Page 3 of 23 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 228
  1. #21
    MissyAg94 is offline Platinum level (1000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,018

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by daisymommy View Post
    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.
    The NPR article title used the limiting abortion language. The supporter of the bill quoted in the article did not.

    "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."

  2. #22
    mommylamb's Avatar
    mommylamb is offline Red Diamond level (10,000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    DC Metro Area
    Posts
    10,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AshleyAnn View Post
    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.
    . You are absolutely right. No one wants to have an abortion. I'm assuming this thread could get heated, so you might want to keep it shut so that it doesn't hurt you when people say mean things. While I've never had to terminate a pregnancy, I might keep it shut too just because I shouldn't let this sort of thing raise my blood pressure.

    The health care reform bill required something similar to what's going on in your state. Insurance plans that participate on the health exchanges and offer abortions would have to collect a separate premium for that particular procedure. The reason being that some of the people purchasing health insurance on the exchanges would also be the same people who receive a subsidy from the government to help them cover their health care costs. Therefore the subsidy would go towards assisting with the primary premium and the abortion premium would be out of pocket. It's a lot of extra red tape, and the anti-choicers really want it there in order to encourage private health plans to just not offer coverage for abortion because it's easier to not bother with a separate premium.

    See, they think the government should stay out of the private sector... except when they want the government to be involved in the private sector. Consistency is not a strong point.

  3. #23
    jenfromnj is offline Sapphire level (2000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Northern NJ
    Posts
    2,549

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by daisymommy View Post
    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.
    I think it's more just an attempt to make a statement that "their" tax dollars will not be used in any way to support those particular women (those using their FSAs, in this case) who, for whatever reason, terminate their pregnancies. Although, I am a bit concerned that this is the "baby steps" approach to attempt to reach a scary destination.

  4. #24
    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 BayGirl2 View Post
    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.
    that statement was in response to the statement that the reason it was getting hard to find a doctor willing to do abortions was because or protesters. I simply stated here could be other reasons. There are MANY pro life doctors who choose not to do abortions that have nothing to do with protesters
    Jeana, Momma to 4 fantastic sons

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

  5. #25
    MissyAg94 is offline Platinum level (1000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,018

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mommylamb View Post
    See, they think the government should stay out of the private sector... except when they want the government to be involved in the private sector. Consistency is not a strong point.
    Wrong! We don't want taxpayer money subsidizing abortion. Let's keep the discussion honest.

  6. #26
    egoldber's Avatar
    egoldber is offline Black Diamond level (25,000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Northern VA, USA.
    Posts
    31,123

    Default

    We don't want taxpayer money subsidizing abortion
    How does this bill do that?
    Beth, mom to older DD (8/01) and younger DD (10/06) and always missing Leah (4/22 - 5/1/05)

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Louisiana, USA.
    Posts
    4,047

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MissyAg94 View Post
    Wrong! We don't want taxpayer money subsidizing abortion.
    I'm a little confused as to how using your HSA money for an abortion is equal to using taxpayer dollars to fund abortion. Isn't it just using your own money that is untaxable? So you aren't using any tax money at all?

    Or do I not understand how HSAs work? We don't have one, so I could be completely mistaken here.
    Stacy
    Wife to K
    Mommy to A (5) and twins E & S (1.5)

    The biggest mistake I made is the one that most of us make...I did not live in the moment enough. I wish I had not been in such a hurry to get on to the next thing: dinner, bath, book bed. I wish I had treasured the doing a little more and the getting it done a little less. - Anna Quindlen

  8. #28
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    RDU NC
    Posts
    2,930

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JBaxter View Post
    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.
    Im sorry, I stand corrected on that front. My point remains the same.
    DS 1/10 "boo-boo"

  9. #29
    jenfromnj is offline Sapphire level (2000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Northern NJ
    Posts
    2,549

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BayGirl2 View Post

    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.
    I think this is an important point, as well--for something that's being billed as a means of saving taxpayer money, how much of that taxpayer money is actually going to be saved via this method, and how much is going to spent (in man hours and actual expenditure) dicussing, introducing, debating, etc. this measure?

  10. #30
    AshleyAnn is offline Sapphire level (2000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,282

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by daisymommy View Post
    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.
    Because she's already saved that money into an account for her use for health services. It doesn't just cost more - its a matter of already having the funds and not being able to get them. You can't take money back out of an HSA, so if this passes even if a woman has a million dollars in an HSA she still has to come up with money from somewhere else to fund her abortion. Many women do not have much, if anything, in savings so getting the money to fund an abortion is difficult. It creates an extra hurdle.

    Its unfair a woman has saved her own money in an account for her health needs and now someone else gets to decide if she should be allowed to determine what her health needs are.

Page 3 of 23 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... 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
  •