Page 2 of 23 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 228
  1. #11
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    RDU NC
    Posts
    2,930

    Default

    It wouldnt be free, it just wouldnt be from taxed earnings. Furthermore, this prevents women from using an HSA account for cases when its known that the baby will not survive (Trisomy 18?). I understand the pro-life perspective, but in cases where the baby is not going to survive, I dont understand wanting to put a mother through the torment of carrying that pregnancy to term.

    ETA: I would also like to point that there are women on this board who have had that experience, of an unviable pregnancy, and its a bit of a slap in the face to term that they just thought the baby was an "inconvenience." Maybe try to keep the cheering to a level thats a little more cognizant of others. I am quite sure we can all express our opinions without slamming others.
    Last edited by WolfpackMom; 03-31-2011 at 12:48 PM.
    DS 1/10 "boo-boo"

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    .
    Posts
    4,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JBaxter View Post
    or maybe their conscience is getting the better of them. One room a woman fights to keep a baby from miscarriage the next it is an inconvenience it has got to play on their minds
    Can we keep this thread about this specific legislation, whether you support or oppose it, and not turn the discussion into how some people think that abortion is just for those women who think of babies as inconvenient? I highly respect BBB posters and find that despite our differences, we usually can agree to disagree.

    Thank you.

  3. #13
    MissyAg94 is offline Platinum level (1000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,018

    Default

    "We're just trying to have a very clear line of demarcation on where our taxpayer funds may be used for abortion," said Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., the Ways and Means Committee chairman. "It's really using the tax code and taxpayer dollars to assist with the procurement of abortion, and we're going to make sure that doesn't happen."
    From the NPR article.

  4. #14
    MissyAg94 is offline Platinum level (1000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,018

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smiles33 View Post
    Can we keep this thread about this specific legislation, whether you support or oppose it, and not turn the discussion into how some people think that abortion is just for those women who think of babies as inconvenient? I highly respect BBB posters and find that despite our differences, we usually can agree to disagree.

    Thank you.
    She wasn't the one who turned the discussion from the original post. She was replying to your previous post that turned the discussion.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    .
    Posts
    4,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MissyAg94 View Post
    She wasn't the one who turned the discussion from the original post. She was replying to your previous post that turned the discussion.
    My response wasn't intended to start a discussion about the propriety or need for abortions. I was responding to the fact that this legislation will contribute to further limiting access to abortions. If others feel like I opened the door to her reply/observation that women who seek abortions are doing so out of inconvenience, then I apologize.

  6. #16
    AshleyAnn is offline Sapphire level (2000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,282

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mommylamb View Post
    It's just a bunch of grandstanding to appease the anti-choicers. I mean honestly, what woman thinks to herself in December, "gee, it's time to decide how much money to put in my health savings account for next year. Let's assume I'm going to have an unwanted pregnancy that I'll need to terminate. Now how much should I put into that account?" Or I can just see it now, "Gee it's the end of the year and I still have $300 in my account. Well, since I can't use it for tylenol anymore, why don't I just get pregnant and have an abortion!" The whole thing is absurd.
    True. I certianly did not think a year ago that I would ever need an abortion. I assure you the other women in that clinic did not expect to be sitting there that day. But we were all there and I can assure you no one was saying "Oh yeah, I knew I was going to get pregnant but I didn't really care cuz I have money in my HSA set aside for abortions." Abortion is scary and painful. No one WANTS to have an abortion.

    My state is working on a bill to require women who want abortions to be covered by thier health insurance be required to pay a seperate premieum just for abortions. I don't really want my employer to know if I would consider ending a pregnancy or not or if I would consider it for my teen daughter.

  7. #17
    ha98ed14 is offline Diamond level (5000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Between the Ocean and the Desert
    Posts
    7,239

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mommylamb View Post
    It's just a bunch of grandstanding to appease the anti-choicers. I mean honestly, what woman thinks to herself in December, "gee, it's time to decide how much money to put in my health savings account for next year. Let's assume I'm going to have an unwanted pregnancy that I'll need to terminate. Now how much should I put into that account?" Or I can just see it now, "Gee it's the end of the year and I still have $300 in my account. Well, since I can't use it for tylenol anymore, why don't I just get pregnant and have an abortion!" The whole thing is absurd.
    This is awesome! THANK YOU for putting it in perspective; I was sitting here with steam coming out of my ears and now I realize how stupid it is!

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    9,979

    Default

    I don't understand why people believe it will make it harder for women to be able to get an abortion just because she can't pay for it with tax free dollars? Yes, it will cost a bit more, but that's it.
    Mama to "The Fantastic Four":
    DS 02
    DD 06
    DS 09
    DD 12

  9. #19
    JBaxter's Avatar
    JBaxter is offline Pink Diamond level (15,000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    16,058

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WolfpackMom View Post
    It wouldnt be free, it just wouldnt be from taxed earnings. Furthermore, this prevents women from using an HSA account for cases when its known that the baby will not survive (Trisomy 18?). I understand the pro-life perspective, but in cases where the baby is not going to survive, I dont understand wanting to put a mother through the torment of carrying that pregnancy to term.

    ETA: I would also like to point that there are women on this board who have had that experience, of an unviable pregnancy, and its a bit of a slap in the face to term that they just thought the baby was an "inconvenience." Maybe try to keep the cheering to a level thats a little more cognizant of others. I am quite sure we can all express our opinions without slamming others.
    OT but Im responding to your statement about Trisomy 18 babies not surviving. They can and do survive birth. Not all parents choose to abort them. They choose to allow happen what what happens. Its a horrible situation to know you are carrying a child that may not survive birth or its first year but is it less terrible than aborting it before giving it a chance?

    THIS IS ONLY in response to you stating a Trisomy 18 baby will not live.
    Jeana, Momma to 4 fantastic sons

    Everything happens for a reason, sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions

  10. #20
    BayGirl2 is offline Emerald level (3000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    3,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JBaxter View Post
    or maybe their conscience is getting the better of them. One room a woman fights to keep a baby from miscarriage the next it is an inconvenience it has got to play on their minds
    Sorry, but I kind of find that statement offensive too, and not on topic for this discussion about the legislation. Its possible to have experienced the pain of a miscarriage and still respect the choice for an abortion, or even make that choice given different circumstances.

    I do agree that few people are setting up HSA's with the intent of needing an abortion, so this is not particularly effective policy making. The money in an HSA is your income, just like the money in your 401k. If the government were to say you can't withdraw 401k money at retirement to do something controversial, that would be ridiculous. Regardless of your stance on abortion, it is a medical procedure, which is the point of having an HSA.
    Amy

    DS - June 2009
    DD - September 2011

Page 2 of 23 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •