Publicly funded abortions

Ho do you feel about publically funded abortions

  • I think public funded abortions should be for any woman under and reason.

    Votes: 11 55.0%

  • I think public funded abortions should be available for rape and life threatening cases only.

    Votes: 3 15.0%

  • I think public funded abortions are o.k., but the woman has to pay back the money later.

    Votes: 1 5.0%

  • I don't think the government should use tax payer dollars to fund any abortions.

    Votes: 5 25.0%

  • Forget about government funded abortions, abortions should just be illegal.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    20
P

Pasta

Registered Senior Member
One of the hot debated topics in the U.S.'s new health care bill is publicly funded abortions (to an extent). The language and contents of this bill keeps changing..... :rolleyes:

I thought this was an interesting moral and ethical issue.
Should tax payers in any country have to pay for someone elses abortion ?
If so, what kind of abortions ? any ? just for rapes ? to save the woman's life ?
Or just loan the govt. money and make her pay it back later ?
 
Hell, I'm having to pay for a war I don't agree with, some pay for an execution they don't agree with, so why can't others pay for an abortion they don't agree with?
 
Ooops, a couple of obvious typos in the poll.
Could one of the forum admins fix those for me please ? they're kind of obvious.
 
I would like to point out that the government already helps pay for abortions for low income individuals through DSHS, at least that's my understanding of it.
 
For the abortion issue itself, I've always wavered from side to side through my life. On the one hand I can understand a woman wanting control of her own body, but on the other hand for the baby it's a life and death issue it can't speak for itself; a tough call.

But for tax payer funded abortions. If it's a personal issue for the woman making the choice, than she should also fund it as well (or close friends/family); not strangers.
 
No; it's not that I am against abortion, but the government's job isn't to use my money to pay for other peoples' irresponsibility.
 
Norsefire said:
No; it's not that I am against abortion, but the government's job isn't to use my money to pay for other peoples' irresponsibility.
Click to expand...

they do it in regards to lots of other forms of irresponsibility. chances are if they're not paying for the abortion, they'll be paying for the livelihood of that child until they're 18...and then probably far beyond that, as the child may be so f'd up from being in the system for years.

in regards to my tax dollars though, i'd rather pay to keep the child alive.
 
In a sense it is. That's why they provide a fire dept, police dept, jails, social welfare programs and all that neat stuff.
 
shichimenshyo said:
In a sense it is. That's why they provide a fire dept, police dept, jails, social welfare programs and all that neat stuff.
Click to expand...

Nah. I believe in something called being responsible. As for social welfare...it's called charity, instead.

The police and fire dept. are not the same, by the way.
 
Norsefire said:
Nah. I believe in something called being responsible. As for social welfare...it's called charity, instead.

The police and fire dept. are not the same, by the way.
Click to expand...

you could call killing someone's child for them charity too if you wanted to.
 
Well, you forgot the option that quite a few people are arguing. That being that general health-care should not be publicly funded at all.

However, presuming this, I would say that abortions should only be funded only in cases where it's medically prescribed (including cases such as rape where it might be prescribed on a psychological basis). Not for ethical reasons regarding abortion itself but that I don't believe any elective procedures should be covered. This would exclude abortions for matters of convenience as well as elective plastic surgery and the like.

~Raithere
 
Like I said earlier its a non issue being as The department of social and health services will cover the cost of an abortion if the person having the procedure is unable to pay for it as a part of their family planning.

At least that's how it works in WA.
 
Last edited:
I thought this was a sci-fi forum? In any case, abortion is a red herring political topic and a boring topic at that. There are more embryos destroyed at fertility clinics yearly but you don't see polls based on that do you. Until Anti-Abortion people fuse the two together I don't see the point in arguing or debating the topic.
 
Opps I stand corrected this is a little more then a sci-fi forum, at least this thread is. But still doesn't change the fact that there are more embryos destroyed at fertility clinics then abortions. Where's the outrage?
 
Norsefire, you let the government pay for Medicare. These people are old yes, but they had their wholes lives to prepare for their retirement. Why should I have to pay for their irresponsibility? You know there, are only a set number of jobs available in this country that offer affordable insurance to their employees. Not everyone can have those jobs. How do you justify those individuals who are on the short end of that stick? I'm a Christian and I ask what would Jesus do on this topic.
 
In the state that I live abortions and birth control are also covered through tax-funded programs, in the event that someone cannot afford them. I think it's modern-day eugenics and I'm all for it.

jack1 said:
Opps I stand corrected this is a little more then a sci-fi forum, at least this thread is.
Click to expand...

Actually the site is for science-related forums (it's a loose definition of "science" :rolleyes: ).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top