Archive for Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Brownback defends abortion insurance restrictions

May 31, 2011

Advertisement

— Gov. Sam Brownback on Tuesday defended his approval of a bill that prohibits insurance companies from offering abortion coverage unless the procedure is necessary to save the woman’s life.

“The abortion debate is a difficult one,” said Brownback, an anti-abortion Republican who has signed several anti-abortion measures this year.

“There are a number of people that do not believe it is appropriate to use taxpayer dollars for abortion. There are a number of people, they don’t want it in their insurance policy that they are paying for and that is the issue that came up in the Legislature, and the Legislature passed it and I signed it,” Brownback said.

The Kansas chapter of the National Organization for Women will conduct a news conference on the south steps of the Capitol at 11 a.m. Wednesday — the official end of the 2011 legislative session — to denounce recently approved abortion bills and the comments made by a legislator during debate of the abortion-insurance measure.

“Kansas NOW is tired of legislators, who in efforts to pass their moral agenda, ignore the horrfiying reality of crimes such as rape,” the group said in a statement.

The Kansas NOW has criticized state Rep. Pete DeGraaf, R-Mulvane, for comments he made during debate in the House on May 13.

During debate, Rep. Barbara Bollier, R-Mission Hills, noted that abortions would not be covered for cases of rape and incest.

According to a report by The Associated Press, DeGraaf responded, “We do need to plan ahead, don’t we, in life?”

Bollier then asked, “And so, women need to plan ahead for issues that they have no control over with pregnancy?”

DeGraaf then said, “I have a spare tire in my car. I also have life insurance. I have a lot of things that I plan ahead for.”

Kansas NOW has asked for $5 donations to deliver model tires to DeGraaf. The group said it has received $3,000 in donations from across the country.

Starting in July, individuals and employers who want abortion coverage would have to buy additional policies that cover only abortion.

In addition, the law also states that no state or federally administered health-insurance exchange in Kansas established under the federal health care overhaul law can offer coverage for abortions, other than to save a woman’s life.

Comments

Tom McCune 4 years, 3 months ago

If the good people of Kansas had chosen to elect an intelligent small government, financial conservative, I could understand and support it. But their decision to elect this dim-witted theo-fascist is incomprehensible.

ksjayhawk74 4 years, 3 months ago

He pretended to be the first kind that you mentioned, people believed him. It's a popular trick with the GOP.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

funkdog1 4 years, 3 months ago

You aren't anyway. Don't have an abortion and your insurance doesn't pay for one. Duh.

bad_dog 4 years, 3 months ago

From my perspective, Sam could have accomplished the same thing by requiring health insurers to offer policies that permitted consumers to purchase policies with or without such coverage or the opportunity to delete abortion coverage in return for a reduced (albeit insignificantly) premium. You know, just like you can purchase liability, comprehensive and/or collison coverage for your auto.

Anyone purchasing a policy with abortion coverage would however, have to have a red "A" painted on their foreheads. You know, just to ensure the proper stigma attached.

mom_of_three 4 years, 3 months ago

I didn't vote for him, but i am stuck with his dumb decisions. And DeGraaf is another numnut.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

name-calling is not how you win debates. He made the right pro-life decision.

mom_of_three 4 years, 3 months ago

Its not up to him to make a pro-life decision. its not up to him to make that decision for any woman.

bad_dog 4 years, 3 months ago

Unsubstantiated declaratory statements are not how you win debates. "He made the wrong pro-choice decision". See?

beatrice 4 years, 3 months ago

His defense is that abortion is a difficult issue?

Gee, really? Any other deep thoughts there governor?

Well, I guess it isn't as difficult as he just made it for rape victims to get an abortion. Remember folks, if you are against abortions in the case of rape, then you are in favor of allowing rapists to choose by force the mothers of their children.

Rulings like this make me see how things like the Taliban become a reality. Religious fanatacism based on an imaginary sky god is bad for mankind.

jayhawklawrence 4 years, 3 months ago

You are never going to get rid of the abortion ball and chain in politics if you turn it into an anti-religion debate. Isn't that what they want you to do?

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

Here we go again anti-christian religious bigotry from the left.

beatrice 4 years, 3 months ago

Is he or is he not basing his decisions on his religion? In my opinion, that is religious fanatacism.

To clarify, I'm not just anti-christian, I am anti-legislation that stems from beliefs in superstitions and sky gods. Sky gods do not exist. Apollo really didn't drive a chariot through the sky dragging the sun behind it, the tooth fairy doesn't exist and nobody died for man's sins. Deal with it.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

I guess you just want to attack the religious beliefs of many Kansans who believe that human life begins at conception and that our private insurance premiums should not be paying for the destruction and dismemberment of little unborn babies! Name calling is the last refuge of someone who is clearly losing the debate in the arena of public opinion!

ebyrdstarr 4 years, 3 months ago

Shouldn't that be something for you and your insurance company to work out privately? This bill seems awfully meddlesome coming from a governor who is supposedly a frirm believer in deregulation and the free market system. I thought micromanaging insurance requirements was something Republicans opposed.

Linda Endicott 4 years, 3 months ago

Before this legislation, then, your choice would have been fairly easy...if the insurance that you get through work provided abortions and you didn't agree with that, then you were perfectly free to opt out at work and find another insurance company and pay premiums out of your own pocket... The state of Kansas should not be dictating to insurance companies what they can and can't do with their own money...

jafs 4 years, 3 months ago

"public opinion" is frequently wrong.

beatrice 4 years, 3 months ago

They are fetuses, not "little unborn babies."

I don't want my insurance premiums paying for people's high blood pressure medicine if they don't eat right and exercise. Do I have that option? Didn't think so.

THINKfirst 3 years, 3 months ago

Source: http://www.healthinsuranceusa.com/articlecontent.php?id=127 Medical insurance premiums "Buying medical insurance is not a one-time payment. Instead, each month you make a monthly payment, or premium, to the medical insurance company in order to keep your medical insurance current. This premium is like paying dues to a club for membership. The money you pay for medical insurance premiums does not go towards your medical costs. It is the fee required each month to ensure that when you need it, you have medical insurance. The amount you pay towards your medical insurance premium is not considered to be part of the amount you pay to the doctor or hospital for health care."

Phillbert 4 years, 3 months ago

"Small government conservative" Republicans strike again.

notanota 4 years, 3 months ago

Notice how he intentionally conflated taxpayer funded and private insurance funded abortion? Real smooth, there, Brownie. Nice way to cover up your big government, business unfriendly legislation.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

They are clearly alike. Monies comingled in a pot requiring others to pay for what they view as abhorrent!

notanota 4 years, 3 months ago

http://www1.american.edu/ted/chocolate-slave.htm

Ok, Where's the law saying companies can't sell chocolate in Kansas unless it came from certified child labor and slave labor free sources? I find child slave labor to be abhorrent - even more so than abortion - and yet Brownback doesn't seem concerned about imposing restrictions on businesses who commingle their money in a pot that pays for child slavery!

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

I guess you equate selling chocolate with killing unborn children through abortion?

jafs 4 years, 3 months ago

Nope - she's equating child and slave labor with it.

As things she is morally opposed to - are you in favor of those?

notanota 4 years, 3 months ago

I'm saying slavery is abhorrent. You don't think slavery is abhorrent? Why, are you pro child slave labor? Stay in the womb long enough to be forced into harvesting cocoa beans to keep chocolate bar prices low?

And yet Brownie thinks it's perfectly fine to interfere with the free market on one issue and not on the other. Why is that?

ksjayhawk74 4 years, 3 months ago

Brownback should have included in his statement at what age he thinks parents should start buying rape insurance for their young daughters.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

notanota 4 years, 3 months ago

So how many times have you carried a pregnancy to term after being raped?

beatrice 4 years, 3 months ago

If you believe women shouldn't get abortions after being raped, then you support rapists' rights to choose the women of their children.

We don't need a rape affirming culture.

Jaminrawk 4 years, 3 months ago

On the bright side, he's seems to be grinding on some Republicans now too. I smell one term. At least he'll have fun for 4 years passing laws that reflect his personal agendas rather than serving his state.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

I believe that Governor Brownback is doing an outstanding job! What republican are you talking about? In my conversation with other Republicans Brownback is a real hero!

Linda Endicott 4 years, 3 months ago

You all must be drinking the same kool-aid, then...

Have you made your tin foil hat yet?

grammaddy 4 years, 3 months ago

Maybe you should talk to someone else.

beatrice 4 years, 3 months ago

Perhaps, kjh, that speaks more to your circle of friends than it does other Republicans.

Bob_Keeshan 4 years, 3 months ago

"The abortion debate is a difficult one..."

Sorry, but that's about the funniest thing Sam Brownback will ever say. There is nothing "difficult" about the abortion debate for Sam Brownback.

Well, maybe except for the "difficult" decision to sign the bill even though it contained a provision for the life of the mother. But I'm sure next year he'll take care of that gaping loophole as well,

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

beatrice 4 years, 3 months ago

Why do you think rapists should have the right to choose the mothers of their children?

While and abortion might not make a rapist go away, it does make their spawn go away. Women should never be forced to carry the spawn of a rapist. Ever.

Jaminrawk 4 years, 3 months ago

Apparently Sam's goals are to have the next generation of kids born to parents that don't want them and then the state won't pay anything to educate them. Why wouldn't people want to live here?

CHKNLTL 4 years, 3 months ago

and those unwanted children will rely on social services offered by volunteers.... Get south of Mexico before it becomes part of this down-the-drain country.

notanota 4 years, 3 months ago

Don't forget that they'll double the crime rate. Read Freakanomics.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

More that 65 cents of every dollar Kansas spends goes to some form of education spending! What are you talking about ? Here the question involves whether insurance premium payers should be forced to pay for the dismemberment of little unborn babies in the womb.

jafs 4 years, 3 months ago

Well, they're just starting the education cuts, there'll be more.

And, no, the question really is whether the government has the right and power to dictate what insurance companies do with their policies.

Armored_One 4 years, 3 months ago

If it's a viable form of life, then let's detach it from it's connections to the woman and find out exactly what happens. If it lives and continues to grow, then it must be sentient and alive.

Knee jerk reactions to pain stimuli does not constitute awareness, merely self preservation.

Brownback is fully within his rights to dictate what state funded healthcare will and will not pay for, though. I still contend, also, that if "pro-life" was all that and the proverbial chicken, we wouldn't have so many kids in the system. If you are that blasted concerned about life, then why does the concern stop at the delivery room?

jafs 4 years, 3 months ago

This is private insurance, not state funded health care, isn't it?

bad_dog 4 years, 3 months ago

Yes, other than perhaps the group insurance provided to state employees.

beatrice 4 years, 3 months ago

Well, Brownback is giving tax breaks to people who move to underdeveloped areas of the state. Isn't that enough?

Mike1949 4 years, 3 months ago

What are you all complaining about? You conservatives vote this idiot in to office! Until you people wake up and smell the coffee, all of Kansas is going down the crappers!

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

I think it was Sebelius and her liberal tax and spend ways that put kansas headed down there! Brownback is making a difference in solving some of these massive financial issues left by the Democrats!

notanota 4 years, 3 months ago

The Democrats? LIke the ones who have had a majority in both houses for how long again? Oh wait, they haven't.

jafs 4 years, 3 months ago

You are clearly uninformed about how our government works.

Legislators craft and pass budgets, governors don't.

During Sebelius' term as governor, the Republicans were in the majority in both houses.

ConMan 4 years, 3 months ago

Same old Lib tactics: 1) someone disagrees with you and they're stupid or fascist, 2) set up straw men like Brownback is ignoring "the horrfiying reality of crimes such as rape." It's Lib judges that let all the rapists go with a slap on the wrists. How about admitting the facts: this law will save human lives!! Way to go, Governor Brownback!!

notanota 4 years, 3 months ago

Or not. It doesn't make abortion illegal. It just makes it more expensive.

beatrice 4 years, 3 months ago

Who exactly in Kansas is appointing all these liberal judges?

pizzapete 4 years, 3 months ago

At least they're not calling for people who are molested or have relations outside of marriage to be stoned to death.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

ebyrdstarr 4 years, 3 months ago

"Violence begets violence." That's one of the reasons I am so strongly opposed to the death penalty and yet no one seems to think I should be able to exempt my tax dollars from going toward prosecuting capital cases. Again I say if you don't want your insurance premiums going to cover abortion services, take it up with your insurance company. Government should stay out of it.

somedude20 4 years, 3 months ago

Sam Sam Sam, you are trying to overtake the Bush when it comes to being disingenuous and disastrous but at least you can only kill this state unlike the Bush who did his best to make love to the world.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

I think the Governor is responding to the desire of the Kansas people to restrict this odious practice of killing our offspring. Certainly our private insurance premiums should never be used to for pro-life citizens to pay for little arms and legs to be pulled away from the fetus! Certainly we should not have to pay for the skull of the unborn to be crusted by the abortionist knife!

beatrice 4 years, 3 months ago

I'm pro-health. Should my insurance premiums pay for medicine and operations on people who eat poorly and don't exercise?

bad_dog 4 years, 3 months ago

You're being entirely too logical Bea, as evidenced by the lack of responses

somedude20 4 years, 3 months ago

Like ksjayhawk74 (anonymous) says… "........at what age he thinks parents should start buying rape insurance for their young daughters"

THINKfirst 3 years, 3 months ago

Many forms of contraception could also be banned. Doctors are hereby ordered to tell women that abortion causes breast cancer, which is a lie. They don’t have to tell women about the health of the fetus they carry and don’t have to tell women about any problems with the pregnancy because it could sway someone to consider an abortion. It makes it legal for your healthcare provider to withhold vital information from you and give you falsified information. THAT'S what I pay MY insurance for. Under this law fetuses do have more rights than women...until it's born. Then its on its own! No insurance, no food, no education....the list goes on and on.

Jimo 4 years, 3 months ago

“The abortion debate is a difficult one,” said Brownback.

Really? Sam has always thought it was a very easy one.

So, to sum up: GOP candidates run in favor of "small" government and once in office start dictating to private companies and private consumers the fine detail of how the two will contract with each other.

There's only one flavor of Republican: the big government variety.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

No not big-government but sensitive government. The Governor is responding to Kansans who DO NOT WANT THEIR INSURANCE PREMIUMS TO HELP PAY FOR ABORTION!. We should not be forced to be involved in the death and dismemberment of the unborn!

Jimo 4 years, 3 months ago

Sensitive government? Is that the b/s spin on Fox these days? LOL

Your insurance premium doesn't "help" pay for abortion any more than buying a slushie that puts a dollar in the pocket of the quickie mart who uses that dollar to pay for maintenance on the air conditioner with that dollar in turn being paid out in wages to the office secretary who uses that dollar to help her daughter get an abortion. Yes, by your logic buying a slushie "helps" pay for abortions!! El stupido.

So - next time, the voters won't be fooled by liars like Brownback. They'll just assume that Sam is all big government, all time, and vote instead for small government liberals who want to get the gov't off your back and out of your daughter's vagina!

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

The point is that those who want an abortion should be required to pay for it. Don't ask others to pay for the destruction of the unborn.

jimmyjms 4 years, 3 months ago

Uh, so just to clarify....my tax dollars shouldn't be spent on anything I disagree with?

Is this what you're saying?

kernal 4 years, 3 months ago

People don't want to pay for others to have abortions? I don't want to pay for people who think it's fine to have children they can't afford and expect the rest of us to take care of their basic needs, which we are morally obligated to do regardless of religious bent. I don't want to pay higher insurance rates for the increasing number of people getting Type II Diabeties because they ignore good health habits. I don't want to pay for needless medications and because people refuse to follow diet and exercise recommendations of health providers.

Yet, pay I will.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

texburgh 4 years, 3 months ago

For Sam Brownback and the majority of these allegedly "pro-life" legislators, life begins at conception and ends at birth. They will now force women - even victims of rape or incest - to carry a child to term. They then vote repeatedly to cut social services and education to support those mothers and children after the delivery.

They are not "pro-life." Sam Brownback, Pete DeGraaf and others like them are not "pro-life," they are anti-abortion. After the delivery, you are on your own. Welcome to the new American Taliban domination.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

beatrice 4 years, 3 months ago

Jesus Christ is as real as Santa Claus. Do you think people should adhere to legislation based on the beliefs in the Tooth Fairy?

Sorry, but until you can prove that your sky god exists, keep your superstitions away from the laws that govern us.

denak 4 years, 3 months ago

Here are my thoughts about all of this:

1) It is disingenious of NOW/Planned Parenthood to always trot out the "rape and incest" card anytime there is legislation regarding abortion. Rape and incest make up 1% of ALLabortions in this country. The health of the mother is approximately another 6%. To try to paint this legistlation as an attack on females who have been raped or are pregnant as a result of incest is dishonest. Rape victims can obtain emergency contraception at a hospital if they are raped or go to their doctors or even go to Planned Parenthood if they need help. This legislation does not make any of those options go away.

2) As for DeGraff's comment, I think he could have worded his answer a little differently but the fact remains is that people DO have to plan for the worst. That is the whole reason for insurance. I get insurance through my employer. However, I don't get every disease covered in full. I have the option of carrying cancer insurance. It isn't discriminatory for my employer to only offer this as an option. Anymore than it is discriminatory for an employer to have an abortion option. If a person knows that they are high risk due to their health, or they feel strongly that they should have this option, should it be needed, then they should pay for it especially if it is an elective procedure as roughly 94% of all abortions are.

Lastly, people need to stop with the "sky if falling" scenarios. If abortion should lose its status as a federal right, it does not mean that abortion will become illegal. Abortion would revert back to a state right which is what it was prior to Roe v Wade. The individual states would determine the "how, what, when and where" of the issue which many are already doing, and doing legally, as a result of court cases.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 3 months ago

"To try to paint this legistlation as an attack on females who have been raped or are pregnant as a result of incest is dishonest.

You're right. It's just an attack on females who want the right to make their own choice about their bodies, not the one you and Sam want to impose on them.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

They can make the "choice" without using my insurance premium dollars or my tax dollars to dismember these children in the womb.

bad_dog 4 years, 3 months ago

Your tax dollars or personal income don't pay my insurance premiums. Only I and my employer pay those. No federal, state or local tax dollars subsidize my insurance premiums-just money from my employer and I.

It's not a difficult concept.

How do you feel about your tax dollars being used to fund wars that "dismember" children whether pre-natal or born?

jafs 4 years, 3 months ago

Actually, money in group plans isn't kept separately to pay individual claims, as far as I know.

It goes into a pool, and claims are paid from the pool - some pay more and use less, and vice versa.

So it is entirely possible that some of your money goes towards medical procedures for somebody else in your group.

Of course, this is a problem with group plans in general, and if somebody doesn't like it, they should take it up with the insurance company.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 3 months ago

It's a legal medical procedure.

Which other such procedures should be excluded from your insurance premiums?

Do I get to choose for you which ones those are?

denak 4 years, 3 months ago

Let's see, right off the top of my head I can think of a few legal procedures or health options that are excluded.

Gastric bypass surgery or any type of weight loss surgery. Nutrition counseling if one does not have diabetes. Plastic surgery that is not to fix a deformities. And probably several others that if I wanted to go get my insurance booklet I could list.

Insurance companies already make decisions on what they do and do not want to cover. Most insurance companies do not cover elective surgeries. For the overwhelming majority of abortions, the procedure is elective. The abortion is not needed because of rape, incest or to save the mother's life.

And since we are on the subject of reproductive health and what insurance should pay for, my insurance also does not pay for in vitro.

And yes, if there were a day where I wanted to try to get pregnant or have gastric bypass surgery or get a boob job and the only way I could do that was to buy additional insurance, then I would do that.

If a person wants to get an abortion or thinks that this may be an issue in the future, then they should have to buy the additional coverage. Their employer should not have to if their employer does not want to buy that part of the coverage.

denak 4 years, 3 months ago

I am not imposing anything on a woman who wants to get an abortion. Once again, there are numerous options available for a woman should she want to get an abortion. There is Planned Parenthood, her individual doctor, emergency contraception, etc. This legislation does not take away a woman's right to get an abortion.

If you believe so, show me how this legislation is going to impact a woman's ability to go to PlannedParenthood, her primary doctor or to the ER.

Richard Payton 4 years, 3 months ago

Brownback signed May 27, 2011 a bill de-funding planned parenthood. Brownback is like Kline on a personal drive to end abortions.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

Remember prior to Roe v. Wade the vast majority of the States prohibited killing unborn babies through dismemberment by abortion.

verity 4 years, 3 months ago

I don't want my tax money paying for wars that I morally object to.

I don't want my tax money paying for Brownback to import Florida's bad government.

I don't want my tax/insurance money paying for the care of people who refuse to wear helmets when they ride motorcycles or who drive when they are under the influence.

I don't want my tax/insurance money paying for a lot of things that I don't agree with and think are immoral. Are abortions the only thing we can object to morally? Besides the fact that the abortion argument is mostly wrong anyway---and has been shown to be so many times on these boards.

pizzapete 4 years, 3 months ago

No doubt, wouldn't it be nice if the tax forms came with an itemized list dividing up how we as tax payers wanted to have most of our tax money spent? And no one item could receive more than 20% of the total we paid. The government could take 20% or 30% off the top to allocate as they see fit. Dreaming is free.

verity 4 years, 3 months ago

Wouldn't make any difference---those things I think immoral would still be funded. Would just be moving funds around. My question is why is abortion any different than anything else that people consider immoral?

verity 4 years, 3 months ago

The issue for most of us is the fact that they are trying to put every blockade they can to legal abortions and the end result they want is to make all abortions illegal. So we keep trying to put out the brush fires.

My belief is that life begins at viability. I have seen no scientific or philosophical evidence to the contrary.

Keep abortion safe and legal!

notanota 4 years, 3 months ago

And keep them rare by providing women with all the affordable family planning services they need.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

Abortion is never safe for the unborn. It is the brutal killing and dismemberment of the child within the womb. "SAFE" is not something it relates to.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

"fetus" is the latin word for small child or "little one"

jafs 4 years, 3 months ago

A fetus is a mammal in the embryonic stage, between conception and birth.

A child is a human after birth, and up to about the teenage years.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

A fetus is God's special creation of a uniquely human sort. Each one an individual growing to become what God would have them to be.

Richard Payton 4 years, 3 months ago

Which insurance company offers this rape insurance? Obama Care will offer abortion coverage in 2014. So does this law only apply for a few years in Kansas? Does Brownback hope that the federal health coverage gets defeated in the Supreme Court? Can a woman or man sue the State of Kansas if they get rape and no insurance company offers rape insurance? I don't know any insurance company wanting to carry this rider do you?

notanota 4 years, 3 months ago

What's your basis for arguing that Obama Care offers abortion coverage? It does not.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

Amazing revisionist history here... but the kicker is that you use labeling "religious right" which amounts to anti-christian religious bigotry to attack your idealogical opponents. While government has no business in private enterprise of a woman's womb neither should another be asked to pay for you decision. My private insurance premium I will once again reinterate should not be used to kill, dismember, or destroy the unborn.

jafs 4 years, 3 months ago

If government has no business in private enterprise, then you should be against this law.

If you have a problem with the insurance company, then you should take it up with them.

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 3 months ago

Revisionist history? Abortion wasn't outlawed by the Catholic Church until 1869 when Pius IX issued a papal bull definitively outlawing it. Even then there was a provision to save the life of the mother. It wasn't fully outlawed in all cases until 1886 under Leo XIII. That's pretty late in the day, don't you think? I suggest you do a little more research.

THINKfirst 3 years, 3 months ago

I pay my insurance as well. I am a mother of two and my tubes are tied. It's not about that. I'm not against this legislation because I need insurance so I can run out and get an abortion. It's a health issue. YOU are making it an "anti-christian" because YOUR ideological beliefs are being challenged. Hello pot! Other people having rights does not infringe upon yours. I thought only god was fit to judge? Keep your religion out of my vagina!

Fixed_Asset 4 years, 3 months ago

Hear! Hear! Paul. A man of my dreams, you are.

beatrice 4 years, 3 months ago

So by how much will premiums now be lowered for all state employees?

If "not spending taxpayer funds" is the issue, then that savings will go back to the workers, correct?

average 4 years, 3 months ago

I'm looking at the state employee health plan (BCBS Plan A anyway) and it only covers abortion in cases of life of mother or rape/incest but only to 8 weeks. The state plans haven't covered elective abortion in at least a decade (that I've paid any attention), and I'm not sure if they ever did.

And that's the thing, companies have always been free to choose plans that don't cover it. Many do just that already. But, we'd rather go the authoritarian route.

somedude20 4 years, 3 months ago

So why stop at abortion if insurance is ala carte now? Myself, as well as many I know here in Kansas don't want to pay higher premiums for obese people as I do not condone that slothy lifestyle and find it morally reprehensible and is one of the major costs in healthcare. Cancer should not be covered since so many cancers are caused by lifestyle choices that I and many have problems with (yes some cancer is no ones fault but then neither is rape or incest) Before you say, "hey, abortion hurts another unlike fatness and cancer" remember what your leader said "There are a number of people that do not believe it is appropriate to use taxpayer dollars for abortion. There are a number of people, they don’t want it in their insurance policy that they are paying for and that is the issue that

For having zero, 0, nil, proof of ANY "god" being real, he/she sure gets a lot of power over us

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

Once again another attack on God and religion is mounted by those who simply disagree with us on this issue. Why do we need to stoop to be a bigot? Why do we need to attack the religious faith of others? We simply disagree that these other issue rise to the level and seriousness of premium payers being asked to pay for abortion. You pay for it yourself don't ask my insurance funds to pay. This is the point we do not want to condone this odious killing of the unborn in any way shape or form.

somedude20 4 years, 3 months ago

you are ducking the issue or missing the point (and what I wrote about "god" was not an attack as "god" would have to be real in order for me to attack him) ""There are a number of people that do not believe it is appropriate to use taxpayer dollars for abortion. There are a number of people, they don’t want it in their insurance policy that they are paying for and that is the issue that" A number of people, like I said in my post, don't want to pay for covering other's lifestyle choices that lead to cancer or obesity, so why are we stopping with abortion? Oh, I get it, "god" people are forcing "god" down our throats Feel free to skirt the issue again, "god" bless you!

beatrice 4 years, 3 months ago

Not believing in a sky god or the tooth fairy makes someone a bigot?

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

If you attack others for their religious convictions yes.

bad_dog 4 years, 3 months ago

Once again another attack on a woman's right to choose and whether to adopt religious beliefs is imposed by those who simply disagree with them on this issue. Why do they need to stoop to ideological zealotry? Why do they need to attack the absence of faith or different beliefs of others? We simply disagree with your beliefs and that your taxes are being used to pay for their abortions. Private insurance is paid by individuals. Group insurance is paid by employers/employees. Taxes likely only fund a small portion of government employee health insurance premiums. Insurance premiums-either group or private-would be negligibly impacted by removing coverage for abortions. The point we don't want to condone is your pre-supposed right to inpose your beliefs upon others-whether in the name of God or on any other basis.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

What makes you think that is the basis? Perhaps it is just my opinion in the arena of public debate? Perhaps we all can have differing opinions without attacking the religious beliefs of others?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 3 months ago

"Once again another attack on God and religion is mounted by those who simply disagree with us on this issue."

No, it's a desire to be free of the mindless meddling from superstitious busybodies such as yourself.

jonas_opines 4 years, 3 months ago

While you are correct that there are those who will attack God and religion, you are wrong when you interpret that comment as doing so.

Why should what You want dictate the decisions of other individuals or their companies, pray tell? It seems like a pretty simple thing. If you don't want insurance coverage paying for something, then find one that doesn't, or personally take the high road and opt out of insurance.

But it's easy to call for change when it's someone else, and not yourself, that is the one who has to make the change, isn't it?

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

Why should I have to be the one to make a change. Why can't we require the change to be made by those who want abortion coverage in their insurance? They--should pay for--the insurance rider that is added.

verity 4 years, 3 months ago

"So why stop at abortion if insurance is ala carte now?"

Hear, hear!

notanota 4 years, 3 months ago

I'm tired of my premiums paying for other people to have prostate surgery!

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

Yes-- and this scientific process--has allowed us to see the developing fetus and understand that prior opinions were wrong and that this develping child inutero should be protected and treated as a patient instead. We should allow the life of the mind to expand our horizons beyond the late sixties sexual revolution and our own personal wants, desires, and appetites. We should protect these children from the abortionists knife!

Centerville 4 years, 3 months ago

KS Jayhawk 74: You missed a memo from Sibileus: only religious fanatics believe that statutory rape isn't 'Romeo and Juliet". Nothing to see here, Move along.

equalaccessprivacy 4 years, 3 months ago

Brownback seems to make a career of defending the indefensible. In Kansas that's a shoo-in.

Centerville 4 years, 3 months ago

Government forcing private insurance companies to cover abortions and forcing taxpayers to buy water (water!) for state employees. A state bureaucracy skimming off the top of NEA grants. What else is under that rock?

Bob_Keeshan 4 years, 3 months ago

It is a sign of your personal intelligence that you believe government forces private insurance companies to cover abortions.

To the contrary, under the new law government is forcing private insurance companies to refuse to cover abortions. Even if a private insurance company wants to offer abortion coverage, it cannot. Only a fool thinks otherwise, which explains your comments.

jayhawklawrence 4 years, 3 months ago

You cannot defend this law. It only stands as a reminder that Brownback lacks character.

He was spaced out during his presidential campaign and he is spaced out as Governor.

Too bad. I thought he was more than this.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

Your backwards is really forwards and your fowards is really backwards! This Governor deserves our highest praise for placing a priority on the unborn children of Kansas! He is willing to place his political fortunes at risk in order to help build a culture of life in our state. Rest assured we Republicans will be strongly supportive of his re-election campaign based on the fact that he has kept his word. This truly is a man of charcter a statesman despite what the left wing believes!

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 3 months ago

Odd that, so far, I haven't seen very many people on this board that have your opinion. You say there are just masses of Republicans that are happy with Brownback. So where are they? Where are their voices? And don't blame it on the "demographic" of this paper or it's board. There are people who post here from all over the country. Gather your friends and have them start posting. Because so far, you are a voice in the wilderness.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 2 months ago

Well I guess you can just elect a legislature that agees with your position if that is the case. At this point my opinion seems to be the majority in Kansas! Even if it is not the majority in liberal blinded enclaves!

jayhawklawrence 4 years, 3 months ago

A lot of women are upset about this.

He caved in to pressure from the extreme right wing. That is not leadership.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

He did exactly what he said he would do during the campaign! He said he would sign any legislation that restricted abortion that reached his desk. You need to visit with all the legislators that you disagree with for passing the bill to his desk? My personal opinion is that Brownback is doing a great job. You will find that most women in Kansas will be strongly supportive of his re-election.

William Weissbeck 4 years, 3 months ago

What about the over use of antibiotics to treat viruses. That raises my insurance rates and is against accepted science. Shouldn't my legislature help me avoid unnecessary expenses caused by the stupid and the uninformed? What about IVF treatments? In some states like Illinois it is mandated that group insurance policies provide coverage. Even though there are some that disagree. Without some generally accepted basic coverage mandates, employees would be at the mercy and whim of their employers who would seek to reduce coverage for things like mental health or treatment for alcoholism.

jafs 4 years, 3 months ago

I'd also like to see those who make healthy choices get to pay lower premiums than those in their group who don't do that.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 2 months ago

The bottom line is that abortion will never make one rape better or less violent. The fact is also that abortion is the violent dismemberment of the unborn child and that our insurance premium dollars should never be asked to pay for this act of violence that many of us wish to see outlawed so that the unborn child is once again protected by the law.

Richard Heckler 4 years, 2 months ago

Meet todays Republican Party: The neocon christian fundamentalists are not necessarily a friend to women or families for that matter. They want to rule the world and women's bodies.

Anti-Abortion Groups Push To Outlaw Contraceptives By Redefining Personhood

Saturday 4 June 2011 by: Marie Diamond, ThinkProgress

A fringe anti-abortion group, Personhood USA, has been startlingly successful at pushing forward legislation across the country that would redefine life as beginning at the moment of fertilization, effectively outlawing contraceptives like birth control pills.

Although the medical community has long been in agreement that fertilization does not mark the beginning of a pregnancy — fertilized eggs must first be implanted, and only about half of fertilized eggs actually result in a pregnancy — a growing number of lawmakers are supporting Personhood USA’s efforts to buck medical expertise and legally define life as the moment a sperm meets an egg.

If they succeed in passing such a law — and if such a law survives judicial scrutiny — it could turn common forms of birth control into the legal equivalent of a homicide.

While “personhood” laws have always been a transparent attempt to outlaw abortion, the legislation supported by groups like Personhood USA goes much further in trying to assert government control over women’s bodies.

These laws would recognize every fertilized egg as an individual and complete human being with full rights, and place millions of women in legal jeopardy. According to 2008 numbers, around 11 million American women use birth control pills and another 2 million use intrauterine devices (IUDs).

Contraceptives like the pill and IUDs not only act to prevent fertilization, but, if fertilization does occur, may prevent that fertilized egg from implanting in a woman’s uterus. Personhood USA considers this tantamount to abortion, and wants to make it a punishable offense for women to control their own fertility.

More to this story: http://truthout.org/anti-abortion-groups-push-outlaw-contraceptives-redefining-personhood/1307204357

Flap Doodle 4 years, 2 months ago

You know what? I'd swear that I just saw this very same post on another thread on this award-winning website. Good to see that you are keeping your copy/paste skills honed, merrill.

kansanjayhawk 4 years, 2 months ago

Killing a child will never make a rape go away and will never make the woman better or healed. One wrong does not justify another wrong and violence begets violence.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.