The Reprehensible Right: Texas ‘Abortion Insurance’

[C_Clayton_Jones]

‘House Bill 214 requires women to pay an additional insurance premium if they want their health plan to cover abortions performed outside of medical emergencies. It does not contain exceptions for instances of fetal abnormalities, rape or incest.
[…]
“Women don’t plan to be raped. Parents don’t plan for their children to be victims of incest,” [state Rep. Chris Turner] said. “Asking a woman or a parent to foresee something like that and buy supplemental insurance to cover that horrific possibility is not only ridiculous, it is cruel.”’

Texas House passes bill restricting insurance coverage of abortion

That sums up most on the reprehensible right: ridiculous and cruel.

So much for ‘small government’ Republicans – this is further proof of the authoritarianism sanctioned by conservative dogma.

 

[Borillar]

They have government so small, it fits into a woman's uterus.

 

[emilynghiem]

‘House Bill 214 requires women to pay an additional insurance premium if they want their health plan to cover abortions performed outside of medical emergencies. It does not contain exceptions for instances of fetal abnormalities, rape or incest.
[…]
“Women don’t plan to be raped. Parents don’t plan for their children to be victims of incest,” [state Rep. Chris Turner] said. “Asking a woman or a parent to foresee something like that and buy supplemental insurance to cover that horrific possibility is not only ridiculous, it is cruel.”’

Texas House passes bill restricting insurance coverage of abortion

That sums up most on the reprehensible right: ridiculous and cruel.

So much for ‘small government’ Republicans – this is further proof of the authoritarianism sanctioned by conservative dogma.

C_Clayton_Jones
Perhaps We the People should have insurance that protects us from bad govt.
Any garbage that politicians pass, playing football with our rights for points in the media,
that either
* violates our equal Constitutional rights to freedom and protection of the laws
* costs us more money than we agree to pay (which is either contested
as "taxation without representation" or "involuntary servitude" or
"depriving citizens of liberty without due process of law"
* establishes a bias either for or against a Political Belief
so as to disparage equal rights and beliefs of opponents
who cannot be forced to comply or change their beliefs by govt
* creates a wasteful tax burden, collective punishment, or other negative or unintended
consequence in violation of the Code of Ethics for Govt Service
can be claimed against so taxpayers refuse to pay the cost of such abuse.

The insurance companies and lawyers can go after the wrongdoers
and either prove they were deliberate or negligent in violating
Constitutional rights, beliefs, principles, due process, equal protection of
laws, including right to petition to redress grievances and right to
be defended from discrimination by creed.

We should have protection from both paying the costs of
incarceration, prosecution and debts/damages from crimes
of individuals, as well as corruption and violations by govt,
corporations, and other collective entities whether business, profit
or nonprofit, religious, political govt or non govt, etc.

And charge claims back to the parties incurring costs
of contested abusive unlawful unethical or unconstitutional actions.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Do you plan on having a car accident? Do you count on your house burning down? You are insured for both.

Abortion insurance makes sense.

 

[Silent Warrior]

So you're apparently asking for rape victims to pay out of pocket for their abortion. That sounds more reprehensible to me.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

So you're apparently asking for rape victims to pay out of pocket for their abortion. That sounds more reprehensible to me.

All abortions are the result of rape?

 

[Silent Warrior]

So you're apparently asking for rape victims to pay out of pocket for their abortion. That sounds more reprehensible to me.

All abortions are the result of rape?

Nope, just making a point. Abortion insurance makes sense..

 

[EverCurious]

Meh if someone is anti-abortion, because they see it as murder, is it really moral to make them pay for it? I think that's not right personally - and I'm actually pro-choice.

Of course I think insurance is a complete waste anyway, much cheaper to pay your doctor visits out of pocket and keep cash, or an unused credit card, available for emergencies...

 

[Conservative65]

‘House Bill 214 requires women to pay an additional insurance premium if they want their health plan to cover abortions performed outside of medical emergencies. It does not contain exceptions for instances of fetal abnormalities, rape or incest.
[…]
“Women don’t plan to be raped. Parents don’t plan for their children to be victims of incest,” [state Rep. Chris Turner] said. “Asking a woman or a parent to foresee something like that and buy supplemental insurance to cover that horrific possibility is not only ridiculous, it is cruel.”’

Texas House passes bill restricting insurance coverage of abortion

That sums up most on the reprehensible right: ridiculous and cruel.

So much for ‘small government’ Republicans – this is further proof of the authoritarianism sanctioned by conservative dogma.

So having those that could CHOOSE to include a provision in their policy pay more for it is wrong?

It's not cruel to expect those making a choice to have an abortion to pay more for the costs. Should those of us that will never have one pay higher premiums to cover it?

 

[Conservative65]

So you're apparently asking for rape victims to pay out of pocket for their abortion. That sounds more reprehensible to me.

All abortions are the result of rape?

Those that argue from the rape or incest standpoint try to make it out that those situations are the rule and not liking the results of spreading your legs is the exception.

 

[Fang]

I agree with abortions not being covered under insurance with the exception of fetal abnormalities, rape or incest. If it's not one of the exceptions, then by all means the woman (and hopefully the guy that stuck his package in her) should pay for it.

 

[WorldWatcher]

>


Since boners are voluntary (after the age of puberty) does Texas plan on making men have "Boner Insurance" for their choice to cover Viagra and Cialis?


>>>>

 

[Conservative65]

Do you plan on having a car accident? Do you count on your house burning down? You are insured for both.

Abortion insurance makes sense.

There's one fault in your logic. Can you figure it out?

 

[emilynghiem]

So you're apparently asking for rape victims to pay out of pocket for their abortion. That sounds more reprehensible to me.

All abortions are the result of rape?

We could define "relationship abuse" or "sexual abuse" as INCLUDING any act of sex that results in unwanted intercourse, unwanted pregnancy, unwanted children or unwanted abortion. If abuse was the responsibilities of both parties in a relationship to address through professional counseling, that would treat both parties equally responsible for the choice to have sex, instead of just targeting the women after pregnancy occurs.