"We believe that the provisions below provide extensive evidence that longstanding restrictions on federal funding of abortion have been maintained. Furthermore, this bill provides new and important supports for vulnerable pregnant women," the letter states.

Their letter:

Dear Member of Congress,

As Christians committed to a consistent ethic of life, and deeply concerned with the health and well-being of all people, we want to see health care reform enacted. Our nation has a rare and historic opportunity to expand coverage to tens of millions of people, make coverage more affordable for all families, and crack down on many of the most harmful practices of the health insurance industry.

We are writing because of our concern about the lack of clear and accurate information regarding abortion provisions in the health care reform bill passed by the Senate on December 24, 2009.

Reforming our health care system is necessarily complex, and the provisions related to abortion, or any other issue, require careful examination of the facts as they exist in the legislative language. We believe that the provisions below provide extensive evidence that longstanding restrictions on federal funding of abortion have been maintained. Furthermore, this bill provides new and important supports for vulnerable pregnant women.

(cont.)

Following is a comprehensive factual listing of all provisions related to abortion and positive supports for pregnant women in HR 3590, along with specific page references.

Abortion-Related Provisions Included in the Senate-Approved Health Care Reform Bill "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" (HR 3590 EAS/PP)

Prohibits the Secretary of HHS from requiring the coverage of any abortion services as part of the essential health benefits for any qualified health plan offered in a state insurance Exchange (pg. 2070);

Allows the insurance company to decide whether or not to include coverage of abortion services, including the Hyde abortion exceptions, in a qualified health insurance plan offered in a state insurance Exchange (pg. 2070);

Prohibits insurance companies from using federal funds, including federal tax credits and cost-sharing assistance, to pay for abortion services except for those services allowable under the Hyde amendment (pg. 2071);

Requires an insurance company that chooses to offer a plan in a State Exchange with abortion coverage, beyond the Hyde abortion exceptions, to collect a separate second premium payment from each enrollee for the cost of the abortion coverage (pgs. 2071-2072 & 2074-2075);

(cont.)

Requires the insurance company to deposit all separate payments into a separate account that consists solely of abortion premium payments and that it is used exclusively to pay for such services (pgs. 2072-2074);

Requires the state health insurance commissioners to ensure that insurance companies comply with these requirements in accordance with guidance and accounting standards set by the Office of Management and Budget and the Government Accountability Office (pg. 2075);

Requires insurance companies that offer general abortion coverage as part of a qualified health plan to provide a notice of coverage in the summary of benefits and coverage explanation (pg. 2076);

Allows states to pass a law prohibiting the inclusion of abortion coverage in plans offered in a state health insurance Exchange (pg. 2069);

Requires the director of the Office of Public Management to ensure that there is at least one private, multi-state qualified health plan offered in each state insurance Exchange that does not provide coverage of abortion services beyond the Hyde exceptions (pgs. 2087-2088);

Prohibits insurance companies offering qualified health plans from discriminating against any individual health care provider or health care facility because of its unwillingness to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions (pg. 2076);

Prohibits the preemption of state laws regarding abortion (pg. 2077);

(cont.)

Maintains current Federal laws relative to conscience protection; willingness or refusal to provide abortion; and discrimination on the basis of the willingness or refusal to provide, pay for, cover, or refer for abortion or to provide or participate in training to provide abortion (pg. 2077);

Establishes and provides $250 million for programs to support vulnerable pregnant women (pgs. 2170-2173); and

Increases the adoption tax credit and makes it refundable so that lower income families can access the tax credit (pgs 2400-2407).

We are now at a critical moment in the history of our country. More than 30 million Americans may finally gain access to a health care system that is affordable -- providing families, children and seniors with fundamental care that is essential to human dignity. We respectfully ask that you make an informed decision about this legislation based on careful deliberation guided by facts.

"Life" doesn't end at birth.

No abortion funding ...plenty for neonatal care.

Pass Senate health care bill (if you want to burn in hell for eternity).

"Life" doesn't end at birth.

Well, this is quite a philosophical statement you make here. At the very moment we are born we slowly start dying. Granted we grow and become adults, but that leads to death eventually. So in a philosophical sense, life does being to end at birth.

Darkness at the break of noon
Shadows even the silver spoon
The handmade blade, the child's balloon
Eclipses both the sun and moon
To understand you know too soon
There is no sense in trying.

Pointed threats, they bluff with scorn
Suicide remarks are torn
From the fool's gold mouthpiece the hollow horn
Plays wasted words, proves to warn
That he not busy being born is busy dying.

Temptation's page flies out the door
You follow, find yourself at war
Watch waterfalls of pity roar
You feel to moan but unlike before
You discover that you'd just be one more
Person crying.

So don't fear if you hear
A foreign sound to your ear
It's alright, Ma, I'm only sighing.

"That he not busy being born is busy dying."

Needed repeating.

Your call.

Misleading headline.

Just who is the 'National Catholic Reporter' who calls themselves "The Independent News Source"? (Almost sounds like the lines the State Run Media uses and others like 'Think Progress')

From Wikipedia:

"The paper is not a member of SIGNIS, has no official church oversight and frequently dissents from official Church teaching."

"the National Catholic Reporter is regarded by some as a "progressive" publication."

"Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good is an organization whose purpose is convincing Catholics to vote for pro-choice Democrats."

Excellent! Where do I send a contribution?

"Life" doesn't end at birth.

#6 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY

Maybe not, but it's certainly the beginning of death. When death is finally complete, life expires. "Life" begins at inception. That is the single point in time when a certain chain of events start that (if left alone) lead to one conclusion. Life. I'm not anti-abortion, but it should be used in a last-case scenario only, IMHO.

People have been arguing when 'life' begins; some saying at conception, some saying at birth.

If you aren't for preserving 'life' once a baby draws its first breath until its last, you can't really call yourself 'pro-life'.

AU-
With all due respect you're assigning more to "pro life" than is implied. Pro life deals with the specific case of dealing with the unborn. Nothing more. Anything else is what you or I might project, given our respecitve outlook.

If you want to extend "pro life" that's up to you. But to assign more to it (IE: healthcare, adoption, quality of life issues) than within the typical pro choice/pro life debate is misleading.

Were I to say "pro choice" means that you're "f*cked" if you make poor choices I'd be arguing the same point, essentially, that you'd assign to my side, no?

OOHRAH

40,000 Americans die every year for lack of health insurance. Is that 'pro-life'?

AU - What of my ending question in #16?

Pro-life is one side's moniker. Pro-choice (not Pro-abortion) is the other's.

Would you agree?

Again, from post #16, if you want to apply the same logic to extension, then what about when people make poor "choices?" If they were on their own to make such choices (free from government dictate) then under what justification should government bail them out?

With all due respect you're assigning more to "pro life" than is implied. Pro life deals with the specific case of dealing with the unborn. Nothing more.

So, the 'sanctity of life' should be a non-starter once they're born? Just as I suspected 'pro-life' people think: life is no longer valued once you're born.

AU-
Regarding the red herring of healthcare and any number of annual deaths you'd attribute to a lack of insurance...

To my knowledge no one is refused if they go to the ER. If I'm wrong, let me know.

Illegal aliens get healthcare.

Lots of people die each year. Cigarettes (our choice to smoke) and other lifestyles contribute to illness.

The 'breath of life' and all that ... doesn't count.

Your life doesn't matter to the 'pro-life' crowd once you're born. OK

9 months 'life' vs 78 years average life expectancy '?'>

78 years doesn't count?

"40,000 Americans die every year for lack of health insurance. Is that 'pro-life'?"

That is as unprovable and a myth. Just like one person dies every ten minutes for the same reason. Everyone knows that is made up, because Harry Reid said so.

Not true, AU. You're creating a convenient strawman and you know it, because it suits your agenda.

Pro-life specifically deals with the case of the unborn. You know that.

People on your side get pissed when I'd call you "pro abortion", right?

Your life doesn't matter to the 'pro-life' crowd once you're born. OK

9 months 'life' vs 78 years average life expectancy '?'>

I heard this a few years ago and it is a thinker...

There is a fire and you have only one chance to go in and make a rescue. One room has a 80 year old in a wheelchair, the other has a petrie dish of fertile human eggs ready to be implanted. Which do you rescue?

What's to think about? You save the 80 year old.

That is as unprovable and a myth.

The American Journal of Public Health and Harvard made it all up?

I'd save my dog.

Just kidding.

I'd save my dog.

Ignoring the irony of a poster named "Crispee" asking that question...

I'm sorry. I can't ignore it. It's a sick kind of funny.

That is as unprovable and a myth.

"The American Journal of Public Health and Harvard made it all up?"

Unless the study can prove lack of insurance is the reason they died, yeah it is a guess. If someone dies instantly in a head on collison and had no health insurance, they are inlcuded in the number, right? Now if it said preventable deaths, that would be a different story.

I'd save my dog.

Ignoring the irony of a poster named "Crispee" asking that question...

I'm sorry. I can't ignore it. It's a sick kind of funny.

#29 | Posted by YAV at 2010-03-13 08:18 PM |

Not bad Yav... BTW.. I would probably save my dog first in just about any situation.

Hi Crispee.

First, there was nothing personal in the #29. It was just amusing (and irony wasn't the right term, I should have just said "funny."

Anyway, the study doesn't count accidents. It's all about preventable disease. It's a good study. Here's a link to a decent summary:

What's to think about? You save the 80 year old.

#26 | Posted by YAV at 2010-03-13 08:11 PM |

I would save the eggs.

Crispee - just read your #31. Should have refreshed before I posted.

Movie night. BBL.

Pro-life specifically deals with the case of the unborn. You know that.

Call it 'pro-embryo' then.

Life doesn't end at birth. The name 'pro-life' is misleading according to what you stated.

"Call it 'pro-embryo' then."

"The name 'pro-life' is misleading according to what you stated..."

Talk about misleading, an embryo becomes a fetus after 8 weeks.

Sorry for answering before you Oorah...

"Call it 'pro-embryo' then.
Life doesn't end at birth. The name 'pro-life' is misleading according to what you stated." -AU

Pro-life came about because it sounds better than "anti-abortion" just as your side's "pro-choice" sounds better than "Pro-abortion."

I've debated this multiple times. Pro-lifers view the unborn as a life... a totally innocent life incapable of defending itself, just as we'd defend an elderly person or very ill person from a "mercy" killing by some other person.

You haven't addressed my "choice" question in #16: "Were I to say "pro choice" means that you're "f*cked" if you make poor choices I'd be arguing the same point, essentially, that you'd assign to my side, no?"

Nor have you addressed this from #21: "To my knowledge no one is refused if they go to the ER. If I'm wrong, let me know."

OK. "Anti-abortion"

The name should accurately reflect what the 'movement' stands for.

Life, by anyone's definition, only ends at death.

In summary, all three of these would be more descriptive:

- Anti-Choice
- Anti-Abortion
- Pro-Embryo

Why not pro-life?

It's a matter of marketing/public relations/semantics. Would you prefer your side to be "pro abortion?" If not, does that mean you're "anti-abortion?" Semantics. Public relations.

You've created a strawman. Pro-life has an accepted meaning in today's culture. To bastardize it and thereby morph it to bash any spending policy which supports your aims... is, well, disingenuous.

I'm out for the night, AU. Got my K-Y, my "Young Republican Pages" magazine and a flashlight. Catch you later.

Would you prefer your side to be "pro abortion?"

Why? It's "pro-choice", because we believe it isn't our decision to make for someone else, thus 'choice'.

If you want to call yourself "Pro-life" remember life only ends at "Death".

Last night my wife and I attended her church, she is Catholic. Prior to the beginning of the Mass the priest announced that there were postcards available in the lobby for parishioners to send to members of the House and the Senate regarding health care reform. We did not get one. I doubt however that the postcards were supportive of the National Catholic Reporter stance.

There is a fire and you have only one chance to go in and make a rescue. One room has a 80 year old in a wheelchair, the other has a petrie dish of fertile human eggs ready to be implanted. Which do you rescue?

I like this question. A lot. Though for utter clarity I would say "fertilized human eggs."