Women’s Right To Choose Questioned By GOP, Defended By Democrats
by Keith Rugar | Oct 14, 2011 9:07am
(6) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Congress
The battle over a woman’s right to choose was front and center on Wednesday as the U.S. House of Representatives took up H.R. 358, the Protect Life Act, to amend rules established under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2009. Women’s rights advocates and healthcare providers view the amendment to the current law as “a radical assault on women’s healthcare and an attack on women’s liberty.”
In a conference call with reporters, U.S. Rep. Chris Murphy expressed his frustration as a pro-choice advocate in Congress. The bill establishes that “any health care plan that receives tax credits through the healthcare reform bill would be prevented from offering abortions or reproductive healthcare services,” Murphy said. “Even if the plan itself only accepts one woman who has a healthcare tax credit, it cannot offer reproductive services to anyone on the health plan.”
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act provided women with the right to receive an abortion, but states “no federal dollars may be used to pay for an abortion.” This bill helped insure 20 million uninsured Americans by giving them a tax credit. With this credit they could purchase private insurance on an insurance exchange.
The new legislation would further restrict a woman’s right to choose by not allowing women who receive this tax credit to buy insurance if that plan provides for abortion coverage.
“This legislation is not about prohibiting the use of Federal funds,” Murphy said. “This legislation is about prohibiting millions of women from purchasing plans that cover abortions with their own dollars.”
An additional clause to the bill, states Murphy, is a “conscience clause” that would allow hospitals associated with certain religious affiliations to provide care based on their religious beliefs. “This legislation would allow those hospitals to deny healthcare services to a women walking into their door even if it meant that woman would die,” said Murphy.
“This bill is an omnibus of terrible ideas,” Susan Yolen, vice president of public affairs and communications for Planned Parenthood of Southern New England, said. She took exception to this bill’s proposed attack on a woman’s right to choose and its proposed effects on Planned Parenthood. “We at Planned Parenthood have been the victim of the ire that we are talking about today,” she said.
“Let’s be clear here. Women’s lives are at stake,” Christian Miron of Pro-Choice Connecticut said.
“We believe in a women’s right to consult with her doctor in making a personal and private decision that is right for her and her family,” he said. “What is most egregious is that this bill would allow hospitals to deny abortion care to women who would die without it.”
As an attempt by pro-life advocates to reduce the effectiveness of the 1973 ruling in Roe vs. Wade, Miron feels “this agenda is out of touch with our nation’s values and priorities, and the values and priorities we have in Connecticut.”
Tags: pro-choice, pro-life, abortion, women's rights, Congress, Patient Protection and Affordable Care
(6) Comments
posted by: AntonK | October 14, 2011 9:35am
May I suggest a headline change for this article?
“Women’s Right To Murder 50 Million Mabies Questioned By GOP, Defended By Democrats”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States
posted by: Careful | October 14, 2011 10:58am
If Chris Murphy objwcts to HR 358, than it’s a good bill! Murphy is “a rubber-stamp fpr our abortion-President Barack Obama!”
posted by: bob8/57 | October 14, 2011 12:17pm
I Too would like to change the headline. It should read: Legislation Reveals Extent of Republican Misogyny
posted by: GoatBoyPHD | October 14, 2011 3:41pm
If Planned Parenthood used their money correctly they’d offer free abortions to women of need off premises.
Their real goal—getting men and conscientious objectors to pay for abortions out of tax dollars.
There’s nothing stopping ‘womenkind’ from opening means tested abortion clinics. Nothing except organizational skills and commitment.
There’s nothing preventing women from offering abortion insurance as a separate private policy wrapped with other pregnancy services and offered through the private markets.
This is more a matter of “women are cheap and disorganized” and want men and objectors to pay.
There’s also the psychological angle: having government entanglement makes it appear ‘acceptable’.
Forcing abortion outside of government makes it appear dirty and filthy and outsider activity by radical feminist groups.
Yes, there are emergency room and rape scenarios requiring immediate action but let’s stick to the run of the mill elective abortion which isn’t all that time sensitive.
Give me one good reason women haven’t opened up nationwide clinics and self-insured and self-funded them and ended this discssion once and for all?
Susan Yolen would be out of business ifshe pursued a solution. Is that the reason?
Let’s get to the real root reason why goverment needs entanglement with this dicey issue except some bizarre attempt to make the whole practive appear legitimate
posted by: ASTANVET | October 17, 2011 7:11pm
Planned Parenthood has a really horrible past, Margaret Sanger was not an advocate for “womens rights” she was about eugenics! Controlling the population growth of what she deemed as drains on “true” Americans… read up on her. I personally do not support ‘elective’ abortions, but for those extreme circumstances, yes, i do believe it is that woman’s choice - but just because i don’t agree with it, and my family wouldn’t make that ‘choice’ it doesn’t mean that I would want to restrict everyone else’s personal choice. The problem is, I also do not agree that Federal funding should be used to conduct abortions. It is a horrible horrible situation to debate - you are talking about destroying a life - there are no winners -
posted by: jssbrd | October 24, 2011 2:14pm
Abortion is not a right. It is an abuse of a power. This power is the ability to share in God’s creative power. Use or misuse of the gift of sexuality creates life. The “choice” came before the conception. Once a child is conceived, there is only one “choice” and that is to give the life that was created. Rape is not an exception. We are talking about a HUMAN LIFE!