Last week I attended a committee hearing, on L.D. 820, insurance nondiscrimination for pregnant women, and opposition points of view were unfathomable to me.

Opponents didn’t want to pay for this “elective” procedure, abortion. Elective should mean caused by one’s actions – most pregnancies; much lung cancer, diabetes, and heart disease. Should I pay for these? Yes, I am a member of a society; I have a responsibility to other members.

They don’t want government telling THEM what to do. But they have no problem forcing poor women into having children they can’t afford, often, causing women and children into a life of deprivation.

Someone stated those potential children could become scientists, engineers, etc. Some children from challenging backgrounds become great contributors, most do not. Never mentioned is what the woman could have become, if her ambitions had not been truncated. A lot about dignity, liberty, pursuit of happiness, but never for her.

Their tax dollars could be better spent? Abortion is a single procedure. Pregnancy care is not, then child medical care, WIC, supplemented rent and school lunches. From a purely dollar standpoint, their logic doesn’t work!

Freedom of religion, but only for them! We fight the ISIS caliphate. Yet they would coerce us all into living by their religious beliefs. Different in degree, but same principle. Separation of church and state?

This one really got me! Their solution to Maine deaths surpassing births – force women who can’t pay for care they need to give birth to children they can’t afford.

If a love of children is their real motive, why doesn’t their effort go to fighting for better education, paid family leave, subsidized child care, a livable wage, and a livable planet? How many underprivileged children have they adopted or fostered?

Kathleen Conrad

North Yarmouth

Send questions/comments to the editors.

« Previous

Next »