DISQUS

Grrrowler · 1 month ago

I'm still trying to figure out what logic these Congress vermin use to justify saying that government money (and government money is really citizen money) can't be used to fund something that is perfectly legal.

fairminded3 · 1 month ago

Thank you John!! I don't know why this hypocrisy continues to astound me but it does... Republicans and Joe Leiberman continue to lie with impunity. IF the MSM notes the lies one time, the lie is continued 100 times without contest.
I will be writing more letters!

stldem · 1 month ago

This is a great idea!

nancy50 · 1 month ago

RU-486 is distributed by Danco Labs in the states. According to opensecrets , Phil Hare D-Il received $1000 from an employee of Danco Solutions, which may or may not be the same company. However, Hare voted against the Stupak ammendment.

I think we would have to have a list of insurance cos that cover abortion and then check opensecrets to see if they contributed to certain congressmen. It will be time consuming, unless someone knows of a better site than opensecrets.

scottinsf · 1 month ago

Where the hell has NARAL been hiding this entire time? I swear they've gotten as bad as the Human Rights Campaign. They're apparently more concerned with rubbing elbows at cocktail parties and endorsing republicans/DINOs than actually lobbying for the groups they claim to represent.

avahome · 1 month ago

I didn't know insurance companies pay for abortions. I have an Aetna Plan and they do not even pay for birth control....nor for erectile dysfunction medicine.

I do expect the Indian Nation to come to the aid of American women and open affordable abortion clinics on the Res.

micbro · 1 month ago

The "morning after pill" interrupts development of the fetus. The interruption occurs at a very early stage, before the fetus has developed nerve endings, brain cells etc. I wonder how you can put this in the same category as a fetus which has developed within a month or two of maturity. It is the lack of human compassion in the cases of abortion in long-term pregnancies that the reasonable person should consider. These babies can actually feel the knives cutting through them, and the suction devices ripping away body parts. Of course they can't comprehend what is taking place, and because of that, I guess it's ok. In the few cases where this abortion might be necessary to save the mother's life, or in cases of rape/incest, then I can agree that it is the adult's choice. But, give me a break....if you get pregnant and don't want the baby, take care of business early.

micbro · 1 month ago

"Of course they can't comprehend what is taking place, and because of that, I guess it's ok."

This was sarcasm, for you that will try to put what I said in a different light.

GrrrlRomeo · 1 month ago

No, the fetus does not feel pain. The nerve cells react to stimuli. A fetus isn't cognizant of pain in the same exact way a flower or tree isn't. Plants have complex reactions to stimuli, but it doesn't mean plants "feel".

What is a woman who is diagnosed with cancer while she is pregnant supposed to do? Chemotherapy kills a fetus. Do you want her to believe that in order for her to live she has to essentially "torture" her "unborn baby"? Or do we take the rational and compassionate route and tell her that the fetus can't actually feel anything?

There is no such thing as an unborn baby. It's either a fetus or a baby. It can't be both at the same time, or one or the other some of the time in special circumstances.

micbro · 1 month ago

I disagree with an assumption that a fetus cannot feel pain. I believe that it should be measured by the ability of the fetus to feel pain. This ability to feel pain is more directly linked to the formation of nerve and brain cells. When you say "cognizant', are you referring to the recognition and understanding of pain, or the feeling of pain. Your example says that there is no such thing as an unborn baby. If we agree, we are assuming that a baby of 8 months or longer cannot feel pain. That is incorrect in my opinion. If that is the case, if they are not "born", they have no ability to feel pain. This is not true. Nerve cells and brain cells decide that for us. There isn't a medical dispute over this.

As for the woman with cancer, I believe that the mother should have the right to decide what to do. Now, if, as the mother's attending physician, you decide to tell her that the fetus will not suffer from treatment, then you have told her that and she should use this information to make her decision. I believe that the mother has the right to decide in that hypothetical situation.

I disagree with abortion in the act of delaying a decision to the point that you may be injuring another person. You cannot hurt someone else (in my opinion) until that person has the ability to feel the hurt. At any point into the third trimester, I believe that we may be hurting someone. Not because the person being hurt understands what is taking place, but just because that person has developed enough to feel pain.

GrrrlRomeo · 1 month ago

By "cognizant" I am referring to having a brain that has developed enough that it can "process" pain.

If you "believe" a brainstem is all it takes to feel pain then you're going to have to tell all the families that take a loved one who has been declared brain dead off a machine (or leaves them on for that matter) that they're in pain the entire time.

You have more compassion for a fetus that can't even process emotion than a real live human being that can.

"Now, if, as the mother's attending physician, you decide to tell her that the fetus will not suffer from treatment, then you have told her that and she should use this information to make her decision."

Do you seriously think that any woman has been shielded from all the anti-abortion propaganda? They're whole mission is based on trying to make any woman who needs to have an abortion hate herself as much as possible.

GrrrlRomeo · 1 month ago

Furthermore, if you disagree with my assumption then I suppose every person that has ever been sedated for surgery is lying when they say they didn't feel pain during the surgery.

If you're still in doubt an analgesic should ease your worry about whether a fetus that has yet to achieve consciousness can feel pain even while a temporarily unconscious adult human being does not.

Perhaps the Aleve I took an hour ago which blocked my headache was merely an illusion.

micbro · 1 month ago

Those who have been sedated agreed to the sedation because they understood the risks. Most likely for an elective procedure.

But to the point, a fetus does not have this choice, and if you choose to chop this fetus in the later period of development, then you are on your own and I choose to walk away from you. I have a right to my opinion and you do as well.

Now, take your Aleve and shove it up your ass.

GrrrlRomeo · 1 month ago

A fetus can't choose to be sedated anymore than a tree can. It is not conscious and it has never been conscious. That isn't opinion, that is a fact.

What makes a human being a living human being is being self-aware. I have seen a loved one brain dead and it wasn't my loved one. It was nothing more than a body, cells & tissue on a machine.

Go save a lobster from a pot of boiling water, because I assure you it's feeling more pain and having deeper thoughts than a fetus can.

micbro · 1 month ago

I shouldn't have been rude in my previous comment. I apologize. We have different views on this and that's ok. I can respect your opinion as I disagree.

scioto · 1 month ago

A rape/incest fetus would "feel pain" just the same as any other fetus.

If the argument is that a fetus, no matter how young, is a "person", I don't understand why it would be okay to abort it. You wouldn't think it was okay to kill a one year old baby if it was revealed that its father was also its grandfather.

I'm not arguing that the decision about an unwanted pregnancy should be made by the government instead of the woman. I just don't understand how if you believe a fetus is a life, why it should make a difference how it was conceived.

micbro · 1 month ago

Great point.

jenawesome · 1 month ago

that is not at all how the morning after pill works. the morning after pill prevents ovulation thereby preventing an egg from being fertilized. in order for there to be a "fetus" there needs to first be a fertilized egg. perhaps you are thinking of the abortion pill which is separate and distinct from the morning after pill.

Bob · 1 month ago

Many corporations give money to organizations like Planned Parenthood. One anti-abortion group posted a list of such corporations at: http://www.cogforlife.org/ppsupporters.htm

I always wondered how people who demand that the government should ban abortion have no moral qualms giving or taking from organizations that fund abortion. Perhaps this could help in your research.

devis1 · 1 month ago

"But it just may be true."

If I had any money I'd wager heavily on it.

scioto · 1 month ago

The right-wing thanks you for using their marketing term "pro-life" to describe those who are anti-choice.

Now if you could just start helping them a little more by using "special rights" when talking about ENDA, DOMA, etc.

polyblog · 1 month ago

I used to faithfully give money to NARAL and NOW; but I don't anymore. I can't remember the last time they truly protected my rights. They act just like the Democrats do: what choice do you have (irony?).

David · 1 month ago

This is a stupid argument.
If I'm at war and my enemy gives our side money to
buy supplies to fight them, am I going to refuse the
money. No.
To me it's stupid of these companies. But if you want to contribute
to end abortion then right on.
What about all the experiments the Japanese did on prisoners which
help medical research. The Americans took all this research and benefited greatly from it. I don't see any of you refusing medical help
based on this research.

Tori2 · 1 month ago

im not sure if i fully disagree with what this bill passes, i mean why should be goverment fund insurance covering abortion? The potentional mother is the one who chooses whether to end this potenial life. I think in cases where a woman has become pregnent becuase of rape or insest, or when the mother will be harmed then the funding for abortion is ok. but if a woman is choosing to have an abortion through her own convienience then why should the governemnt fund the insurance?

Judith · 1 month ago

Isn't anyone who pays medical insurance premiums helping to fund abortions?