Who determines "rape and incest"?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

Is there DNA testing?

If you want a DNA sample from an accused rapist for purposes of determining whether big brother will allow you to get an abortion are there 4th/5th amendment issues?

And what if you accuse someone of rape but it wasn't rape... how can you kill that poor fetus without proving beyond a reasonable doubt that he's the child of a rapist (and thus deserves to die)

But if you wait for the outcome of a trial it will be too late to get the abortion.

It's so complex... if only there was some way around this, like letting you get an abortion without proving that you have "earned" it via being the victim of a crime.

[FLDCVADem]

1. You can get an abortion without proving rape or incest

You just have to pay for it yourself.

It's like that now, and it will be like that under the new law - no change.

[katandmoon]

6. Any other legal medical procedures singled out like that in the new law? Or just abortion?

[FLDCVADem]

8. Not that I know of

My point is that everyone is acting like this is something new, and it isn't. It's been this way for 30+ years. Where has all this outrage been for all those years? I agree that it's wrong, but why is everyone just now complaining about it? Why hasn't there been an equal outcry to overturn Hyde for all these years?

[katandmoon]

12. It hasn't been like that for the past 30+ years. For the first two years of the Clinton

Administration, Federal employees' health insurance COULD cover abortion, until repugs took over congress again.

Obama is too chickenshit to do what Clinton did.

[FLDCVADem]

14. Fair enough

So for two years, it wasn't this way for federal employees. What about other women that aren't federal employees? That still leaves 30 years where it was, but there are people here and elsewhere that act like this is some brand new infringement on women's rights.

[katandmoon]

16. What DIFFERENCE does it make that it's not brand new? Don't you think it's damn time that people DID

start to protest the hell out of it?

ETA: As a retired Fed, I've been protesting this for YEARS and I've posted it about it numerous times on DU.

[FLDCVADem]

17. Sure, protest it

But how about being honest in the protests? How about instead of acting like this is some brand new thing that was dreamt up to harm women we admit that we've let this stand for decades? How about Congress having the balls to overturn Hyde instead of trying to do an end-run around it and then whining when they get caught?

I understand that people don't like this part of the bill, but the dishonest way this has been portrayed does nothing but make people appear ignorant.

[katandmoon]

21. Again -- what difference does it make if it's new or not? Do you think most people who were not Feds

Were even AWARE that Federal employee health insurance did not cover abortion? This IS new to most people who are not Federal employees! Why are you picking on people for their reactions to this rather than to the fuckers who are foisting it on us? They didn't have to!

[FLDCVADem]

22. You obviously aren't reading the same posts I am

Where people are talking about this taking away the right to abortion, that it restricts abortion, that poor women are losing rights under this bill.

It's all bullshit - for all of the wailing and gnashing of teeth, this bill changes absolutely nothing as it pertains to federal funding of abortion. Nada, zilch, zero.

[katandmoon]

24. Again -- the fact that this bill perpetuates a ban on abortion coverage is NEWS to a lot of people

And it expands the ban to an ever greater number of women in order to appease the fucking fucker known as Ben Nelson.

People SHOULD be outraged by this.

[FLDCVADem]

26. It doesn't expand the ban at all

No one was able to get federal funding for abortion before and no one will be able to get it now. How is that expanding the ban?

And if people didn't know about the ban on federal funding for abortion, they should be at least as outraged at their own ignorance as they are at the fact the ban exists.

[enlightenment]

25. You're referring to government funded health plans.

The Hyde Amendment covers those and the Reid amendment reiterates the Hyde provisions.

The Nelson Amendment, as written (Sec. 1303, Special Rules, in the Manager's Amendment), will allow States to opt out of allowing insurance companies within the exchange to offer coverage for abortions - these are not just the government subsidized plans, these are plans that will be direct commerce between a woman and the insurance company.

That is new.

And by the way, a lot of people have been outraged over the Hyde Amendment since it went into play - women in the military, particularly.

[FLDCVADem]

27. As I read the amendment

States can opt out only for the exchange plans that are federally subsidized. Women not receiving government assistance can still buy plans in the exchange that cover abortion.

[enlightenment]

28. I don't agree.

There is nothing in the language that suggests that - indeed, it is very clear that 'qualified health plans' may be prohibited by the States from offering abortion coverage through the Exchange. Said plans may also, at their discretion, choose not to offer abortion coverage - so abortion is outside the realm of comprehensive coverage, since they can choose not to cover it. I have copied the definition of 'qualified health plan' below, as it is important to understand that it does not refer only to plans that are offering federally funded subsidized premiums, but to ALL insurance companies that will operate within the Exchanges.

‘‘SEC. 1303. SPECIAL RULES.
‘‘(a) STATE OPT-OUT OF ABORTION COVERAGE.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A State may elect to prohibit abortion coverage in qualified health plans offered through an Exchange in such State if such State enacts a law to provide for such prohibition.
‘‘(2) TERMINATION OF OPT OUT.—A State may repeal a law described in paragraph (1) and provide for the offering of such services through the Exchange.

‘‘(b) SPECIAL RULES RELATING TO COVERAGE OF ABORTION SERVICES.—
‘‘(1) VOLUNTARY CHOICE OF COVERAGE OF ABORTION SERVICES.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of this title (or any amendment made by this title)—
‘‘(i) nothing in this title (or any amendment made by this title), shall be construed to require a qualified health plan to provide coverage of services described in subparagraph (B)(i) or (B)(ii) as part of its essential health benefits for any plan
year; and
‘‘(ii) subject to subsection (a), the issuer of a qualified health plan shall determine whether or not the plan provides coverage of services described in subparagraph (B)(i) or (B)(ii) as part of such benefits for the plan year.

This section is the reiteration of the Hyde Amendment but goes a step further by allowing insurance companies within the Exchanges to CHOOSE to not offer coverage EVEN IF the procedure is allowed under Federal law (i.e., rape and life of mother). Note that this section specifically refers to the expenditure of Federal funds, while the preceding section only refers to 'qualified health plan'.

‘‘(B) ABORTION SERVICES.—
‘‘(i) ABORTIONS FOR WHICH PUBLIC FUNDING IS PROHIBITED.—The services described in this clause are abortions for which the expenditure of Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services is not permitted, based on the law as in effect as of the date that is 6 months before the beginning of the plan year involved.
‘‘(ii) ABORTIONS FOR WHICH PUBLIC FUNDING IS ALLOWED.—The services described in this clause are abortions for which the expenditure of Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services is permitted, based on the law as in effect as of the date that is 6 months before the beginning of the plan year involved.

A "qualified health plan" is not a special plan that offers federally subsidized premiums. It is, by definition, any plan that applies and is accepted to operate within the "exchange" in each state.

IN GENERAL.—The Exchange shall require health plans seeking certification as qualified health plans to submit to the Exchange, the Secretary, the State insurance commissioner, and make available to the public, accurate and timely disclosure of the following information:
‘‘(i) Claims payment policies and practices.
‘‘(ii) Periodic financial disclosures.
‘‘(iii) Data on enrollment.
‘‘(iv) Data on disenrollment.
‘‘(v) Data on the number of claims that are denied.
‘‘(vi) Data on rating practices.
‘‘(vii) Information on cost-sharing and payments with respect to any out-of-network coverage.
‘‘(viii) Information on enrollee and participant rights under this title.
‘‘(ix) Other information as determined appropriate by the Secretary.

[Odin2005]

2. K&R

[Ozymanithrax]

3. Some day we may live in an enlightened country...

Some day is not there yet.

[seabeyond]

4. if you think abortion is murder, how can you validate murder for any reason. be it

rape, incest or womans health.

that is the question and makes no sense to me

it is MURDER i tell you, and we will only murder under these circumstances

makes no sense. not logical, spiritual or emotional sense.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

10. It is, ironically, a a sort of psychological health of the mother exception

Even our esteemed president suggested that "psychological health of the mother" is some bullshit women claim just because they like killing babies. (He said that he's concerned that women not be able to get late-term abortions for what he considers weak psychological-health reasons.)

Yet the venerated rape exception is nothing more than a recognition that it's nasty to make a woman carry a rape-product fetus to term because it would be an outrage against the mother.

[seabeyond]

11. they can make wahtever justifications they want, in their eyes it is still murder, ergo wrong.

and cannot be validated.

[bluestateguy]

5. Could lead to some fake rape allegations

and more Duke Lacrosse cases.

[FLDCVADem]

7. Is that happening now in order to get federally funded abortions?

Because nothing changes under this bill in that regard.

[cbdo2007]

9. Good point. It should always be up to the parent to choose at what age their child dies.

[Sparkly]

13. ??

:crazy:

[WT Fuheck]

15. Senator Nelson will personally check each claim.

[madfloridian]

18. Stupak only wanted to cover "forced rapes".

Now how in the world would you prove that?

[FLDCVADem]

20. My guess would be

forcible rape v. statutory, but who knows?

[undeterred]

23. I'm guessing it means 'stranger' rapes.

Most rapes involve an acquaintance or someone the woman knows and they do not result in prosecution. They may however, result in unwanted pregnancy. Many people do not understand this.

[undeterred]

19. I actually had to explain this to a District Attorney once...

[Cleita]

29. I'm wondering when these Senators time traveled from the

sixteenth century. :eyes: