Liberals: Would You Support An Abortion Ban In Exchange For A UHC Bill and Immigration Reform

In response to a thread about how many religious conservatives object to a UHC bill because they believe it will fund abortions would you support a deal with religious conservatives to support an unilateral ban on abortion by constitutional amendment except if the mother’s life is threatened in exchange for a comprehensive universal health care bill and immigration reform?

No. We’ll get it without the religious right.

But if you support UHC–abortion issues aside–good on you for being genuinely pro-life.

In theory I support many of the health care reforms but I am opposed to mandated health care coverage which utterly makes the current bill unaccepatable to me.

I’m not even going to get into why the bill must mandate insurance coverage for everyone- because if you don’t get why it’s necessary by now, you never will- but no, I’m not willing to accept an abortion ban in exchange for UHC.

Of course not.

There is no reason to trade one step forward for one step backwards when the constant progression of history is on your side.

No. The thought of telling A 14 year old girl who was raped by her grandfather that she has to have that baby disgusts me. In fact, hands off women’s wombs, period, unless the fetus is old enough to survive birth. Why are “conservatives” so against government involvement in anything until it’s inconvenient for them to be?

I consider banning abortion and respecting fetuses as human life to be great progress.

In such a case abortion can be justified as the girl’s body may not be strong enough to give birth.

Well then I’m sure you’ll tell your parents to take you off their health insurance right away and never think about being willing to cover you until you’re 26.

Immigration reform is a bad idea for liberals and conservatives.

As my parents do not have healthcare I have some form of state health insurance. And what you advocate is a bad idea; it will encourage young people not to have jobs and stay in their parents homes.

This.
Now that the millenium’s behind us, that group’s a spent force anyway.

What if it is “strong enough”?

And hell no.

A constitutional amendment to ban abortions would be a horrible, horrible idea. Mixing that with UHC and immigration reform is a hypothetical not worth considering.

Of course not.

My child bearing decisions are none of the goddamned religious right’s business.

The real issue has always been why pro-lifers vote for representatives who are against UHC in the first place. If all life is sacred why should someone be allowed to die simply because they can’t afford medical care?

So, no answers yet.

Abortion is one of those dealbreaking issues to me along with neo-isolationist foreign policy. If some candidate supports it I can’t support him unless all the other candidates are more or less extremnists.

Well then, I’m sure you’ll be happy to give up your SCHIP coverage. After all, it’s a big bad government program that was also put through by reconciliation.

I agree with John Mace. This idea is DOA. And the Republicans have just spent the last 14 months proving that they’re not worth listening to anyway when it comes to, well, just about any public policy.

Oh, and right now you can’t vote. Tell me how you feel in 2014 or 2016.

SCHIP?

Not even foreign policy?

Petreaus For President. Whitman For Governor (Yeah she’s pro abortion but she’s the only Republican with a chance).

Lol.

I’m a realist-same reasons why I supported Scott Brown in Massachusetts and Giuliani in New York. Elect Rockfeller Republicans in the liberal states and conservatives in conservative states