How would single-payer deal with abortion?

[ColbertWatcher]

Is this one of the reasons why the GOPers don't support it? Because they don't want their taxes to pay for it?

[jwirr]

1. it is one of the big reasons.

[ColbertWatcher]

2. So, what's the best argument against their stance? n/t

[Dangerously Amused]

9. That they aren't special, because everyone has to pay taxes for some things they disapprove of?

Some people are morally opposed to the death penalty, but live in death penalty states and their taxes help to pay for lethal injections. Some people are morally opposed to eating meat, but their taxes pay for others' hamburgers via food stamps. You don't get to pick and choose where your tax dollars go. If you don't like it, move. Or use the power of your vote in the next election.

Don't know that this is the "best" argument, but it is one that will be difficult for them to (legitimately) counter.

[ColbertWatcher]

11. Okay, I just like to be ahead of these morans. n/t

[AllentownJake]

3. abortion aside

I assume their belief that the government can do nothing right other than the military has more to do with it.

[leftstreet]

4. I don't think they've even thought about that

The corporate talking points are about "evil government run healthcare" or some nonsense.

But it'd sure give them something to talk about.

[ColbertWatcher]

5. "evil government run healthcare" is code for imposing secular values on Christians. n/t

[ColbertWatcher]

6. Oh, and don't forget all that crap they pulled with pharmacists. n/t

[Greyhound]

7. Since when is "I disagree with that, so I shouldn't have to support it with my tax dollars"

a valid argument?

It's not and never has been.

[ColbertWatcher]

10. I'm just asking. n/t

[Greyhound]

13. The answer to your question is clear, it is a medical procedure and it would be paid

at the set rate.

How would single payer deal with quadruple bypass?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

16. Not so clear. Abortion is an elective procedure the vast majority of the time

Heart surgery is not. That places it in the same category as cosmetic mamoplasty and is the classic reason put forward for not having the government pay for it. However, its demonstrably cheaper to pay for an abortion for a woman who can not afford one than pay for the child. Same argument can readily be made for low cost birth control and sterilization for both genders.

[imdjh]

8. I haven't heard that yet. Mostly just blather about incompetence of government...

... and of course their belief that Single Payer would mean a reduction in health care to the most deserving people, ie themselves.

They're a mess. They love to brag about studies which show them to be the most charitable people, even if they don't like it when we make them deduct church support from "charity" . They accuse us of being "zero sum" and "class war" and "class envy" (Like I ever considered Republicans to be of a higher class?) and then they act like there is a fixed amount of health care which should only go to those who can pay cash for it, because they also claim to want to do away with insurance entirely.

[ColbertWatcher]

12. They haven't said it outright, but they have hinted at it.

Don't forget what they've done with RU486.

[pnwmom]

14. Among the rabid anti-abortion crowd, YES. n/t

[MrModerate]

15. They say it matters, but I'm convinced that's bullshit.

The vocal 'Licans who write the talking points (read out on the air by multimillionaire commentators) genuinely believe that the quality of *their* health care will decline if everyone is covered. Their distaste for abortion is mostly phony justification for the current system of rationing health care to those whose employers can pay for it.

The fact that the "base" (which doesn't write the talking points but insteads suckles on 'em at Fux News) is more likely to lose or have lost its healthcare due to economic reverses is one of those little anomalies that are building up and will drag the whole 'Lican facade into the mud.

[dipsydoodle]

17. Unless things have changed

the first one in the UK would be covered by our NHS. After that I think it has to be done privately but it don't cost a fortune anyway. My wife had two terminations back in the '70's as there were doubts that her back would withstand further full term pregnancies and we already had two healthy children anyway. So - maybe the same rules would apply in the USA.

[kdmorris]

18. I hate that my tax dollars build bombs to kill born people, too

But I still pay them.

[WeDidIt]

19. Cover it like any other medical procedure. n/t

[bunkerbuster1]

20. I think it's a minor reason, but it plays a part. Ironically, of course...

a competently administered single-payer plan would surely promote prevention, meaning better access to contraception, meaning, likely, fewer abortions.

(Then again, abortions are steadily declining anyway, so I don't know if single payer would have a huge impact. But likely some.)