Abortion Debate Forum - Should abortion be funded by the state?

Debate Forums > Abortion Debate Forum > Should abortion be funded by the state?

Q: Should abortion be funded by the state?

asked by: DamianaRaven on February 28th, 2009

Experienced User

I think abortion should be provided free (or for a small copay) to any pregnant woman who qualifies for Medicaid. I know that there are a lot of people who object to this, so I'd like to hear from them. I think I can predict some of the arguments, so I'll try to address them in advance.

"Why should my tax dollars go to pay for something I find morally reprehensible?"
The government funds a lot of things I think are hideous. War and waste are some major uses I don't want my money put to, but I have to cowboy up and live with it because we aren't in a utopia here. Killing Iraquis is just as impolite as killing fetuses, but you're paying for that too. The government funds a lot more things I like, so I take the bad with the good. Tax dollars are supposed to be appropriated to improve the quality of life for the citizens of any given jurisdiction and I think that preventing the births of unwanted/unplanned babies is a great start. Education and free birth control should be the front-line defense but if that fails, making abortion affordable should bring up the rear.

"If abortion is cheap or free, women will start using it as birth control."
Having been through an abortion, I think not. There are some idiotic exceptions running around out there, but once is enough for most women to learn that the pill or the Depo shot is so much less stressful. Frankly speaking, the procedure itself hurts like hell, and that's with a Valium and a local anesthetic. Women may start using it as a back-up for birth control, but that's OK with me. As for those idiotic exceptions... well, there's a few of those in every crowd.

"Killing babies is bad, mmmkay!"
Yes, I'm aware that some of you feel that way but that's not what I'm wanting to discuss in this thread. If you wish to explain the horrors of slaughtering the unborn, there are threads everywhere itching to do just that. I'm trying to discuss whether the state should fund such a Holocaust.

In closing, I think it's sad that abortion is often withheld from those who need it the most. When I went - 12 years ago - it was $400. To a teenager with no money (and so many other women desperate enough to have a vacuum hose crammed up their nethers) that might as well have been 4 million. Thankfully, my father was cool enough to lend me the money but without him, who knows what might have happened? (I have an idea, and it ain't pretty!) It isn't fair that the only women who get to "choose" abortion are the ones with the ability to pull hundreds of bucks out of thin air. One of the most common reasons women choose abortions is "I can't afford to have a baby. I have no job, no skills, and no way of going to school to fix that with a child to look after."

I look forward to a courteous and enlightening debate. Blessed be to all!

Replies(17)

Darkmoon

replied on February 28th, 2009

Active User, very eHealthy

Considering that childrearing is currently funded by the state, yes, I think it's only fair. If the government can take money from me to support irresponsible breeders then the government can take money from them to prevent me or other people from joining the ranks of resource-sucking.

Darkmoon

replied on February 28th, 2009

Active User, very eHealthy

By the way, the people that call childfree individuals "selfish" have it wrong. If it weren't for us refusing to breed, their children would have yet another person to compete with in the job market.

The selfish people are the ones that reproduce just to perpetuate DNA or (attempt to) ensure a permanent caregiver once they get old. The childfree are by comparison largely un-selfish, because we aren't creating more competition for their precious crotch-nuggets to find work and homes.

Anyone can breed and having kids isn't a guarantee they'll be there for you. I still get floored by the sheer nerve of these selfish pieces of trash that have problems with people that won't breed just because they can.

DamianaRaven

replied on February 28th, 2009

Experienced User

Darkmoon wrote:

Now wait a minute! Calling parents "breeders" and their children "crotch nuggets" is going a little too far in the other direction for my tastes. I have two beloved daughters (I've been pregnant four times in my life - twice with children I didn't keep.) that I bred for reasons that only included perpetuating my fine DNA and caring enough to protect me from society when I get old and helpless. I also wanted someone to love and teach my ideas for humanity's redemption. Selfish of me? You bet it was!

"Selfish" is a word people need to stop tossing around on this board, because it's irrelevant. WE ARE ALL SELFISH! Every living animal on the planet acts in its own best interest first and foremost. If having children suits your needs and desires, you'll do so. If not, you won't. This is petty name-calling that I find beneath the intellect of someone like you, Darkmoon. I appreciate that you feel passionately about your views, but you're dangerously close to letting that passion erupt into hateful anger or angry hate. In my experience, that much emotion never helps to get things accomplished.

msrosie

replied on February 28th, 2009

Experienced User

Re: Should abortion be funded by the state?

DamianaRaven wrote:

"If abortion is cheap or free, women will start using it as birth control."
Frankly speaking, the procedure itself hurts like hell, and that's with a Valium and a local anesthetic. Women may start using it as a back-up for birth control, but that's OK with me. As for those idiotic exceptions... well, there's a few of those in every crowd.

My experience was totally different. I was under general anesthesia, so didn't feel a thing and when I came out of it, had cramping that was less painful than a typical period for me. Abortion is covered under our universal health care system, but I would still rather prevent pregnancy than have to go through a surgical procedure over and over again.

As to the question of should it be funded by the state - if gestation and childbirth is covered, then so should abortion be. Either fund both or neither. BTW, it is my understanding that a big reason for second trimester abortion in the USA is the woman needing time to get the money together for the procedure.

DamianaRaven

replied on February 28th, 2009

Experienced User

Re: Should abortion be funded by the state?

msrosie wrote:

BTW, it is my understanding that a big reason for second trimester abortion in the USA is the woman needing time to get the money together for the procedure.

Good point. Forcing women to save up for it is only increasing the outrage of the offense, because it's a well-known fact acknowledged by both sides that the further along things get the less OK it is to terminate that life.

I don't try to justify any of my pro-choice views by thinking that an embryo/fetus is not alive and that it isn't a unique person. It is. Abortion ends a life and it is killing, but I approve of it anyway. I would really like to believe that life is sacred, but it isn't. Death is everywhere, and if you let yourself get too upset about, you can't enjoy living and then what good is life? I use death to enrich the quality of my life every day, and so do most. Humans become valuable to me as part of the society I live in, so until they're out of their mamas - who are part of my society - they're no more important to me than the cow I ate for dinner tonight.

Darkmoon

replied on February 28th, 2009

Active User, very eHealthy

DamianaRaven wrote:

Parents and breeders are a "breed" apart. I don't refer to parents as breeders and vice-versa. Proving your reproductive organs work and expecting everyone else to do the same doesn't make one a parent. I apologize for not making that clear. I'm just fed up with people harping endlessly on my choice not to bear offspring and the ones that do are generally those who seem to think a woman's only purpose in existing is to reproduce and I know for a fact that having children doesn't guarantee they'll automatically be willing or able to care for you in return when you are no longer able to. I spent more time in the past four years of my life living across the ocean from my husband to care for my parents but I have been witness to the fact that many other offspring aren't willing to do the same. It's a poor reason to reproduce, in my opinion, and it's even poorer to slam people who choose not to (not that I'm accusing you of ever slamming childfree people but this is one of the most common bingos we get from ruthless zealots that think you might as well be dead if you don't have kids).

Look at octo-mom. She's desperate to surround herself with offspring that she's neither willing nor able to care for, at the expense of other people who are trying to live responsibly...whether it be through refraining from perpetuating their own DNA or only having as many children as they can handle. The money being spent on this selfish woman's choices could go toward people's OWN families. She is a breeder, not a parent.

DamianaRaven

replied on February 28th, 2009

Experienced User

Thank you for clarifying you views. However, I believe that the people you're describing are a distinct minority. Many people feel that they themselves wouldn't be complete without reproducing - or carelessly humping on everything that can - and that's OK. It's why humans are still walking the planet.

For someone to think that you should have a child whether you want one or not is pure idiocy! Why would I want you warping someone's mind by raising them resentfully and then turning him/her loose on society? (Not that I'm saying you would abuse an unwanted child, but children aren't idiots. They know when they're not welcome in their mother's life and it messes them up.)

I want all the humans I have to share this society with to be happy. Happy people don't often go around making life difficult for others. Fetuses aren't part of society, so if a few of them have to be killed to make their mothers happy, then I'm sorry for them but they gotta go! Their tiny little spirits aren't hovering around the fringes or looking down from Heaven feel sad about all that rejection. Or maybe they are and they're happily thinking "Glad I dodged that bullet! Who wants to be alive when you can float around not needing a clunky old body? It's a lot cooler up here in Heaven. Thanks Mom!"

Maria730

replied on February 28th, 2009

New User

HELL NO

you were stupid enough to get pregnant (maybe AGAIN) and if you dont want it give it up for adoption to people who cant have kids. The state and us taxpayers have enough bills on our hands not including the ones we set up oursleves.

DamianaRaven

replied on February 28th, 2009

Experienced User

Re: HELL NO

Maria730 wrote:

I think that's a very narrow view of things. Did you consider that not every baby is automatically snapped up on the adoption market? (I explained this in another thread.) You seem so protective of taxpayer money, but it's already being spent en masse on irresponsible pregnancies. Are you only in favor of spending on careless pregnancy if it suits your moral philosophy, even though it'll cost many thousand times more in the long run?

tallyhoe

replied on February 28th, 2009

New User

state funded abortion

Do you believe God exists?

DamianaRaven

replied on February 28th, 2009

Experienced User

Re: state funded abortion

tallyhoe wrote:

Do you believe God exists?

This simple question smells of a trap, but OK. I'll bite. I believe there is a higher power - what you would call God - but I believe that he/she/it is so far beyond what we're capable of understanding that nobody's even come close yet. Religion as we know it is just a bunch of make-believe spread by people who were furthering their own (often admirable) agendas. Nothing gets people listening and obeying faster than convincing them that you know what the Almighty Creator of the Universe is thinking, feeling, and wanting from them. How utterly arrogant!

tallyhoe

replied on February 28th, 2009

New User

Belief in Higher Power

It seems your "debate" questions is an attempt to justify abortion. Have you tried to consult your "Higher Power" instead? If so, can you share what you feel is his/her/it's perspective?

luvtiedye

replied on February 28th, 2009

New User

My 'Higher Power' says "Every child a wanted child". If that means some have to die to get to that point, so be it.

DamianaRaven

replied on February 28th, 2009

Experienced User

I don't really need to "attempt" to justify abortion. The government has legalized it, which is justification enough for me. I've made numerous attempts to consult my "Higher Power," and I have not received an answer. If you're sane and completely honest with yourself, you haven't either.

Lemme guess what you're thinking: "Why do I think that people who claim to have heard God are insane?" Have you met some of these people? I find it quite interesting that few have ever declared to the world: "God has spoken to me and told me that I was way wrong about everything." It's almost always "God told me I was right and everyone who disagrees is a jerk who's gonna be tortured for eternity!" which is either a self-serving lie or a self-validating delusion. Sometimes, this "God" even tells people to chop off their children's arms (It's happened!)so I approach with caution any person with entirely too much faith in their own God theory.

I think I speak for more than myself when I say those who claim to consult with God one a two-way basis are either lying or dangerously delusional. So knowing that, when was the last time you had a little chat with Jesus?

oopoopoop

replied on March 1st, 2009

Extremely eHealthy

Re: HELL NO

Maria730 wrote:

A child born into a modern western society costs FAR FAR more than hundreds of abortions cost. Taxpayers have to pay for school, medical care, "public" services, and eventually the crime and unemployment. Note that the crime rate dropped significantly in the US some years after abortion was legalised, as a whole cohort of children who would have become criminals did not get born.

The TAXPAYER should be encouraging more abortions, instead of applauding the birth of more and more children who will be under-educated, under-resourced, and far more likely to be future felons than taxpayers.

diamondsz

replied on March 1st, 2009

Extremely eHealthy

Re: HELL NO

Maria730 wrote:

You pay more for adoption and to fund single mothers on welfare, then you will ever fund to have an abortion, please get the facts straight.

People who can't have kids, when they start adopting black, hispanics, asian, disabled, crack babies then I will start to believe in adoption, until then the demand of parents for these children are lacking majorly.

diamondsz

replied on March 1st, 2009

Extremely eHealthy

Re: Belief in Higher Power

tallyhoe wrote:

It seems your "debate" questions is an attempt to justify abortion. Have you tried to consult your "Higher Power" instead? If so, can you share what you feel is his/her/it's perspective?

My higher power depicts that abortion is okay based on a persons choice.

Learn About Us

Get Help

Join In

Do More

We comply with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health
information:
verify here.

The site is not a replacement for professional medical opinion, examination, diagnosis or treatment. Always seek the advice of your medical doctor or other qualified health professional before starting any new treatment or making any changes to existing treatment. Do not delay seeking or disregard medical advice based on information written by any author on this site. No health questions and information on eHealth Forum is regulated or evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration and therefore the information should not be used to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease without the supervision of a medical doctor. Posts made to these forums express the views and opinions of the author, and not the administrators, moderators, or editorial staff and hence eHealth Forum and its principals will accept no liabilities or responsibilities for the statements made. Schizophrenia health sitemap.
This page was last updated on January 1, 2009.
© 2008 eForums, Inc