All proposals to address the abortion funding question have one thing in common: they blithely disregard the effect of such proposals on the actual women and families who choose abortion.
Does anyone else see the irony in the U.S. bishops wanting to define universal health care as covering everything except for what they don’t support?
A public health option without abortion coverage does not sound like neutrality to me — it sounds like selling out women for political expediency, again.
The president and his staff have been reluctant to take on reproductive rights in health reform. But that has not prevented anti-choicers from using the issue to activate their base against reform.
Two religious organizations have called on the Family Research Council to shut down a television ad and Web site that contain “massive misinformation” related to the national discussion on health care reform.
The White House’s proposed budget condones a two-tier health system, in which women with private health insurance or private funds can exercise their right to an abortion, but poor women cannot.