Poor Iowans would be prohibited from having a taxpayer-paid abortion in cases of rape or incest under an amendment to a budget bill approved by a House committee this week.
Again, grotesque…
-
Archives
- August 2019
- July 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
-
Meta
Texas has a similar bill that requires women to get a sonogram before having an abortion, but I don’t think it has been passed yet: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/7456246.html
More about it: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/7461341.html
If Big Brother is paying for abortions, why wouldn’t Big Brother want to determine which abortions he would pay for? Iowa isn’t banning abortions in these circumstances, just banning state government funds being used for those abortions. It is inevitable that when government decides to start doling out money, it pays for some things and not for others. I can understand disagreeing with the decision that the Iowa legislature is making here, but I don’t understand the hysteria about what they are doing. Again, they aren’t prohibiting anything, they are just declining to pay for it. I don’t see hints of “1984” in that kind of situation…
Mark in Spokane, you took the words right out of my mind. I agree 100%. Big deal.
Incest and rape are serious crimes. Women who are pregnant as a result of rape or incest are victims of serious crime. I like to think that good governments try to give crime victims a helping hand. In Iowa, it seems that some legislators would sometimes prefer to give them an extra kick instead.
The headline is a bit deceptive, in that the amendment was written to block all Medicaid-funded abortion save medical emergencies. I’m not sure Medicaid is the agency to determine what makes for a rape or incest case. Perhaps the legislators should have made some exception, but this hardly justifies Stuttaford’s hysterical drama about BB’s imminent arrival.
Polchinello, I always enjoy reading your comments (even when I don’t agree with them!), but I do think you set a somewhat low bar for “hysterical drama”. There was only the one picture, and Big Brother is quite often used as a quick metaphor for governmental overreach….Interestingly, and ironically in the context of the illustration I chose, there’s quite good evidence to suggest that George Orwell was very troubled by the idea of ‘easy’ abortion, although we can only guess at what he would have thought about legislative measures such as the one we are discussing here.
They can do what they want but it’s really stupid public policy. If there’s one thing a welfare state needs more it’s unwanted babies born to poor people, most of them on a sure path to criminality and/or requiring public assistance.
Are we even sure that this is the correct characterization of this law? This is from the Des Moines Register after all. A newspaper not known for its objective reporting on matters related to abortion.
Hmmm…the unspoken assumption of the original post is that a fetus does not have a claim of right to exist. That is a hotly debated moral question. But even if we assume for the sake of discussion that a fetus does not have such a claim of right, the point about government having a legitimate interest in how state benefits are extended is fair.
Consultus, I think that the issue here is not so much government’s interest in the fate of the fetus as the specific message that some Iowa legislators are trying to deliver. If these Solons have to choose between the rights of the fetus and the rights of the woman who has been raped (or is the victim of incest), they clearly are picking those of the fetus. The penalty for being raped (in addition to the horror of the original assault) is thus nine months in which your body is not your own. I assume that this is the platform on which these politicians will be happy to run, snd they should do so, specifically and without any ambiguity.
The Iowa legislators are not making a policy in favor of a fetus or a woman who has been brutalized by rape or incest. The Iowa legislators are getting the government out of the abortion-funding business — making the government neutral between the fetus and the woman carrying the fetus. I just don’t see this as “Big Brother” — in fact, quite the contrary, it is an example of the government leaving a field of human activity alone, rather than intervening to favor one side or the other.
I think, Mr. Stuttaford, that you would have a far stronger argument if the Iowa legislators were attempting to ban abortion in cases of rape or incest. But they are not. They simply are seeking to have the government refrain from funding such a procedure. Again, they may be wrong — that policy may be a mistake. But it isn’t “Big Brother,” and it isn’t the government favoring one side or the other.