I don't believe it's honestly feasible to get the bill passed if it covers medical procedures that a large bulk of America (unfortunately) believes should be outright illegal.
And, I'm sorry, but it *is* a nebulous area. There are certainly instances such as rape where a pregnancy is not the direct result of the woman's choices. But if you allow public health care coverage to pay for the repercussions of actions done by individuals who know the risks, what other things must you likewise cover? Lung cancer costs for smokers? Prosthetic legs for people who go whacko on shrooms and self-amputate? I realize I am treading next to a slippery slope argument, and I don't mean to say that "paying for abortions" implies "paying for these other things," but I ask where the line is drawn and why there?
I think getting healthcare coverage for people who catch the flu or people who have a genetic condition requiring some fancy medication is better than not getting healthcare coverage for them. That something is better than nothing.
Rejecting a health care bill for lacking all of the health care needs of the American people is akin to blowing up someone else's food just because you have no mouth. It doesn't solve your problem. It just leaves you both hungry and sad.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
momijizukamori
Re: I like Capuano but
Date: 2009-12-10 04:27 (UTC)And, I'm sorry, but it *is* a nebulous area. There are certainly instances such as rape where a pregnancy is not the direct result of the woman's choices. But if you allow public health care coverage to pay for the repercussions of actions done by individuals who know the risks, what other things must you likewise cover? Lung cancer costs for smokers? Prosthetic legs for people who go whacko on shrooms and self-amputate? I realize I am treading next to a slippery slope argument, and I don't mean to say that "paying for abortions" implies "paying for these other things," but I ask where the line is drawn and why there?
I think getting healthcare coverage for people who catch the flu or people who have a genetic condition requiring some fancy medication is better than not getting healthcare coverage for them. That something is better than nothing.
Rejecting a health care bill for lacking all of the health care needs of the American people is akin to blowing up someone else's food just because you have no mouth. It doesn't solve your problem. It just leaves you both hungry and sad.