So everybody in a government-subsidized insurance exchange will pay premiums to fund abortion but this isn’t the public funding of abortion?
The Washington Times has a scathing editorial on Senator Ben Nelson’s sell-out.
On Page 41 (lines 5-8) of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's manager amendment, the proposed rules mandate that everyone buying insurance through new exchanges or through the new government-run plan must pay a monthly abortion premium to be used for elective abortion services. This fee applies "without regard to the enrollee's age, sex or family status." That means that people who have no possibility of wanting an abortion themselves will pay for others to have them. On Page 43 (lines 1-7), insurance companies will be required to assess the cost of elective abortion coverage, and on Page 43 (lines 20-22) they are mandated to charge a minimum of at least $1 per enrollee per month to cover abortion…..
Many Americans wanted to believe Mr. Nelson was a decent man of his word, but the senator caved in when his vote could have made a difference for the lives of the unborn. A politician can't get any more despicable than that.
Scientists in the UK have used adult stem cells to help patients regain their vision.
Russell Turnbull, 38, had ammonia squirted into his right eye after he tried to break up a row on a bus. His attacker caused massive damage to his cornea and left him with Limbal Stem Cell Deficiency.
But Russell can finally see again after stem cells were taken from his good eye and grown in a lab. They were then implanted in the damaged eye and began to function as normal without any rejection.
A judge has ruled that Scott Roeder can’t use a necessity defense in his trial for the murder of abortionist George Tiller.
Scott Roeder, 51, has confessed to shooting the physician, George Tiller, on May 31 and said it was necessary to save unborn children. Roeder listened intently as the judge gave a lengthy recitation of case precedents that mostly undermined that contention.
Posts
The Washington Times is owned by "Reverend" Sun Myung Moon, who conducts mass-weddings in which he marries strangers to each other (thousands at a time).
ReplyDeleteTo treat it as a serious source for news or opinion is a grave error.
I'm sorry - but what does who owns the paper have do with the validity of the arguments/statements it's editors make?
ReplyDeleteThat's an ad hominem.
JJ, ad hominum is not always bad. When your opponent is a for-profit cult-leader with no aptitude nor interest in objective reporting, it's appropriate to say so.
ReplyDeleteAgain, how does naming who owns the paper have anything to do with whether the claims/arguments made by the paper's editors are true/valid? They obviously don't.
ReplyDeleteAd homs are always bad when you're attempting to make logically arguments. But from your numerous comments, it appears you have no interest in that.