U.S. Military Must Pay for Abortion

ABC NEWS ^ | June 1 | Associated Press

[JMJ333]

Glad you have compartmentalized what should and shouldn't happen in your life. Maybe it will work out that way and maybe it won't. Regardless, you are more concerned about your pocketbook than with the value and dignity of human life. I have no way to change your mind and won't attempt to try. I simply pray that you never are put in the position of being the benefactor of what you preach.

True virtue is not anemic or self-centered.

[bannie]

You do not address my issues of charity. You choose to ignore that which I state. You simply say, "I hope you never find yourself in the position." I told you that WHEN I HAVE BEEN IN THAT POSITION, I DO NOT DEMAND ANOTHER'S HARD-EARNED MONEY.

WELFARE IS NOT CHARITY...it is THEFT:>

[bannie]

I understand "the government footing the bill" part...however, this is a military dependent. When we hire our military, we offer them complete medical care. I believe that this tragedy is a medical condition.

albeit, a very sad, and difficult condition.

[Gee Wally]

Can't we pay for a soldier's spouse who discovers herself in the painful position of carrying a child to term which has no way of possibly surviving more than a couple of days...and will have NO "LIFE" for those minutes here.

That's not for judges to decide, it's for the legislature. Tell Congress to change the law. Lobby, buy off your Congress critter or whatever. I think that's the way it's done in a FREE REPUBLIC.

Is this still a "conservative" forum or am I lost?

[APBaer]

"Regardless, you are more concerned about your pocketbook
than with the value and dignity of human life."

"value and dignity of human life."
The baby DOESN'T HAVE A BRAIN,
as brain dead as a friggin doornail,
Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, either way, no brain.

Also, aren't you rather free with YOUR advice about what others should do with THEIR "pocketbooks"

[JMJ333]

I didn't ignore you, bannie. I addressed it by saying that you had successfully compartmentalized your life in what you think ought to happen. I hope your family comes through for you if you are ever in need. Maybe they will and maybe they won't. Should they fail to live up to your expectations, and you can't find a suitable charity to cover the cost of your medical care, I hope no one applies your own philosophy to your predicament.

[APBaer]

"Is this still a "conservative" forum or am I lost?"

Gee Wally, from the self righteous tone of most of the posters,
I'd say you've taken a wrong turn.
Sounds like the Taliban, same page, but different book.

[bannie]

You have not addressed my issues.

You simply state FEELINGS. The feelings upon which you should act are those based upon facts. You do not deal with the factual aspects in this case...I believe that you cannot allow yourself to see the wrong of welfare because you can not accept that your family survivied on the backs of people whom your parents accepted as unwilling oxen.

I also believe that you have already "dismissed" me.

Perhaps the actualities are not pleasant things with which to deal.

[JMJ333]

Human Life begins at conception. If not human life, then what? A flower? A walrus? Let me guess...a clump of cells with no worth or value or intrinsic dignity. Have you redefined when life begins to suit some weird purpose of yours?

You can't get around the fact that if it isn't a human at conception than the woman isn't pregnant. Have a little mercy on those who can't defend themselves. I know it will piss you off that I ask you to back off on the innocent, but that is what I am asking you to do.

[JMJ333]

There is nothing self-righteous in having mercy on the innocent and defenseless. Who the hell are you to determine the worth of another??

[APBaer]

"Human Life begins at conception."

Assuming arguendo that it true.
What this case was about was a fetus without a brain, if this fetus ever had "Human Life",
a dubious proposition at best, but neverless assuming he did, he sure as hell didn't when he grew without a brain.

[JMJ333]

If this country still held to the Christian principles that it was founded on, then I would agree with you. I am not for the continuous expansion of government--but make no mistake--it will be there [gladly] when morality has been completely thrown out in favor of relativism. We are already there mostly. What you seek isn't possible at this point because the culture is in a not-so-mysterious process of self-destruction. This is a reality, bannie.

[bannie]

You dismissed me with that "compartmentalized" statement: It does not address my issue of charity--or responsibility.

I do, however, realize that my solutions--which DO work for me, daily--are painful for you because you have already taken from those who may have not CHOSEN to give.

You do not seem to understand that...I HAVE "been in your shoes." There ARE better ways. My family and community DO live on a "give and take" keel.

You will remain a captive of the government of you believe that THE GOVENRMENT IS YOUR MOTHER, YOUR FATHER, and YOUR ONLY FRIEND. You seem to believe that, WITOUT THEM YOU WILL PERISH!

To quote many of today's kids, "Think outside of the box." YOUR box seems to be the one into which the government has apparently sealed you.

[JMJ333]

Let me explain again. Life begins at conception and a person has full worth and dignity at that point--brain or not. You have no right to determine if this person can come into the world or not. That's eugenics a position championed by Dr. Mengele and Hitler--and a plethora of Americans including Margaret Sanger.

I don't want someone who has no mercy on the innocent and defenseless deciding who gets to live or die. No thanks.

[APBaer]

"I don't want someone who has no mercy on the innocent and defenseless deciding who gets to live or die."

I, you , and everyone can have as much mercy as possible and still, a fetus without a brain is not going to live.

[JMJ333]

I hope they do work for you and for oher Americans. I would be glad to spend the money that goes toward tax, but I am saying to you that as of this point most Americans have ditched any semblance of responsibility and morality. Some people are going to need help. I know that burns you, but it is the truth. I say reform the system, but in the mean time don't deny people who have no other way to get help.

[JMJ333]

I, you , and everyone can have as much mercy as possible and still, a fetus without a brain is not going to live.

Then let him die peacefully. Leave him alone. He still has worth in my eyes. Full intrinsic dignity.

[bannie]

I am not naive. I am a 50-year-old woman who has not been living in a castle with perfect lighting!

I am a mother who raised her children...without welfare and, mostly, without child support. I used my GI Bill (EARNED!) to complete my education. I asked for no governmental assistance to raise my children for me!

I am now assisting my daughter in raising her children...one of whom needs considerable medical assistance...for which I am paying--NO WELFARE!!!!.

My siblings and I are also working together to assist our parents who are in their 80's...and THEY help by occasionally caring for their great-grandchildren.

I know that you are going to pick that apart and tell me how it wouldn't work for you...SURE, your situations is "different." Everyone's is! SO WHAT! Quit looking for big brother to hold your hand and "make everything right."

[maturin]

I'm really enjoying this discussion, but I'm confused on a couple of things. Is it your opinion, or that of your adversary, banny, that forcing a man to pay for acts, issues, beliefs, etc. he despised is tyrannous, a la T.Jefferson?

Or is that the opinion of both of you?

Also, if this is the case, is it justifiable for a citizen to simply refuse to pay taxes for such activities, of which there seem to be so very many in these days of the nanny state?

Also does this issue turn solely on which of the two options, (live birth followed by fairly speedy natural death, versus abortion) is more expensive than the other, or is there not a lot of much higher principle at stake?

Just curious... thanks.

[Shethink13]

This has nothing to do with pro-life. The baby has absolutely zero hope of surviving and is likily a real danger to the mother. In this case the most pro-life thing to do is to take the baby out. The baby has no brain. You are taking pro-life to a ridicously extreme and have thrown out common sense.

Please explain the danger you fear for the mother. I don't think you'll be able to because there is none. I don't understand this "logic". If the baby is going to die anyway, why do you need to murder it? Why do you think a mother would feel better knowing she was the cause of her child's demise rather than mother nature? Why not let this woman deliver her baby, and give it some love for the short time of it's presence on earth?

I know this wasn't part of your argument, but there wouldn't be a lot of medical costs to allow a birth in a case like this. If death was truly eminent, there wouldn't be any extraordinary life-saving measures taken.