# Michigan passes "rape insurance" bill
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262
**Category:** Politics & Elections
**Created:** [December 13, 2013, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262 "2013-12-13T18:33:01Z")
**Posts on this page:** 13
**Page:** 4
### Author:  [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)
#### Post date: [December 18, 2013, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262/61 "2013-12-18T18:56:26Z")
to put **YogSosoth’s** initial comment a bit differently: why do only religious people get to be married? why should non-religious people be restricted to “civil unions”?
---
### Author:  [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)
#### Post date: [December 18, 2013, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262/62 "2013-12-18T20:28:07Z")
> [@Bricker](#):
>
> Yes – in fact, several years ago, I posted in several threads supporting this approach – get the government out of the “marriage” business altogether. Let them issue civil unions to any two adults. “Marriage” is left for whatever the churches wish to make of it.
What is the problem that deleting the word “marriage” from public discourse will solve? Throughout history people have entered into pair bonds and society and law evolved to recognize these bonds. As it developed, society understood these bonds to be called “marriage” and enacted laws providing for them.
But it set rules on who may enter into such a bond:
1. Over a certain age
2. Not already married
3. Cannot marry a close relative
4. (in most states and until recently, all) must be of the opposite sex
Now, last century Utah had a deal with #2 and ended up changing that. If we decide that #4 needs to be changed, why is there a need or even a suggestion to remove the word “marriage”?
Even if the government would do such a thing, people will still say that they are married, talk about getting married, say that so and so married so and so last weekend, and that those two people used to be married, but got a divorce (can we still use that word?)
Since people will be using the word in everyday discourse as they have for thousands of years, again, what is the point of the government pretending the word doesn’t exist?
---
### Author:  [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)
#### Post date: [December 19, 2013, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262/63 "2013-12-19T17:58:17Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#):
>
> When _was_ the last time a rogue county sheriff necessitated an armed citizen militia to remove them from power?
About 67 years ago. An armed populace has been keeping them in check!
---
### Author:  [@BrightSunshine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightSunshine)
#### Post date: [December 27, 2013, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262/64 "2013-12-27T17:52:03Z")
Elective first trimester abortions are in the $300-500 range. Medically necessitated, later term abortions (D&C for incomplete miscarriage, danger to mother’s health or life, severe fetal anomalies) carried out in a hospital can cost a lot more. Are insurance companies prohibited from covering those as well? If so this law has serious consequences for women who are trying to be mothers as well as those who are not.
Rape and incest makes for good soundbites, but health/life of mother and fetus account for ~10 times as many abortions as rape and incest ([link](http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html)).
---
### Author:  [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)
#### Post date: [December 30, 2013, 7:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262/65 "2013-12-30T07:21:54Z")
I do not know a single religious right winger who would not be happy with a federal law against abortion. They are constantly talking about how horrible Roe v. Wade was, in the same way they talk about how horrible Engel v. Vitale was.
I mean, think about it. This law got passed because of religious right wingers. There’s no way free marketers or Democrats would have supported it, meaning the religious right is all that’s left.
---
### Author:  [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)
#### Post date: [December 30, 2013, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262/66 "2013-12-30T19:01:18Z")
> [@BigT](#):
>
> I do not know a single religious right winger who would not be happy with a federal law against abortion.
Do you consider me a religious right winger?
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [December 31, 2013, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262/67 "2013-12-31T00:35:49Z")
And for that matter, I’m a Democrat, and I would like a federal law against abortion… if it had a snowball’s chance in Hell of actually working. But since it doesn’t, I favor measures like the ACA for reducing abortion, instead.
---
### Author:  [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)
#### Post date: [December 31, 2013, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262/68 "2013-12-31T01:05:55Z")
Re: I mean, think about it. This law got passed because of religious right wingers. There’s no way free marketers or Democrats would have supported it,
I’m a Democrat, and I would have supported the law, if I’d been a Michigan legislator. (To be more precise, I’m on the far left on economics and foreign-policy issues, and on the right on some of the cultural issues, including abortion, but in general, in spite of abortion, I have more in common with the Democrats than with the Republicans). A significant minority of Democrats are anti-abortion.
That said, while I’d _like_ a constitutional amendment banning abortions (with a medical necessity exception), that isn’t on the table right now, and I think Democratic policies (particularly, an expanded welfare state, low cost child care, etc.) offer some hope of lowering the abortion rate.
**Marley** I strongly doubt that women favour the Democrats because of the abortion issue. Women are only very slightly more pro-choice than men (there isn’t much of a gender gap on the issue) and are actually a bit more likely to hold the extreme pro-choice position as well. Women _Democrats_ are actually less likely to be pro-choice than men _Democrats_, so it’s more likely women lean (slightly) pro-choice because they are Democrats than the other way around. There are lots of other reasons women might favour the Democrats that seem more plausible to me.
---
### Author:  [@LibrarySpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LibrarySpy)
#### Post date: [January 6, 2014, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262/69 "2014-01-06T02:40:23Z")
Yes, but **Hector\_St\_Clare** , you support it as a way to reduce abortions. You’re clear about the intent of the law. That’s fine.
Hand-waving this small government nonsense is disingenuous subterfuge. The law was not made because of states rights or libertarianism, because it interferes in what a private insurance company can or cannot provide to customers.
---
### Author:  [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)
#### Post date: [January 6, 2014, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262/70 "2014-01-06T05:16:27Z")
And doesn’t ACA already take care of this by making it mandatory for insurers to offer policies without abortion coverage?
---
### Author:  [@Mosier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mosier)
#### Post date: [January 20, 2014, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262/71 "2014-01-20T01:18:23Z")
> [@jtgain](#):
>
> That’s pure hyperbole. There is no law that attempts to “force” women to have babies. Just that insurance won’t cover a $500 procedure. Off the top of my head, I can’t think of anything else worth $500 that a person attempts to insure against.
Medical insurance covers things that cost $500 or less so frequently that it’s pretty much routine.
> [@](#):
>
> Like adaher said, most insurance has a higher deductible than that. If my house burns down, I have to pay $1000 before insurance kicks in.
Which is nothing at all similar to how medical insurance works, of course. One example is out-of-pocket annual maximums that are part of every plan I’ve ever seen. Another example is plans which have different deductibles for different types of services (ambulance transport vs. primary care, for example) which are also part of every health insurance plan I’ve ever seen. Another example is deductibles which are less than 500 dollars, which are not at all rare.
> [@](#):
>
> Further it is an elective procedure (it is a choice, right???). What other insurance does the insured have a choice in whether a qualifying event has occurred? It seems like a further twisting of the insurance model of health care where it isn’t needed and doesn’t apply.
Is there such a term as “qualifying event” in terms of medical insurance? Medical insurance talks in terms of treatments and conditions, not events (the way other insurance does). The insurance company doesn’t ask how you came to be injured or sick or pregnant or deformed or asthmatic or whatever. They just verify the condition exists (sometimes), and the procedure or treatment is appropriate for the condition and covered by the insurance.
---
### Author:  [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)
#### Post date: [January 20, 2014, 8:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262/72 "2014-01-20T08:48:25Z")
> [@Mosier](#):
>
> Medical insurance covers things that cost $500 or less so frequently that it’s pretty much routine.
That’s why it’s more accurately called a “health plan”, since it’s mostly a pre-payment plan rather than insurance.
You’re paying for your routine medical costs monthly in advance. But this is not an essential policy interest that insurance companies should do this. Nor is it an imposition if a law prevents insurance companies from covering a routine medical cost.
---
### Author:  [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)
#### Post date: [January 20, 2014, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262/73 "2014-01-20T12:10:05Z")
Well, that certainly settles that!
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michigan-passes-rape-insurance-bill/676262.md?page=3)