Universal Health Care Reduces Abortions

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-24-2009
Universal Health Care Reduces Abortions
76
Tue, 03-16-2010 - 2:08pm

"Countless arguments have been advanced for and against the pending bills to increase health-care coverage. Both sides have valid concerns, which makes the battle tight. But one prominent argument is illogical. The contention that opponents of abortion should oppose the current proposals to expand coverage simply doesn't make sense.

How health care discourages abortion
Increasing health-care coverage is one of the most powerful tools for reducing the number of abortions -- a fact proved by years of experience in other industrialized nations. All the other advanced, free-market democracies provide health-care coverage for everybody. And all of them have lower rates of abortion than does the United States."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/12/AR2010031202287.html

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2007
Fri, 04-02-2010 - 12:49am

<>

I didn't in a single post. In my next post to you, in reply to your request for data, I provided a source. As I said before, you are making a great deal of fuss out of my neglecting to provide you a link in a single post. It's not as if you had to ask me again and again and again, while I kept posting about the issue but not posting a link for you. That, actually, is the issue I have addressed with you, that of repeatedly making claims you do not provide evidence to support.

It makes absolutely no sense of you to make such an issue of demanding to see evidence when you see absolutely no need to provide it for yourself. I could just as easily do as you have done, and say it's my opinion and I don't have to prove it.

<>

Wow, that was a huge logical leap. "I think money is more important in a woman's decision to have an abortion than you do" turns into "money is the most important thing in life"? Talk about a misinterpretation. That's a full straw man.

<>

Okay then. I will just reply with a comment of yours from post #10:

"I think that,that is purely speculative on your part and speculation is worth absolutely nothing."

<>

Studies are anecdotes?

<>

I would like you to show me where I wrote that abortions are done "by monetary figures alone." That has never, never been my claim. Never.

<>

Which ones?

<>

No, the word you used to me was that I had done the "same" thing I had "accused" you of doing. Neglecting to provide data in a post (and following up with data in the next post) is hardly "the same" as refusing to provide it.




Powered by CGISpy.com


Thanks to Spencer (gespenst) for the beautiful signatures!
Lilypie 2nd Birthday PicLilypie 2nd Birthday Ticker
Photobucket
Photobucket




Powered by CGISpy.com


Thanks

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-28-2008
Fri, 04-02-2010 - 3:25am

<>

you continue to harp on the issue I simply pointed out that you didn't provide proof I gave you a study as well as you giving me one and yet YOU continue to make an issue of it. I didn't say I had to ask you again and again, you make it sound as if i did. I didn't make a claim and not provide evidence in fact I went to the same source you did to make my point.

<>>

I cited the same evidence you did and i accepted your evidence I didn't say it was wrong or bad I accepted it as it was and acknowledged that you provided it. I don't agree with it but that isn't your fault it just is the way I think.

<>

Nope you said you think money is more important than i do, I simply pointed out that you were right again in agreement with you. I also stated that I thought there were more important things in life than money and you seemed not to think that,again you should make yourself more clear. You went to great pains to explain to me that not only did you think that money was everything when making a decision about whether or not to continue a pregnancy but you threw yourself into the mix by suggesting that money was VERY important to you and yes you then implied that it held at least that much significance in your life. I didn't misinterpret you,you again did not make yourself clear.

<"I think that,that is purely speculative on your part and speculation is worth absolutely nothing.">>

Nor did I imply that they were worth anything you did. Or rather you have said that I place value on it. it is what it is.

<>

no your anecdotes are anecdotes,you gave studies that seem to support your claims but hey your anecdotes are not fact they are in fact anecdotes.

<>

no you only claim that they are done by others by monetary figures
or am I misinterpreting? I mean your whole argument hinges on the idea that women would abort for cost alone, that the significance of money is so great that one would make a decision to continue a pregnancy or no. Which is it? Is it significant or not?

You have reduced an abortion to numbers,prices,figures and you suggest that id money were no object that population would be affected.

<>

The study failed to say. it only said 27 countries I assume that some have UHC.
but still it begs the question,how many babies would actually be born but for UHC?

<>

Have you missed the numerous times that I acknowledged your providing a link to your study as well as pointing out your negligence in providing it in the first place?

Talk about making a fuss over the issue.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-19-2006
Fri, 04-02-2010 - 8:39am

>So it is beyond you to think that it is crass and low class to reduce a woman's personal choice to a monetary figure? of course how did i not see that!<

Lots of women make parenting choices based on financial situations (myself included) so why would it be any more 'crass or low class' to factor finances into a pregnancy decision?

I really don't get how saying "I can't possibly afford X" is low class.

Photobucket
*
Follow me to the Unplanned Pregnancy board!Follow me to Hot Debates!Follow me to Abortion Debate!
Photobucket

Lilypie Pregnancy tickers
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-29-2005
Fri, 04-02-2010 - 12:05pm

don't you know it's low-class to talk about money at all?

 


Powered by
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-10-2003
Fri, 04-02-2010 - 6:32pm
Personally, I think it's (crass, tacky, low-class, et al) to have children for which you cannot provide a good upbringing. It's (crass, tacky, low-class, et al) to have children for which you expect other people/government to provide their basic needs.
To discuss your abilities, resources and strengths prior to having those children- well that's just intelligent and prudent to me.
And if it means you abort because you don't have a home, health care insurance, or the means to feed them, clothe them and shelter them- not crass at all. Responsible and sensible perhaps.
.
.
.



iVillage Member
Registered: 02-28-2008
Fri, 04-02-2010 - 9:41pm

<>

I would say that UHC is a govt program that would indeed seem to encourage a lot of people to have kids that maybe they still can't afford. It seems a double edged sword yes,it gives people much need coverage but if it indeed reduced abortion in this country then perhaps we are making it even easier for folks who really can't afford kids to just go ahead and have them anyway.

I give you octo mom and yes, she is an extreme case but yeah she is covered medically by the govt and she knew it,of course no one will deny her babies and children care and she knew that going in so she went full speed ahead without thinking of the cost. on one hand if i am right and it doesn't make people change their minds hey so much the better but if it does i see overpopulation growning way out of control. I see a bunch of people taking advantage of UHC does that mean that we shouldn't have it at all?

No.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-28-2008
Fri, 04-02-2010 - 9:52pm

<I really don't get how saying "I can't possibly afford X" is low class.>>>

Saying that janey needs braces but I don't see how we can afford them right now that isn't low class,saying gee I don't see how we are going to afford that particular vision plan or that type of insurance isn't low class. Saying you know what I don't think i will enroll my kids in karate or dance class cause we can't afford the fees right now that is not low class. I guess what I am saying is I respect a woman's choice to have abortion and not have an abortion but I think and yes it is my opinion that it is low class to boil her decision arbitrarily down to dollars and cents.

We keep talking about how personal and emotional and agonizing this decision is for some women and the we entertain the idea that well hey I guess we can attach a price tag to it.I feel its just disrespectful and yeah that kinda bothers me.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 04-02-2010 - 11:15pm

Is it time for me to make a non-sequitur Hitler remark here to spur a Godwin claim and kill this thread?

(oooh, maybe we should kick this horse a few more times for good measure. I think I saw him TWITCH!)

The 3 Day

Sandy
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-28-2008
Sun, 04-04-2010 - 11:49pm
Just for the record, since this is the internet,you really have no idea what mood I am in or with what intent I say anything since meanings and feeling can't be quantified thru words. I would further suggest that since you have seen my face or listened to my voice you can't really be sure what i mean or how I mean it,so the snark comment is really a bit odd and out of place.
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-15-2005
Mon, 04-05-2010 - 12:55pm
Hey now - watch the horse comments.



The problem with winter sports is that – follow me closely here – they generally take place in winter.
- Dave Barry


Pages