Green Room

“Health coverage that starts in the womb for every child”

posted at 11:46 am on August 28, 2013 by

Does New Jersey Senate candidate Cory Booker’s online healthcare policy statement inadvertently acknowledge what most Americans understand intuitively?

This is a bit awkward, given Booker’s extremist stance on abortion:

Booker’s position is complex: A fetus isn’t a person at any stage of pregnancy, unless she’s deemed to be “wanted” at some point, in which case the government should provide her her with in-womb healthcare.*

*Care can be rescinded, and “child” status revoked, at any time prior to birth.

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

*Care can be rescinded, and “child” status revoked, at any time prior to birth.

*Care can be rescinded, and “child” status revoked, at any time prior to or within about half an hour or so of birth.

FIFY. Gosnell rule.

SoRight on August 28, 2013 at 12:01 PM

Wendy Davis hardest hit.

Bitter Clinger on August 28, 2013 at 12:02 PM

How long until the wording on that page is changed?

Flange on August 28, 2013 at 12:12 PM

Well, maybe he’s just including abortion within “health coverage”. That would be the consistent liberal position……

GWB on August 28, 2013 at 12:14 PM

Well, maybe he’s just including abortion within “health coverage”. That would be the consistent liberal position……

GWB on August 28, 2013 at 12:14 PM

So that would mean changing the title to: “Health coverage that starts and potentially ends in the womb for every child”

Bitter Clinger on August 28, 2013 at 12:28 PM

*Care can be rescinded, and “child” status revoked, at any time prior to birth.

That’s actually, subtly, built into the line item. What else do you think “preventing costly chronic conditions before they develop” could mean?

The Schaef on August 28, 2013 at 12:30 PM

*Care can be rescinded, and “child” status revoked, at any time prior to birth.

I loathe what my country has become.

Chris of Rights on August 28, 2013 at 12:51 PM

I don’t want Cory Booker, therefore he is not a person.

The Rogue Tomato on August 28, 2013 at 1:17 PM

A fetus isn’t a person at any stage of pregnancy, unless she’s deemed to be “wanted” at some point, in which case the government should provide her her with in-womb healthcare.*

This has long been the liberal definition of when “life” begins. If a pregnant woman is murdered: double homicide. But if that same woman had an abortion, it wouldn’t be called homicide at all.

Therefore, a fetus is only a baby if the mother wants a baby. Otherwise it’s just a clump of cells that can and will be discarded at her will. And naturally men don’t even factor into the discussion unless we’re talking about child support.

Esthier on August 28, 2013 at 2:36 PM

that’s the logic of abortion supporters: your mom decides whether or not you are a person. wtf? how can someone just decide that someone else isn’t a person? you can’t have it both ways. either everyone’s a person in the womb or no one is. it doesn’t make sense that some count as people and some do not. abortion supporter logic is just so confusing to me.

Sachiko on August 28, 2013 at 2:39 PM

This is a bit awkward, given Booker’s extremist stance on abortion:

G.B.

And yet quite appropriate, as Booker is also an extreme lowlife moron.

onomo on August 28, 2013 at 4:20 PM

It’s just like raising chickens. If you plan to eat an egg, you are going to care much less if you accidentally break it, than one you are letting a chicken roost.

thuja on August 28, 2013 at 5:18 PM

*Care can be rescinded, and “child” status revoked, at any time prior to birth.

I loathe what my country has become.

Chris of Rights on August 28, 2013 at 12:51 PM

Because it was so much more cool back when women with unwanted pregnancies would trying fall down the stairs to kill their fetuses?

thuja on August 28, 2013 at 5:20 PM

Government will be there from the womb to the tomb, unless someone decides the womb is your tomb.

RadClown on August 28, 2013 at 5:26 PM

He is a democrat…two facts..he is a liar and he supports baby killing

crosshugger on August 28, 2013 at 6:56 PM

thuja on August 28, 2013 at 5:20 PM

I was born @ 35 weeks. According to monsters like you-it’s just awesome if babies are aborted at 35 weeks.
Someday-God will deal with you and your ilk.

annoyinglittletwerp on August 28, 2013 at 7:19 PM

Cory Booker is a liar. Kick him to the curb good people of NJ.

Bmore on August 28, 2013 at 9:46 PM

I was born @ 35 weeks. According to monsters like you-it’s just awesome if babies are aborted at 35 weeks.
Someday-God will deal with you and your ilk.

annoyinglittletwerp on August 28, 2013 at 7:19 PM

Well, yeah, it is awesome.
But your fantasy of God punishing me for my honest beliefs about the world doesn’t strike me as a loving and joyous reponse to other people’s opinions. The people who are so concerned about dehumanizing the fetus dehumanize their political opponents constantly.
Honestly, I don’t even see a point in your bringing up when you were born beyond you think it gives you the highly coveted status of victim. It doesn’t.

thuja on August 28, 2013 at 10:16 PM

thuja on August 28, 2013 at 10:16 PM

It’s a baby-not a fetus-you piece of garbage. Those that support infanticide-such as yourself-DESERVE to be dehumanized.

annoyinglittletwerp on August 28, 2013 at 10:28 PM

It’s a baby-not a fetus-you piece of garbage. Those that support infanticide-such as yourself-DESERVE to be dehumanized.

annoyinglittletwerp on August 28, 2013 at 10:28 PM

Your stance of recognizing the personhood of fetuses but not political opponents is more than a little insane. Not that I’m blaming you. It’s the insanity of the “pro-life” position. Maybe you should find another issue which is supported by better arguments.

thuja on August 28, 2013 at 10:59 PM

thuja on August 28, 2013 at 10:59 PM

Believing that a woman should not have the option of murdering her child in the womb is ‘insane’?
Hitler would be proud of you.

annoyinglittletwerp on August 28, 2013 at 11:17 PM

Believing that a woman should not have the option of murdering her child in the womb is ‘insane’?
Hitler would be proud of you.

annoyinglittletwerp on August 28, 2013 at 11:17 PM

Hitler? You are you just so unpleasent. I mean, really, you would be happier finding a different topic where you don’t need to say such mean things.

thuja on August 28, 2013 at 11:31 PM

Slavery is when one person determines the humanity of another.

unclesmrgol on August 29, 2013 at 1:40 AM

Because it was so much more cool back when women with unwanted pregnancies would trying fall down the stairs to kill their fetuses?

thuja on August 28, 2013 at 5:20 PM

Pregnancy. From the Latin word “to carry”.

Hmm. What are they carrying? Fetuses. What are fetuses? The unborn young of any viviparous vertebrate having a basic structural resemblance to the adult of their kind.

Of their kind. Woman. Homo sapiens. Human.

Viviparous — bringing forth live young that have developed in the body of their parent.

A young human — a baby.

Hmm.

I wonder what Thuja thinks about providing knives or guns to murderers — because, after all, they are going to murder anyway….

If every child ought to be a wanted child, then I can also see, using Thuja’s reasoning, that “postnatal abortion” is fine too.

That woman who gave birth in a bathroom in a bar and then dumped the baby into the toilet tank so she could continue to watch the game… just fine in Thuja’s mind. The kid wasn’t wanted. Just fine.

unclesmrgol on August 29, 2013 at 1:49 AM

*Care can be rescinded, and “child” status revoked, at any time prior to birth.

Or a reasonable period thereafter.

The right to define the period when child status shall be revoked is reserved to the States respectively, or the people, for them to decide according to how far they’ve degraded themselves.

At the moment we’re at “twerking” and “pretend live babies aren’t chopped up on a butcher block in many abortion clinics even when one of the perpetrators is publicly tried.”

HitNRun on August 29, 2013 at 8:06 AM

Pregnancy. From the Latin word “to carry”.

Hmm. What are they carrying? Fetuses. What are fetuses? The unborn young of any viviparous vertebrate having a basic structural resemblance to the adult of their kind.

Of their kind. Woman. Homo sapiens. Human.

Viviparous — bringing forth live young that have developed in the body of their parent.

A young human — a baby.

Hmm.

I wonder what Thuja thinks about providing knives or guns to murderers — because, after all, they are going to murder anyway….

If every child ought to be a wanted child, then I can also see, using Thuja’s reasoning, that “postnatal abortion” is fine too.

That woman who gave birth in a bathroom in a bar and then dumped the baby into the toilet tank so she could continue to watch the game… just fine in Thuja’s mind. The kid wasn’t wanted. Just fine.

unclesmrgol on August 29, 2013 at 1:49 AM

Well, let’s just analyze what you have to say. You mention the Latin origin of the word “pregnant” as if its Latin origins have some relevance to an argument about morality. Maybe you should look up the etymology of “melancholy” and check its relevance to psychology. After that you free associate words until you come to the word “baby”. Free association is not an argument. It’s the polite way of saying babbling. But I am fairly sure that where you want to go is some sort of logical proof of your position. Of course, my contention is that no such argument is possible.

You then proceed to a non-sequitur about arming murderers. In terms of the question you ask, I would like know how does one know one is arming a murderer if you are a gun salesman? Unless you want to make a gun control argument that you shouldn’t sell guns at all since you can’t know for sure? As a supporter of the Second Amendment, I would reject that position.

You then proceed to a case of infanticide, which isn’t relevant to the “child in the womb” we were discussing. I do have to say that I truly don’t want a woman to raise a child who would commit infanticide to watch a game. I think the response of the criminal justice system to such a woman should be to sterilize her to make sure she never gets pregnant again. Presumably, you would want her to go to prison or be executed for murder.

thuja on August 29, 2013 at 9:17 AM

You then proceed to a case of infanticide, which isn’t relevant to the “child in the womb” we were discussing. I do have to say that I truly don’t want a woman to raise a child who would commit infanticide to watch a game. I think the response of the criminal justice system to such a woman should be to sterilize her to make sure she never gets pregnant again. Presumably, you would want her to go to prison or be executed for murder.

thuja on August 29, 2013 at 9:17 AM

It’s an interesting leap of logic you display to say that a discussion of infanticide is not relevant to a discussion of the child in the womb, given that abortion is infanticide. Any woman who would have an abortion is, by definition, a woman “who would commit infanticide.” Are you suggesting that any woman who would have an abortion should then be forcibly sterilized by the state so that she can never have other children? That would be the only logically consistent position to take.

Shump on August 29, 2013 at 9:24 AM

@Shump on August 29, 2013 at 9:24 AM

Shump, why stop with redefining infanticide? Why not just call birth control murder and make everything easy?

You need to understand logic before coming to any conclusion about logical consistency.

thuja on August 29, 2013 at 10:06 AM