Freedom of Choice is in Jeopardy from a Surprising Source

I’m confused. I thought the pro-abortion camp was committed to freedom of choice. That’s the point right? Pro-Choice? If that is really the case then President Obama just became the biggest opponent of Pro-Choice. Or… light of recent event it’s becoming clear that “choice” isn’t what’s driving the abortion movement at all.

Read this…

Finalized on March 12, 2012 (and set to go into effect with the 2014 exchanges), the new HHS rule implements Section 1303 of the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” The new rule imposes mandates on every single enrollee in a qualified health plan that happens to include abortion coverage. In particular, federal law will soon mandate that every single individual enrolled in such a plan make payments to a private fund designated solely to the payment of abortion. This scheme allows Obamacare to get around the controversial issue of government-funded abortions with a new funding source: mandatory private payments by you, the insured.

This was a little confusing for me at first, so here is an explanation:

Here’s how it works. The new rule authorizes issuers to offer abortion coverage as part of their plans in the government-subsidized exchanges. For issuers that voluntarily include abortion coverage as part of their health plans, the new HHS rule mandates the private insurer to compel all enrollees to directly pay a separate abortion premium “without regard to the enrollee’s age, sex or family status.” Not surprisingly, the abortion premium also must be paid without regard to whether the individual has a religious or moral objection to funding other people’s abortions.

Well, you might argue, you still have the “choice” to choose a non-abortion providing insurance plan. Maybe not…

According to the rule: “A [qualified health plan] that provides for coverage of [elective abortion] must provide a notice to enrollees, only . . . at the time of enrollment.” It goes on to provide that the issuer’s advertising in the exchange must provide information “only with respect to the total amount of the combined payments” (without the need to put consumers on notice by breaking out the abortion amount to be billed separately). Thus consumers picking plans will likely have no idea about which ones come with the abortion premium mandate.

As I read up on this and tried to do as much fact-checking as possible, I was left with several observation:

  1. Pro-choice isn’t about a choice. If it were then people would be able to choose not to fund abortions.
  2. Pro-choicers are going to have to put their money where their mouth is. I’m staunchly pro-life in every way, which means I morally oppose abortion. Even if I weren’t, which I am, I still wouldn’t want to pay for someone else to have an abortion. That’s what this does. Americans need to decide if they want to be personally responsible for financially facilitating abortions.
  3. The Pro-choice mentality sees people and relationships in a far different way than the bible. For pro-choicers a baby is only as valuable as it is convenient. It’s only worth keeping if it doesn’t get in the way of a “real” person’s aspirations and desires. The bible doesn’t view people like that. God doesn’t view people like that. I hope you don’t view people as tools only existing to serve you. If you do something tells me you’re not very happy in your relationships.

You can read more HERE.