Abortion?

[tbburg]

So I've been thinking recently about the legality of abortion in the face of universal medical care.

In the Roe-v-Wade decision the Court ruled that a right to privacy under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion.

OK, good enough. (for the time and place anyway,..) Fast forward 40 years, and now we're gearing up for government supplied medical care. Our medical records will now be government records.

It would seem that our right to privacy in our personal medical decisions is overridden by the government need to account for the medical care provided.

Now, the court didn't say,"She has a right to an abortion, so shut up and leave her alone." It said, "She has a right to privacy, so quit being nosy."

So where does it leave the right to privacy in these matters when there's a government bureaucracy waiting to collect the paperwork?

 

[Bent]

So where does it leave the right to privacy in these matters when there's a government bureaucracy waiting to collect the paperwork?

The likely outcome will be an armed revolution followed by military tribunals for many that are currently in office; that includes the by then former President. I suspect many will be hanged or face firing squads should they survive alive. DO NOT mistake a revolutionary war with a civil war; even if that’s what Washington tries to call it one.
Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness are all stated as inalienable rights bestowed by God. According to precedent, if a pregnant woman is murdered; the murderer is charged with two counts, having taken two lives.
Does an abortion violate the right to life of said unborn fetus? Precedent appears to have established that it is indeed a life. The Declaration of independence does not place any stipulation on how life is conceived; nor do the two counts of murder. In fact the rulings associated with the killing of a pregnant woman does make it clear that the unborn life is independent and separate than that of the dead mother.
At what point does sentient life begin? I won’t even pretend to guess. I do know for a fact that Obama care is only 1% about health care; the remaining 99% is about subjugation of the American people. I am quite curious who will be running for President; and congress in 2016.
:wantyou:

 

[Tom R.]

Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness are all stated as inalienable rights bestowed by God.

Not to detract from a good post, but just want to clarify that they are unalienable rights. It makes all the difference.

 

[kastein]

with some of the little hellions I see running around, I can't help but support abortion until the 54th trimester.

 

[JohnX]

with some of the little hellions I see running around, I can't help but support abortion until the 54th trimester.

Amen to that.

I am not pro life, nor am I pro choice, I am however pro abortion. Overpopulation of the world will be the end of us as a race, we will destroy everything to try continue how we have live for centuries.

 

[rockclimber]

I am pro throwing small children into a river.

 

[xcm]

I heard it makes great soup...

 

[westvirginia24976]

I am pro throwing small children into a river. in a bag full of bricks

fify

 

[superdave]

Why is it the "pro choice" folks only push one choice, that choice being abortion? Why do they not advocate adoption as a choice?

Why is it when a pregnant woman is murdered, the person who did it is charged with 2 counts of homicide but abortion is not murder because "life has not begun"?

Now for government health care. Meaningful Use (electronic health records) will be a way for the government to deny health care to people who are a burden on the system. If you are obese, use tobacco, drink, are a risk taker (skydiving, etc) you will be denied coverage. Watch and see.

That being said, I think that if you are obese, use drugs, regularly drink to excess or regularly participate in activities that are very likely to get you a trip to ICU, you should pay a higher premium than those who do not do these things. The problem lies with who is to make that call on who fits into that category and how much the premium should go up.

I also think that if you are getting government assistance of any kind you should be regularly drug tested and if you fail, you are cut off for 90 days. During that 90 days you are to be re-tested. Pass and you can reapply. Fail and you are done. If you do something that lands you in jail you should also be cut off and can reapply when you are released.

 

[SC Rednek]

Also interesting that we condemn ancient societies as barbaric for throwing out defective or unwanted babies. But we do the exact same thing now, we just do it before birth.

But our technology cannot predict who will be a moron later in life, I think post-birth abortions should be allowed for complete idiots.

Also anybody who's living on taxpayer money, should not only be regularly drug tested, but if they become pregnant during that time, there should be a mandatory abortion with the cost of it taken out of their taxpayer provided benifits. And if they have a religious opposition to abortion, then force them to put the baby up for adoption, and fix both mother and father so no more babies will happen.



And the original question about where privacy will be in the direction our healthcare is headed, there will be none. I predict that within the next 50 years, the government will control all the records, provide them to employers, courts, IRS, and whoever else has a "need" for them. They'll be use them to determine job elegibility, what benifits you get, or taxes you should pay. The government loves data and records, not privacy.

 

[Darky]

Amen to that.

I am not pro life, nor am I pro choice, I am however pro abortion. Overpopulation of the world will be the end of us as a race, we will destroy everything to try continue how we have live for centuries.

Abortion isn't the only option to reduce our birthrate...not when we have the massive amount of contraceptives and the ability to safely and reliably sterilize yourself and even to reverse the procedure, at least for men. Why wait and kill the fetus when you can prevent it from happening in the first place. We have condoms, diaphragms, spermicidal lube, the pill, morning after pill, IUD, Depo shots, vasectomies, tube tying, and more that I'm forgetting. You want to go out and have sex, take precautions or deal with the consequences.

As far as privacy, I concur with SC Rednek. We have no privacy. The gov't can and will seek out any info they want.

 

[xcm]

You want to go out and have sex, take precautions or deal with the consequences.

Thats what the coat hanger is for? dealing with the consequences.

 

[rockclimber]

Thats what the coat hanger is for? dealing with the consequences.

don't forget the shop vac.

 

[alex22]

With the election season upon us and since I'm back at college there is no shortage of college kids that want to drag me into a political discussion/argument and try to tell me who to vote for. When I have neither the time nor the effort I respond with a question of my own. "I like guns and abortions, who should I vote for?" Gets them every time.

~Alex

 

[souske]

Ron paul

 

[Alienspecimen]

I guess I am on the opposite side of the argument-I have a lot more faith in the government than in the sleaze-ball insurance agent, but thats just me...

Boris

 

[kastein]

Alienspecimen - government run healthcare: the efficiency of the DMV and the compassion of the IRS. Have fun with that...

With the election season upon us and since I'm back at college there is no shortage of college kids that want to drag me into a political discussion/argument and try to tell me who to vote for. When I have neither the time nor the effort I respond with a question of my own. "I like guns and abortions, who should I vote for?" Gets them every time.

~Alex

I like to argue on their side of the debate and slowly build up to a conclusion that causes enough cognitive dissonance that they either have no logical answer, or just sputter while I make my escape.

 

[tbburg]

Now for government health care. Meaningful Use (electronic health records) will be a way for the government to deny health care to people who are a burden on the system. If you are obese, use tobacco, drink, are a risk taker (skydiving, etc) you will be denied coverage. Watch and see.

That being said, I think that if you are obese, use drugs, regularly drink to excess or regularly participate in activities that are very likely to get you a trip to ICU, you should pay a higher premium than those who do not do these things. The problem lies with who is to make that call on who fits into that category and how much the premium should go up.

Two pertinent points to make here:
1) Over the last four years, the company that provides health insurance to me and my co-workers first asked for voluntary, then started requiring physicals(for free)to keep insurance with all the results going to the insurance company. This year they instituted a policy where our individual insurance rates go up unless we start exercising and living healthy lifestyles. They also included a test for nicotine metabolites in our blood(they check that while they're checking cholesterol)

2)Interesting you mentioned "risk-taking like skydiving". I used to skydive. When I was active(about 4 months out of the year) I used to purchase catastrophic medical coverage insurance to pay for medical bills in the event I burned in and didn't die.(happened to a friend of mine, 25K in medical bills before he even woke up) It was a million dollar limit, 100% payment, no deductible, no co-pay,.. 17 dollars a month(I would buy a 6 month policy in the spring). Didn't kick in unless I spent 24 hours in the hospital. Didn't cover ER visits for the flu, flu shots, birth control, viagra, dental checkups, or any of the other crap now required by law. Those policies aren't even available now because all the "required treatment options" tacked on.

"I like guns and abortions, who should I vote for?" Gets them every time.

~Alex

I don't believe you.

Ask that question on any American college campus and you'll probably get, "You shouldn't be allowed to vote."

 

[rockclimber]

With the election season upon us and since I'm back at college there is no shortage of college kids that want to drag me into a political discussion/argument and try to tell me who to vote for. When I have neither the time nor the effort I respond with a question of my own. "I like guns and abortions, who should I vote for?" Gets them every time.

~Alex

Unfortunately for you, I'd say Obama. he has yet to make a real move on guns or gun control, and he seems to support abortion....



or Ron paul...

 

[alex22]

I don't believe you.

Ask that question on any American college campus and you'll probably get, "You shouldn't be allowed to vote."

I haven't gotten that response yet, but I haven't had to say it to a professor yet.

As far as patient privacy & confidentiality, I think that what little we currently have will disappear under government controlled health care. At least now medical records will only be given out under court order, or possibly sold to profit the company. Government controlled medical records will probably be too easily obtainable.

Ken, I'm just not clever enough to lead the conversation in a circle that will eventually end up with them contradicting themselves, I like you're style though.

Unfortunately for you, I'd say Obama. he has yet to make a real move on guns or gun control, and he seems to support abortion....



or Ron paul...

I'll pass on the O vote.
My actual stance on abortion is that I'm against it (rape, incest, mother's health I see it as ok) but I have not been in the position of being a potential parent. I have a hard time judging this situation from the side lines having never been in the position of a potential parent.

~Alex