Wow! I love it when someone goes to the heart of the hypocrisy of faux Christian organizations like Focus on the Family. They blather ad nauseum on issues, yet then one finds that their own conduct may in fact violate the standards they seek to impose on others. In this case, the apparent hypocrisy is in respect to health insurance and funding for abortions. Something FOF doesn't want health care reform to allow, although it appears FOF's own employees have such coverage. In my view, James Dobson and FOF are modern day Pharisees and a cancer on society that needs to be exposed as a fraud whenever possible. Here are some highlights from a Time article that looks at the issue:
*
It [Focus on the Family] does if you hold the organization to the same standard it uses to insist that health reform would result in publicly funded abortions. A few weeks ago, I wrote about the fungibility argument that many pro-life groups and politicians have employed to oppose health reform. The problem, they say, is that if any insurance plan that covers abortion is allowed to participate in a public exchange, then premiums paid to that plan in the form of taxpayer-funded subsidies help support that abortion coverage even if individual abortion procedures are paid for out of a separate pool of privately-paid premium dollars. You can debate about whether it makes sense to use this strict standard, but that's the argument.
*
But are those pro-life organizations holding themselves to the same strict standard? As it happens, Focus on the Family provides its employees health insurance through Principal, an insurance company that covers "abortion services." A Focus spokeswoman confirmed the fact that the organization pays premiums to Principal, but declined to comment on whether that amounts to an indirect funding of abortion.
*
Even if the specific plan Focus uses for its employees doesn't include abortion coverage--and I'm assuming it doesn't--the organization and its employees still pay premiums to a company that funds abortions. If health reform proposals have a fungibility problem, then Focus does as well.
It [Focus on the Family] does if you hold the organization to the same standard it uses to insist that health reform would result in publicly funded abortions. A few weeks ago, I wrote about the fungibility argument that many pro-life groups and politicians have employed to oppose health reform. The problem, they say, is that if any insurance plan that covers abortion is allowed to participate in a public exchange, then premiums paid to that plan in the form of taxpayer-funded subsidies help support that abortion coverage even if individual abortion procedures are paid for out of a separate pool of privately-paid premium dollars. You can debate about whether it makes sense to use this strict standard, but that's the argument.
*
But are those pro-life organizations holding themselves to the same strict standard? As it happens, Focus on the Family provides its employees health insurance through Principal, an insurance company that covers "abortion services." A Focus spokeswoman confirmed the fact that the organization pays premiums to Principal, but declined to comment on whether that amounts to an indirect funding of abortion.
*
Even if the specific plan Focus uses for its employees doesn't include abortion coverage--and I'm assuming it doesn't--the organization and its employees still pay premiums to a company that funds abortions. If health reform proposals have a fungibility problem, then Focus does as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment