Skip to comments.
Congressional Bill May Discriminate Against Disabled Unborn Babies
Life News ^
| 2/2/07
| Steven Ertelt
Posted on 02/02/2007 2:29:42 PM PST by wagglebee
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A leading pro-life group is worried that a bill intended to protect the disabled may leave out disabled unborn children who could become victims of abortion simply because of their disabilities.
On Wednesday, a Senate committee approved the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (S. 358). The measure would prevent health insurance companies and employers from discriminating against people who test "positive" for a genetic disease.
That's a great start the Family Research Council says, but it worries that, while it covers individuals and their families, it excludes unborn children.
The definition of "family member" includes the individual and "a dependent child of the individual, including a child who is born to or placed for adoption with the individual."
"FRC is extremely concerned that this definition would exempt unborn children and children in the process of adoption from the bill's protections," the group said in a statement LifeNews.com received.
"Research suggests that as many as 92% of unborn children who test positive for Down Syndrome are aborted, in many cases because the unborn child is denied, or subject to the denial of, health insurance," FRC added.
"Health insurance companies and employers should not be allowed to use genetic information about unborn children to discriminate against their families or to pressure parents to abort them," the pro-life organization concluded.
The group says it will continue to work with leading pro-life senators, including Republican Sens. Mike Enzi of Wyoming, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, and Richard Burr of North Carolina, to ensure that the loophole is closed.
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; civilrights; disabled; eugenics; humanrights; moralabsolutes; prolife; righttolife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
"Research suggests that as many as 92% of unborn children who test positive for Down Syndrome are aborted, in many cases because the unborn child is denied, or subject to the denial of, health insurance," FRC added.This is sickening.
1
posted on
02/02/2007 2:29:49 PM PST
by
wagglebee
To: cgk; Coleus; cpforlife.org; Mr. Silverback; narses; 8mmMauser
2
posted on
02/02/2007 2:30:41 PM PST
by
wagglebee
("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
To: 49th; 69ConvertibleFirebird; Alexander Rubin; An American In Dairyland; Antoninus; Aquinasfan; ...
Moral Absolutes Ping! Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
Insurance companies may be able to coerce pregnant women into aborting babies who might be disabled.
3
posted on
02/02/2007 2:32:10 PM PST
by
wagglebee
("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
To: wagglebee
Murder the defective, unborn and useless old people and you can buy the latest XPODS or IBOXS!
4
posted on
02/02/2007 2:32:32 PM PST
by
HuntsvilleTxVeteran
("Remember the Alamo, Goliad and WACO, It is Time for a new San Jacinto")
To: Salvation
You'll want to read this.
5
posted on
02/02/2007 2:32:41 PM PST
by
wagglebee
("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
To: BykrBayb; T'wit; bjs1779
6
posted on
02/02/2007 2:32:59 PM PST
by
wagglebee
("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
To: wagglebee
Research suggests that as many as 92% of unborn children who test positive for Down Syndrome are aborted, in many cases because the unborn child is denied, or subject to the denial of, health insuranceSay what?!?
7
posted on
02/02/2007 2:34:31 PM PST
by
mtbopfuyn
(I think the border is kind of an artificial barrier - San Antonio councilwoman Patti Radle)
To: wagglebee
"Research suggests that as many as 92% of unborn children who test positive for Down Syndrome are aborted, in many cases because the unborn child is denied, or subject to the denial of, health insurance," FRC added. And that is why I never see them anymore.
8
posted on
02/02/2007 2:35:21 PM PST
by
cgk
(Republicanism didn't make Conservatives a majority. Conservatism made Republicans a majority. [NEWT])
To: wagglebee
Too bad they're not GAY babies...THEN they'd be protected from discrimination!
9
posted on
02/02/2007 2:37:12 PM PST
by
2harddrive
(...House a TOTAL Loss.....)
To: Salvation; wagglebee
You'll want to read this. Yeah, but then you'll wish you hadn't.
How much lower will we go before we hit bottom?
10
posted on
02/02/2007 2:37:29 PM PST
by
BykrBayb
(Be careful what you ask for, and even more careful what you demand. Þ)
To: wagglebee
I'd be interested in seeing that research...
To: wagglebee
"On Wednesday, a Senate committee approved the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (S. 358). The measure would prevent health insurance companies and employers from discriminating against people who test "positive" for a genetic disease."
I've been saying that we need a Constitutional Amendment to protect life, including genetic screening as grounds for discrimination (not just insurance and employers) as well as prohibiting abortion and some other things.
Roe v. Wade will be argued until the cows come home. It belongs a "states' right" no more than slavery does. That child is deserving of protection.
And yes, some "prevent disease" charities are pushing for aborting children. Including false positive screened children.
So much for the Left saying "if we kill one innocent man in jail". Innocent children are just "stuff".
12
posted on
02/02/2007 2:38:48 PM PST
by
weegee
(No third term. Hillary Clinton's 2008 election run presents a Constitutional Crisis.)
To: mtbopfuyn
Is there any risk to an adult who'd receive the stem cells of a "defective" child?
13
posted on
02/02/2007 2:39:56 PM PST
by
weegee
(No third term. Hillary Clinton's 2008 election run presents a Constitutional Crisis.)
To: mtbopfuyn
It is always risky to personalize a post, but in this case, I must. Day before yesterday my only grandchild, a boy who was born with fatal heart defects, if he had not had the best of medical care, had his tenth birthday. He is always an inspiration to those who know him. He endured almost three years of extensive reconstructive surgery, much of that time in the pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) following his all too often open heart and other surgical procedures.
That boy knows how to love and bring good cheer to everyone around him. His playmates love him, his teachers as well.
He deserved to live and he has. Who knows where his life will lead, or how long it will be? Already he has lived almost ten years longer than his expectations at birth. Would someone have aborted him to avoid those difficulties? If so, they would have deprived the essence of humanity from existence.
In the 40's and 50's we didn't turn away from people who were not physically perfect, no did we turn our heads at the sight of them. In fact, many of us got our inspiration from the bravery, endurance, and gentleness of those who were born to a different reality than most of us.
To: 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; annalex; ...
15
posted on
02/02/2007 5:52:04 PM PST
by
Coleus
(Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, birds, insects)
To: wagglebee; Coleus
They'd better say chromosomal abnormalities too, in the bill and in the amendment for the unborn, as Down's is not a genetic disease, strictly speaking (except in a very small minority of cases).
To: billhilly
Hooray for your grandson -- and for the docs who have helped give him a future!
It sounds as if the boy is a shining example of the hope that burns brighter than ever for patients with severe diseases and disabilities. Modern medicine is amazing. Ironic, then, that the "right to die" movement is making big strides in getting these very people legally killed off -- just as they catch sight of a good future life thanks to science.
17
posted on
02/02/2007 7:41:19 PM PST
by
T'wit
(Visitors: the good news is, lots of people have agreed with you. The bad news is, they were Nazis.)
To: 2nd amendment mama; A2J; Agitate; AliVeritas; Alouette; Annie03; aposiopetic; attagirl; Augie76; ...
ProLife Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
18
posted on
02/02/2007 7:49:22 PM PST
by
Mr. Silverback
("Safe sex? Not until they develop a condom for the heart."--Freeper All the Best)
To: wagglebee; 4lifeandliberty; abigail2; AbsoluteGrace; afraidfortherepublic; Alamo-Girl; ...
Pro-Life/Pro-Baby ping!

Please FReepmail me if you would like to be added to, or removed from, the Pro-Life/Pro-Baby ping list...
19
posted on
02/02/2007 9:31:03 PM PST
by
cgk
(Republicanism didn't make Conservatives a majority. Conservatism made Republicans a majority. [NEWT])
To: wagglebee
20
posted on
02/03/2007 3:38:09 AM PST
by
8mmMauser
(Jezu ufam tobie...Jesus I trust in Thee)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson