California Governor Rejects Trump's Effort to Cut Off Funding over Abortion

[beautress]

(Reuters) - California on Friday fought back against a Trump administration threat to withhold federal funds for some health programs unless it stopped requiring health insurers to cover abortions, saying it would undermine the state's authority to protect women's reproductive rights.

Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Xavier Becerra, both Democrats, accused the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services of threatening billions of dollars of funding, not just for abortions, by reversing the Obama administration's view of a federal law governing insurance coverage.

In a letter to Roger Severino, director of HHS's Office for Civil Rights ("OCR"), Becerra said California already complied with the law, citing OCR's 2016 ruling in the state's favor in similar cases, and that a provision in the state constitution protected the right to have an abortion as a privacy right.

California's stance risks a possible showdown with HHS, which could try to expand any funding pullback to five other U.S. states that also require insurers to cover abortions.​

More here: California rejects Trump effort to cut off federal funds over abortion​

 

[Norman]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Why would insured people want to pay for "conditions" that people are entirely responsible for causing to themselves?

 

[beautress]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Of course, a pregnancy is not a disease. However, the artificial killing of the fetus causes extreme pain to the victim child being aborted very early in the first trimester, and it's on tape every time they videotape an abortion, the baby frantically tries to escape his torturer's killing equipment.

 

[Norman]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Of course, a pregnancy is not a disease. However, the artificial killing of the fetus causes extreme pain to the victim child being aborted very early in the first trimester, and it's on tape every time they videotape an abortion, the baby frantically tries to escape his torturer's killing equipment.

I think I will skip paying for this as fun as it sounds.

Let leftist lunatics be irresponsible on their own dime.

 

[beautress]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Of course, a pregnancy is not a disease. However, the artificial killing of the fetus causes extreme pain to the victim child being aborted very early in the first trimester, and it's on tape every time they videotape an abortion, the baby frantically tries to escape his torturer's killing equipment.

I think I will skip paying for this as fun as it sounds.

Let leftist lunatics be irresponsible on their own dime.

I'm not a Roman Catholic nor member of any church that bans members from getting abortions, but I thought forcing religious families to pay for other people's abortions was just plain wrong.

The Congress has done a disservice to the public at large for not defining based on scientific knowledge of stages of life when human life starts. Science says that once the egg and sperm unite, DNA is determined for life when the fusion becomes the two resulting cells. And those DNAs of the new human life are not the same as its mother's and is therefore not the same person. Extinguishing its life is an act of killing. The federal government should not be paying for people to kill their own homemade humans.

 

[beautress]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Of course, a pregnancy is not a disease. However, the artificial killing of the fetus causes extreme pain to the victim child being aborted very early in the first trimester, and it's on tape every time they videotape an abortion, the baby frantically tries to escape his torturer's killing equipment.

I think I will skip paying for this as fun as it sounds.

Let leftist lunatics be irresponsible on their own dime.

That's another reason why I strongly disapprove of sex education at extremely young ages. Kids learn from older siblings who learned how to have sex at school that it's fun, so that's why we're having younger and younger mothers having babies. There was some blurb in the news in the last few days about an 11-year old giving birth to a baby, and the authorities were sure interested in who raped her, since having sex with a minor is considered rape.

 

[Norman]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Of course, a pregnancy is not a disease. However, the artificial killing of the fetus causes extreme pain to the victim child being aborted very early in the first trimester, and it's on tape every time they videotape an abortion, the baby frantically tries to escape his torturer's killing equipment.

I think I will skip paying for this as fun as it sounds.

Let leftist lunatics be irresponsible on their own dime.

That's another reason why I strongly disapprove of sex education at extremely young ages. Kids learn from older siblings who learned how to have sex at school that it's fun, so that's why we're having younger and younger mothers having babies. There was some blurb in the news in the last few days about an 11-year old giving birth to a baby, and the authorities were sure interested in who raped her, since having sex with a minor is considered rape.

Aren't they teaching anal sex by 7 years old now?

At least it doesn't lead to kids...

 

[beautress]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Of course, a pregnancy is not a disease. However, the artificial killing of the fetus causes extreme pain to the victim child being aborted very early in the first trimester, and it's on tape every time they videotape an abortion, the baby frantically tries to escape his torturer's killing equipment.

I think I will skip paying for this as fun as it sounds.

Let leftist lunatics be irresponsible on their own dime.

That's another reason why I strongly disapprove of sex education at extremely young ages. Kids learn from older siblings who learned how to have sex at school that it's fun, so that's why we're having younger and younger mothers having babies. There was some blurb in the news in the last few days about an 11-year old giving birth to a baby, and the authorities were sure interested in who raped her, since having sex with a minor is considered rape.

Aren't they teaching anal sex by 7 years old now?

At least it doesn't lead to kids...

I have no idea, Norman. My children are in their 50s, and have no children themselves, so I don't know what the local schools are doing, but the largest local elementary school is funded by parents, and they teach children what abortion actually is and what it means to the future of humankind.

 

[Norman]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Of course, a pregnancy is not a disease. However, the artificial killing of the fetus causes extreme pain to the victim child being aborted very early in the first trimester, and it's on tape every time they videotape an abortion, the baby frantically tries to escape his torturer's killing equipment.

I think I will skip paying for this as fun as it sounds.

Let leftist lunatics be irresponsible on their own dime.

I'm not a Roman Catholic nor member of any church that bans members from getting abortions, but I thought forcing religious families to pay for other people's abortions was just plain wrong.

The Congress has done a disservice to the public at large for not defining based on scientific knowledge of stages of life when human life starts. Science says that once the egg and sperm unite, DNA is determined for life when the fusion becomes the two resulting cells. And those DNAs of the new human life are not the same as its mother's and is therefore not the same person. Extinguishing its life is an act of killing. The federal government should not be paying for people to kill their own homemade humans.

I am not religious.

Forcing me to pay for someone else's abortions is anti-American. Yes, these people are sick.

 

[beautress]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Of course, a pregnancy is not a disease. However, the artificial killing of the fetus causes extreme pain to the victim child being aborted very early in the first trimester, and it's on tape every time they videotape an abortion, the baby frantically tries to escape his torturer's killing equipment.

I think I will skip paying for this as fun as it sounds.

Let leftist lunatics be irresponsible on their own dime.

I'm not a Roman Catholic nor member of any church that bans members from getting abortions, but I thought forcing religious families to pay for other people's abortions was just plain wrong.

The Congress has done a disservice to the public at large for not defining based on scientific knowledge of stages of life when human life starts. Science says that once the egg and sperm unite, DNA is determined for life when the fusion becomes the two resulting cells. And those DNAs of the new human life are not the same as its mother's and is therefore not the same person. Extinguishing its life is an act of killing. The federal government should not be paying for people to kill their own homemade humans.

I am not religious.

Forcing me to pay for someone else's abortions is anti-American. Yes, these people are sick.

Passing laws for the sole and only purpose of getting more votes had put this nation's taxpayers into a payment of taxes that benefit others and not themselves. You shouldn't have to fund someone for their mischief.

 

[Snouter]

Killing a pre-born human being is a personal choice of the "parents." There is no justification for intelligent American citizens or others who who know simple biology to pay for the mistakes of others.

Mandatory sterilization would help stop organ selling of fetuses and abortions. What good looking, intelligent mother and father would ever consider murdering their pre-born child? In the West, fucking was about thinking about the future and expressing evolution and the love of promise of something even better. That is why there were so many good, intelligent people in the 1900's. Now, it is basically a shit show of uglies fucking for domination reasons, insecurity reasons or whatever. But definitely ugly people are not using protection, that is a fact.

 

[OldLady]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Why would insured people want to pay for "conditions" that people are entirely responsible for causing to themselves?

Like obesity? Smoking? Drug abuse? Those are covered.

 

[OldLady]

Killing an pre-born human being is a personal choice of the "parents." There is no justification for intelligent American citizens or others who who know simple biology to pay for the mistakes of others.

Fine. Then don't take insurance at all. It's a "pool" for a reason. Others are paying for treatment for your heart disease. Is that fair to them?

 

[Norman]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Why would insured people want to pay for "conditions" that people are entirely responsible for causing to themselves?

Like obesity? Smoking? Drug abuse? Those are covered.

Huh? I did not know that "smoking" is a covered condition, nor obesity for that matter. When it comes to those people can still identify what is and is not a disease.

I have no problem if someone wants to make a dumb policy. What is problematic is making it a law that any insurance has to include the nonsense. This is anti-American.

 

[OldLady]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Why would insured people want to pay for "conditions" that people are entirely responsible for causing to themselves?

Like obesity? Smoking? Drug abuse? Those are covered.

Huh? I did not know that "smoking" is a covered condition, nor obesity for that matter. When it comes to those people can still identify what is and is not a disease.

I have no problem if someone wants to make a dumb policy. What is problematic is making it a law that any insurance has to include the nonsense. This is anti-American.

You know what I was getting at. Smoking and obesity cause known health problems which are ALL covered by insurance.

 

[Norman]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Why would insured people want to pay for "conditions" that people are entirely responsible for causing to themselves?

Like obesity? Smoking? Drug abuse? Those are covered.

Huh? I did not know that "smoking" is a covered condition, nor obesity for that matter. When it comes to those people can still identify what is and is not a disease.

I have no problem if someone wants to make a dumb policy. What is problematic is making it a law that any insurance has to include the nonsense. This is anti-American.

You know what I was getting at. Smoking and obesity cause known health problems which are ALL covered by insurance.

No one is lobbying to make it illegal to have higher fees for smokers.

How a smoker can buy health insurance

"One of the biggest myths in personal finance is that smokers can't get health insurance. Contrary to popular belief, health insurance companies do offer coverage to smokers albeit with different terms and conditions as compared to non-smokers. Do keep in mind that being a smoker may force you to avail health insurance at a higher premium. However, this must not deter you from availing health insurance as smokers are more prone to lifestyle diseases than non-smokers."

They pay for their way. So higher fees for those with many sexual encounters then?

If you want to pay for someone else's abortion you did not even get to have sex with go ahead cuck. Not everyone is made out of soy.

 

[OldLady]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Why would insured people want to pay for "conditions" that people are entirely responsible for causing to themselves?

Like obesity? Smoking? Drug abuse? Those are covered.

Huh? I did not know that "smoking" is a covered condition, nor obesity for that matter. When it comes to those people can still identify what is and is not a disease.

I have no problem if someone wants to make a dumb policy. What is problematic is making it a law that any insurance has to include the nonsense. This is anti-American.

You know what I was getting at. Smoking and obesity cause known health problems which are ALL covered by insurance.

No one is lobbying to make it illegal to have higher fees for smokers.

How a smoker can buy health insurance

"One of the biggest myths in personal finance is that smokers can't get health insurance. Contrary to popular belief, health insurance companies do offer coverage to smokers albeit with different terms and conditions as compared to non-smokers. Do keep in mind that being a smoker may force you to avail health insurance at a higher premium. However, this must not deter you from availing health insurance as smokers are more prone to lifestyle diseases than non-smokers."

They pay for their way. So higher fees for those with many sexual encounters then?

If you want to pay for someone else's abortion you did not even get to have sex with go ahead cuck. Not everyone is made out of soy.

Procreation being one of our more fundamental and primitive drives, you will not find many who do not engage in sexual encounters. It doesn't take "many" to get pregnant. You're being downright silly, imo. You don't want to pay for abortions. Just say it. Tough toenails for you, since it is a legal medical procedure in the United States and yes since half the population is continually at risk of pregnancy, it has a valid reason for being covered. You guys can make all the judgments you want about women getting pregnant; pretty convenient that you will never have to worry about that.

 

[Care4all]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Of course, a pregnancy is not a disease. However, the artificial killing of the fetus causes extreme pain to the victim child being aborted very early in the first trimester, and it's on tape every time they videotape an abortion, the baby frantically tries to escape his torturer's killing equipment.

I think I will skip paying for this as fun as it sounds.

Let leftist lunatics be irresponsible on their own dime.

FYI
It costs less for insurers to cover abortion than to cover the costs of pregnancy and labor and delivery....

money is not a factor or issue for the insurance company on this.... many, if not all insurers were covering abortions on their own accord on the policies they provided before Obama care... it saves the Insurer money.

This is a political and ethical argument, not a money one....

 

[Norman]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Why would insured people want to pay for "conditions" that people are entirely responsible for causing to themselves?

Like obesity? Smoking? Drug abuse? Those are covered.

Huh? I did not know that "smoking" is a covered condition, nor obesity for that matter. When it comes to those people can still identify what is and is not a disease.

I have no problem if someone wants to make a dumb policy. What is problematic is making it a law that any insurance has to include the nonsense. This is anti-American.

You know what I was getting at. Smoking and obesity cause known health problems which are ALL covered by insurance.

No one is lobbying to make it illegal to have higher fees for smokers.

How a smoker can buy health insurance

"One of the biggest myths in personal finance is that smokers can't get health insurance. Contrary to popular belief, health insurance companies do offer coverage to smokers albeit with different terms and conditions as compared to non-smokers. Do keep in mind that being a smoker may force you to avail health insurance at a higher premium. However, this must not deter you from availing health insurance as smokers are more prone to lifestyle diseases than non-smokers."

They pay for their way. So higher fees for those with many sexual encounters then?

If you want to pay for someone else's abortion you did not even get to have sex with go ahead cuck. Not everyone is made out of soy.

Procreation being one of our more fundamental and primitive drives, you will not find many who do not engage in sexual encounters. It doesn't take "many" to get pregnant. You're being downright silly, imo. You don't want to pay for abortions. Just say it. Tough toenails for you, since it is a legal medical procedure in the United States and yes since half the population is continually at risk of pregnancy, it has a valid reason for being covered. You guys can make all the judgments you want about women getting pregnant; pretty convenient that you will never have to worry about that.

Not everyone is a slut like... all the people you know?

We don't want to pay for your shit. It is completely anti-American to make it illegal for you to pay for your own shit.

 

[Norman]

That's ridiculous, getting pregnant is not a disease.

Of course, a pregnancy is not a disease. However, the artificial killing of the fetus causes extreme pain to the victim child being aborted very early in the first trimester, and it's on tape every time they videotape an abortion, the baby frantically tries to escape his torturer's killing equipment.

I think I will skip paying for this as fun as it sounds.

Let leftist lunatics be irresponsible on their own dime.

FYI
It costs less for insurers to cover abortion than to cover the costs of pregnancy and labor and delivery....

money is not a factor or issue for the insurance company on this.... many, if not all insurers were covering abortions on their own accord on the policies they provided before Obama care... it saves the Insurer money.

This is a political and ethical argument, not a money one....

Guess what costs even less?

The ethical argument was already made. I am not going to pay for someone else's mistakes. My body, my wallet.

So if it's not an issue, why does it need to be illegal to not cover hoes abortions?