To those who are opposed to abortion, and nationalised health care; what's your view?

If someone, who had been raped, did not abort their subsequent pregnancy, in accordance with the, hypothetical, law; and did not have the child adopted. If the child later became ill-enough to be admitted to hospital, but the mother did not qualify for any, current, supported health care: would you support nationalised health care, to be made available for all, so that there would be no financial discrimination against anyone else due to their economic position?To those who are opposed to abortion, and nationalised health care; what's your view?I am not totally opposed to abortion, although I think we have far too many "unwanted" pregnancies and we need to address that. I do not regard abortion as an alternative means of birth control.



I have seen many comments here from people who do not want a national healthcare plan to pay for the healthcare costs of people who engage in high risk behavior, particularly smoking and heavy drinking. I feel that way about women who engage in unprotected sex and expect taxpayers to pay for their abortions (that’s plural), of which there are sometimes several over a period of time. The same goes for their STD treatments, which can be very expensive. If a woman gets an STD and becomes barren as a result, should I also pay for her to have an expensive surgical procedure to restore her fertility?



How is it financial “discrimination” if I object to paying the healthcare costs of people whose health issues are a direct result of their own irresponsible behavior? The financial “discrimination” here is directed AT me, not BY me. It really irritates me when someone says, “I am entitled to healthcare and YOU are obligated to pay for it!” For ordinary medical expenses, that’s fine. I also have no problem with some expensive surgical procedures that are not a result of high risk behavior. But when we get into high risk behaviors that result in high medical expenses, I draw the line, and that goes for abortions for women who engage in casual sex and take no precautions.To those who are opposed to abortion, and nationalised health care; what's your view?
George Carlin had 'pro lifers' number on this issue. "If you're pre born, you're fine. If you're pre school, you're ******."To those who are opposed to abortion, and nationalised health care; what's your view?My proposal would be to keep the current health care system as it is, but enact a national health care system for those making, say, $25,000 or less as a single or $45,000 or less as a couple and did not receive benefits from their job.
I, cannot, understand, your, question, as, there, are, too, many, commas.To those who are opposed to abortion, and nationalised health care; what's your view?That's why Republicans started the SCHIP State Children's health insurance program back in 1998.



A program that every Democrat in the House voted Against starting !!!!



To provide health insurance for children who's parents could not afford it.



I refuse to even discuss national health care with anyone who cannot tell me how much such a program would cost.



How it might be funded

Who would decide whats covered

Who decides what services cost.



So far, I have Never seen any proponents of national health care answer any of those questions.To those who are opposed to abortion, and nationalised health care; what's your view?
You are assuming prolifers are against having to pay your own way.



However, right now emergency health care is covered.



Also, I don't know that I am for laws forbidding abortion in all instances at all stages. The morning after a rape seems not quite as objectionable to me. I don't really know that I can speak for other people, I'm just not comfortable with abortion and am UNcomfortable with late term abortion or abortion used as birth control.
Then the woman needs to either adopt out the kid or get an effing JOB!To those who are opposed to abortion, and nationalised health care; what's your view?
1. I think rape victims should be allowed the morning after pill to prevent implantation. Unlike many of my (life begins at conception) counterparts, I think it begins at implantation where the embryo implants and pregnancy has begun. EC can prevent this from taking place so it is not the same as abortion.



2. No hospital is going to turn away a child sick enough to be admitted to a hospital. They will work out some arrangement later but first treat the ill child. I've seen it hundreds of times.
Sink or swim.
I don't understand what point you are trying to make. I don't believe in universal health care because the way they are trying to run it hurts us all, so it's pointless. Many people would die while waiting for procedures they need. People should always be allowed to earn a place above other people. We aren't all the same, so we shouldn't be treated the same. That doesn't apply to kids, however. I think it's great that all kids have a right to education, and I think they should have a right to health care. Medicare and Medicaid should tighten their ship, and there is plenty of money to take care of all the kids in this country.
First of all there is Medicaid available if a person becomes homeless. The tax payers pick up the tab that's why last year we had a 1.5 billion dollar government health care bill. And sense she has a child and no income then she would qualify for all sorts of government assistance programs. Simply put, the government would not let a child starve and freeze to death.
we already have medicaid..what is the problem?.......increase medicaid and everyone has health care.....oh that's right the government health care program (medicaid, medicare) is already a failure....