I read the following article on Pro-Life Blogs earlier this weekend, and haven’t been able to stop thinking about it since then. At the surface level, I’ve opposed the coverage of abortion in health care reform because I don’t believe that abortion is a healthcare procedure, and obviously, I don’t believe that the abortion attempt meant to end my life all those years ago was a healthcare procedure-it was an abortion, pure and simple, an attempt to end my life.
The more that I think about the looming health care reform, the more fired up I get about it. Not only do I oppose the coverage of abortion in the health care package because it is preposterous to me that we, as taxpayers, should pay for the murder of innocent children just like me each year, but I also oppose it because it is just another example of policy makers attempting to fund something that is a means to an ends, not a means at addressing the underlying issues and problems that face the women, men, children, families, and communities in the U.S. each and every day.
Instead of creating and supporting legislation that hurts your constituents, I challenge you, legislators, to create and support legislation that supports expectant and current parents. Affordable, accessible health care for families; affordable, safe childcare; sick leave; expanded maternity and paternity leave; a living wage; housing assistance; my list could go on and on. These are the true areas of American life that need to be addressed through funding and legislation, not abortion.
With a 60 to 39 vote, the Senate approved floor debate on legislation that represents an unprecedented expansion of federally-funded abortion as part of the government takeover of health care. Updated: Obama is gratified.
The Family Research Council explains,
Among the several objectionable items included in this bill; like the public option, employer and individual mandates, is the government funding for elective abortion, which is the most onerous and morally objectionable. Additionally the bill provides subsidies for private plans that cover elective abortion. The “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services to include elective abortion in the public option and subsidize health plans in the government run exchange that cover elective abortion.
Our friends at Americans United for Life are on top of issue and reacted quickly:
“This was a pro-abortion vote tonight because this bill provides for an unprecedented expansion of federally-funded abortion. Supporters argued that the debate needed to move forward – but life should be at the heart of any health care reform. There was no more important time for legislators to show their support for life than by leveraging their power now to demand that any health care reform bill genuinely respects life. What is health care about if it is not for preserving and protecting human life? Tonight the Senate failed to do just that. This legislation moves us toward redefining abortion as health care which is the ultimate objective of the abortion lobby led by Planned Parenthood. The flawed provisions in Reid’s anti-life bill provide for federal funding for abortion, fail to protect medical providers who object to performing procedures that violate their conscience, and fail to prohibit federal funding of assisted suicide.
But wat happened to our pro-life Democrats (Soconvivium)?:
With the cooperation of ostensible pro-lifers Ben Nelson (D., Neb.) and Robert Casey Jr. (D, Penn.) the motion to bring the health care reform debate to the Senate floor was passed 60-39. They had the chance to defeat a bill that will expand abortion, but didn’t.
The Susan B. Anthony List adds:
In response to this evening’s advancement of the Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act in the U.S. Senate, Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser offered the following statement:”It’s gravely disappointing that pro-life Democrats in the Senate failed to show the same courage and conviction shown by their counterparts in the House of Representatives.
“Senators should consider themselves on notice: America is still waiting for you to strike government funded abortion from this legislation. Votes have consequences, and if this health care bill makes it to conference committee without an authentic abortion exclusion, Senators Casey, Landrieu, Lincoln, Nelson and Reid will be held especially accountable.
“Their first opportunity to defend Life was on the motion to proceed. Their last chance will be on the final cloture vote to end debate. A vote to close debate without the addition of strong pro-life language will be a vote for government-funded abortion. That would be the ultimate betrayal of pro-life constituents and even self-described pro-choice Americans who oppose government-funded abortion.
The National Right to Life reacted strongly:
Obama and Reid wanted debate – so now they’ll get debate, on their cloaked provisions that would cover abortion on demand in proposed new government-run and government-subsidized insurance plans.
Obama and Reid are seeking to block enactment of the bipartisan Stupak-Pitts compromise, adopted by the U.S. House of Representatives on November 7 by a vote of 240-194. This amendment would prevent government funding of elective abortion through the proposed “public option,” and would also prevent federal subsidies from paying for private insurance plans that cover elective abortion.
During the weeks ahead, National Right to Life will continue to fight the efforts of President Obama and congressional Democratic leaders to cover abortion on demand in two huge new federal health programs. The Senate bill faces additional 60-vote hurdles in the future. Moreover, a courageous group of pro-life Democrats in the House of Representatives will oppose final approval of health care legislation if the Stupak-Pitts Amendment is gutted or removed.
And so will we …Forcing Americans to buy government approved health care insurance is arguably unconstitutional. Forcing Americans to fund abortion within the government plan is without question unconscionable. – Tony Perkins