I was just reading the House Bill (HR 3962). It explicitly prohibits including abortion services as a mandatory component in defining which plans do or do not qualify as meeting minimum standards for coverage. It prohibits any form of discrimination against coverage plans based on whether or not they provide for abortion coverage. It prohibits any plan from discriminating among providers based n whether or not tey provide abortion services. It explicitly states that no provision of the bill shall be construed to modify or require modification of any Federal or state laws governing abortion services or reimbursement of abortion services. Finally, it states that, to the extent that a plan provides coverage for abortion services that are not eligible for coverage by Federal funds that the cost of that component of coverage will be excluded in calculating any applicable Federal subsidies. Based on this, I do not understand the basis for the OP's claim that the House plan requires coverage for abortion services.
Might we go even one step further,,,which would make most men murderers.:)Quote:
What about birth control pills? Are they the moral equivalent of murder
When will you and the rest of the libs recognize the healthcare bill, IN ANY FORM... has nothing to do with healthcare.... IT'S ALL ABOUT CONTROL!!!! Just like the global warming bill...the "help the union thugs take charge again bill"...and any number of other Democrat led bills being rapidly shoved down the throats of the American sheeple...before they understand what the hell they've stepped into, and what they've allowed to happen to this country.
Well, I don't know about those that are against abortions and those that advocate for more abortions statistically being for or against executing convicted killers.
But, is there a plausible argument that can be made why a "convicted killer" hasn’t forfeited his right to life?