Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: denizen48 who wrote (67670)	11/24/2004 1:23:55 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Respond to of 89467

"Your view is from inside the SUV." I don't own or drive an SUV. As for the rest, AFAIK, insurance carriers are not required by law to cover ANY elective procedure. If you're suggesting a reputable carrier would deny a medically non-elective procedure (if in fact this amendment even covers insurance carriers and such situations), then it seems to me that is a much broader issue than just abortion and could easily be addressed in insurance laws, if it hasn't been already. Additionally, you start by objecting to insurance carriers, which you say many people have no choice about, being able to deny abortions to people who can't afford them otherwise (a situation already addressed above), but then you switch inexplicably to the case of the poor who have no insurance. If they don't have insurance, how are they restricted by a carrier as to their choice of providers? You're just not making sense, HARRY.