https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-essential-politics-20190607-story.html
(This is not my view on abortion, as abortion is a complex issue, however I do support abortion in cases of rape, incest, and saving the life of the mother)
If you’ve been following the democratic presidential election trail, one issue has been recurring most frequently. Abortion.
Abortion as an issue has split Americans down the middle. From abortion at point of birth to the banning of abortions completely, America will likely never reach a consensus.
A new talking point related to abortion has been in the news recently, and you’d be forgiven if you had never heard of it before.
The Hyde Amendment was conceived from the mind of republican Rep. Henry Hyde of Illinois. Hyde was an opponent to the abortion cause, the restriction that bears his name drew support for years from a much broader swath of opinion. Backers argued that in a country with a wide divergence of views on abortion, taxpayers should not be forced to pay for a procedure that many regard as immoral.
The amendment has been featured in the news recently because former Vice President Joe Biden, who has long supported the amendment recently flipped multiple times on the topic int he space of a week. This was because of increasing pressure because of the increasingly radicalised left (The Left and Democrats are not the same thing).
To explain further, the Hyde Amendment basically states that taxpayers should not be forced to pay for elective abortions (As stated above). This is because those who do not support abortion should not be forced to pay for them to occur and secondly, because abortions in many cases are an “elective” procedure, which means that there is no danger to the life of the person, it is just a want instead of a necessity.
Importantly, taxpayer money could still be spent in the case where an abortion is not elective, any real danger to the long-term health and life of a patient can be covered by taxpayer money if needed.
Abortion itself is an intensely complicated subject, one that has so many factors that it is hard to take them all in, however, the Hyde Amendment itself is less complicated.
It’s difficult to come up with a logical argument for abandoning the Hyde Amendment, and it is perhaps more difficult to find an ethical argument.
To reiterate, The Hyde Amendment bars the use of federal funds to pay for abortion except to save the life of the woman, or if the pregnancy arises from incest or rape.
So, the difficulty arises comes from a scenario like this. If I want to get a new nose via plastic surgery, should you have to help pay for my new nose? The answer to this is obviously no.
If I had to have surgery to remove a brain tumour which would kill me, the answer could easily be yes, but an unnecessary surgery especially in a case where being responsible could’ve prevented the whole situation is different.
Further, forcing taxpayers, many of whom see elective abortion as morally apprehensible, to pay for what they see as wholly immoral is immoral in itself, and was the origin of the Hyde Amendment in the first place.
Elective surgery should not be covered by anyone but the person electing to receive said surgery.
America cannot afford to keep freeing people from individual responsibility
Daily Dose of Drake 