UHC is just that, universal. Abortion, regardless of its controversial nature, is still a medical procedure that requires staff and equipment to be paid for. You can't have your cake and eat it too. UHC means medicine, period, is covered. It's this that people aren't understanding.
You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo
Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
I think why it is so different is because it is still a emotive issue in US, which probably links into the fact US is undeniably very religious for a western country.
Abortion has been a dead issue in many countries. Accept it and try to reduce it by not criminalizing it.
In any case... abortion is covered under UHC as part of most nations' birth control regimes. It's also the reason why birth control pills tend to be cheaper in Western nations, since they receive some subsidy from the government.
It seems though that UHC is coming regardless. Maybe UHC endorsed abortion will be a party-based initiative. Just like Republicans almost always endorse abstinence only education, and just like Democrats tend to re-abolish it when they come back into power, maybe UHC endorsed abortion will be treated the same.
That's fine, but don't be surprised when I inform you that your opinion - although very neat! - doesn't make any sense.Lots of people on this thread have merely shared their opinion and not provided logic.
Opinions can also be correct or incorrect. Your's happens to be incorrect.You certainly haven't provided any logic that i'm aware of. Hell, you act like the fact that you disagree with me is a "shortcoming". That's faulty logic if i've ever heard it. Perhaps you should take a page from my book and not act like you're presenting logic when you're just presenting your biased opinion.
Two wrongs don't make a right, you know.Current taxation does this every day. It's a fact of life.
What?Um, sure. Look, this board is allowing us both to post. Let's not pretend that somehow what people should and shouldn't say, according to your opinion is somehow relevant.
Sammyo's children, whilst in attendance at any public school, shall be made to pray to our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, whose blood was shed so that we may have everlasting life.It depends on the wording of the law.
So, what do you think of my law?
DING-DING-DING! We have a winner!I imagine that i'd be vocal in some way just like you'd be vocal in some way on abortion paid for with tax dollars.
So, suppose, in the course of your vocalizing, I simply told you to "stop whining". Would you consider that to be a logical refutation of your position?
When are you going to stop beating your wife? See, I can ask loaded questions, too.I think you should have the right to be vocal about abortion paid for with tax dollars and that i should have the right to be vocal about whatever i please. That's what make this country so great. What about this process do you not like?
Nowhere have I advocated anything in opposition to free speech or the exercise thereof. I'm simply trying to contest the validity of your opinion, not its existence.
Hey, thanks for that. I love reality.Well you were the one acting like your opinion was some almighty pronouncement or something. I never did. If you want to take opinions so seriously than that's your business. I was just cluing you in to the reality that i don't.
Illegals will get free healthcare.
"He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)