sure they weren't all wealthy GOP'ers (I'm not quite certain why you would suggest leaving Dems out of this process!)

re: #201 SanFranciscoZionist

For all the posturing a human life amendment will go nowhere. It has gone nowhere. There are very few states that would ratify it.

Being a national politician and making sweeping statements about banning abortion is safe. Safe for pro-life pols. Safe for pro-choice pols. It is safe because nothing is going to change from this point forward. It is silly for the GOP to have embraced the anti-abortion plank precisely because it can go nowhere and is now used by ideologues as a litmus test for candidates. And in places like California that means few viable candidates and an unbalanced political ecosystem that has the state legislature and executive stacked to the rafters with ideological Democrats.

re: #201 SanFranciscoZionist

re: #201 SanFranciscoZionist

The 2008 Republican platform states:

We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment's protections apply to unborn children. We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion and will not fund organizations which
advocate it.

Let me translate for you--this party does not want me to have an abortion, and, in point of fact, supports altering the Constitution to prevent me from having one. Am I nuts to find it sort of interesting that they have no problem with the idea that the health coverage they provide their employees will pay, with RNC money, collected from Republicans and friends who support the language above, for an abortion? Is it nuts to see some sort of disconnect or hypocrisy at work here?

That is their wish list. That is their moral stand. I don't think the laws legalizing abortion will ever be overturned, maybe restricted for things like late term abortions. Not all Republicans are against abortion. Not all Democrats are commie/pinko/socialists. An abortion is the end result of how a woman used her body 9 months before.

re: #215 eclectic infidel

No one's perfect. You're not perfect, I'm not perfect. Everyone's made mistakes.

I recently learned that I am perfect.

It made me blush. Which, I suppose, is the reaction you'd expect from a perfect person.

/

re: #224 ajax52

AJAX52

Registered since: Oct 18, 2009 at 4:07 pm
No. of comments posted: 1
No. of links posted: 0

Amazing compression of a ton of bad logic in one short sentence.

re: #13 Gus 802

"We are taking steps to address the issue." (whatever it costs us, and we will pay the difference since 1991, whatever it costs, if pigs can fly)

re: #220 reine.de.tout

I certainly do not wish to offend by discussing an obviously emotional topic. However, I have been give to understand that yes, there is quite a lot of demand for a healthy newborn baby from a middle class background.

There is in general a different story.

re: #146 EastSider

Has any state ever had a public referendum (i.e. gay marriage initiatives in CA and ME recently) to determine the legality of abortion? My view is that its historically been argued in the courts, and to a lesser extent the legislatures.

South Dakota, in 2006 (they wanted a law that would serve as a test case after Roberts and Alito were added to the court; they hoped to get Roe v. Wade overturned).

Even in reddest of the red South Dakota, when put to the voters the abortion ban failed.

Conservatives will talk long and loud about how much they want abortion outlawed, and that's what they'll tell pollsters face to face (or even on the phone)... but in the privacy of the voting booth, not so much.

re: #224 ajax52

I believe in Darwin; genes and breeding count, therefore abortion=one less liberal to worry about.

Possibly you already regret that dumbass comment, but if not you should realize that what you propose is selective breeding, not evolution, which is what the ID proponents sell, in the final analysis.

re: #229 LudwigVanQuixote

I certainly do not wish to offend by discussing an obviously emotional topic. However, I have been give to understand that yes, there is quite a lot of demand for a healthy newborn baby from a middle class background.

There is in general a different story.

No offense.
Yes, there is a different story altogether for children with disabilities or other issues.

I worked with a woman who took into her house two at-risk teen girls, as foster children. She was making plans to adopt the one she had had longer (since age 8 or so) but for some reason I don't recall it didn't work out - the biological mother became more responsible or something. This woman was not wealthy by any stretch of the imagination (nor a Republican!). I always felt she has a special place in heaven for her willingness to take these girls in.

re: #232 reine.de.tout

One of my daughters works monitoring, and more, children under state supervision. Most in foster care, some with other relatives. I have yet to hear a heart warming story. I have some concern that my daughter will absorb the worst parts of it, but so far it seems she is getting stronger, and wiser.

re: #136 Cato the Elder

Nonsense. You plainly know nothing factual about European health care.

I recommend you get a passport and find out about the great big world outside the murky propaganda walls of America. Or just ask Jimmah.

This document gives a pretty good overview of different health systems, including the role of insurance.

[Link: www.commonwealthfund.org...]

People in countries with "universal coverage" do often buy private insurance to cover procedures or medicines that are either not covered, or rationed by waiting times, so you could argue they do pay twice over.

On the flip side though, in the US people with private insurance still pay through their taxes for programmes like Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, VA health, Tricare, the health benefits of government employees etc, so they pay twice as well. Per capita people in the US pay much more for their healthcare than those in comparable countries.

[Link: dll.umaine.edu...]

This has probably already been covered, but the huge majority of plans cover elective abortion BECAUSE IT'S A MONEY MAKER.

Care for a pregnant woman and her newborn over the period of two years cost a WHOLE lot more to the insurance company than the one time cost of an abortion.

Depending on your ideology, the unborn child brings more to society's table as a person than the elimination of that unborn child through abortion.

re: #13 Gus 802

"We are taking steps to address the issue."

Bet that will go over well. They're going to re-write their contract with Cigna to reflect a puritan's view.

Might as well cut off contraception, elective plastic surgery, sexual enhancement drugs, and so on.

And no coverage for in vitro fertilization?

I'd be pretty confident that elective plastic surgery isn't covered. To go full Puritan, you'd have to drop coverage for emergency/accident-related plastic surgery. Disfigurement from injury shouldn't be repaired because you are countering an act of God and all.

/oy

I sat through a sermon in a Catholic church where an aged priest tried to link end of life suffering to Christ's passion...blah, blah, blah...suffering lets us truly appreciate that sacrifice, etc. I've been suspicious since then that the Catholic opposition to places like Dignitas has little to do with being "pro-life."

re: #93 Spare O'Lake

No, I would just like to see enough females encouraged to choose to give birth to enough babies to fulfill the outstanding demand for adoptions. Wouldn't that be a win-win?

"encouraging" females to go through a miserable experience to satisfy other people's desire to get a baby?

are you kidding?

Every pro-life Republican should immediately: 1) if a male, pledge never to insist that a woman carrying his unborn child have an abortion (actually, they should not have sex outside of wedlock, right?); and 2) if a woman, never have an abortion. If they violate the pledge, they will immediately donate all of their wealth to charity and admit to being hypocrites on tv.