HOME | Contact Editor | Add Comment | Forum | Directory | Search | Advertise | Tell-a-Friend
October 25, 2006 | South Carolina Headlines


Join us in
South Carolina Headlines

Sign up today to take part in the forums, interact with the content, receive South Carolina Headlines newsletters, display current weather conditions in your area, and more.

Already a member?



Support South Carolina Headlines - visit our advertisers


Author (last 7 days)

My Almost-Not-Quite Interview With 'The Bear'


 :: Jonathan Pait
 :: Benj Buck

 :: Jimmy Moore
Press Releases

 :: List All

Want to be a columnist? Contact the editor to learn how.

Enough With Semantics - A Baby Is A Baby!
Jimmy Moore
February 5, 2002

It's about time we've started calling a baby a baby! Last week, the Bush administration declared that a developing fetus can now be classified as an "unborn child," thus making the child eligible for government health care to cover prenatal expenses. This has been a long time coming!

The State Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) will provide some much needed prenatal care for unborn children. Traditionally, CHIP does not cover women who are pregnant, but Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson thinks the lack of prenatal care is a crucial medical problem that can be easily solved by bringing the unborn children under the jurisdiction of CHIP. If the fetus is not properly taken care of while it is developing, then there is a greater chance of problems once the baby is born and throughout his life.

Each individual state, however, has the authority to make the final determination about whether or not fetuses would be included under CHIP. If states choose to include fetuses, then the mother would be eligible for prenatal and delivery care. On the other hand, if states choose not to include fetuses, then thousands of women across America will not get the proper care for their unborn babies. To me, this is borderline criminal!

Abortion rights supporters are running scared from this because they think there are other ways to cover pregnant women under CHIP. What they are really afraid of is that this is (in their minds) a sneaky attempt by an anti-abortion administration to legally classify a fetus as a person, which would weaken the pro-abortion argument that the fetus is not a child. Well, duh! Everyone knows that you can hear a baby’s heartbeat and feel him kicking long before birth. Are we supposed to ignore the health needs of that precious gift of God just because some people refuse to acknowledge life when it is staring them in the face?!

Thompson said he is in favor of including the fetus under CHIP because it is the quickest way to get prenatal services to the most women. Thompson said he also supports legislation pending in the Senate that would allow states to automatically add pregnant women to CHIP, much as poorer pregnant women are eligible for Medicaid. This policy shows that the Bush administration is showing true compassion to both the mothers of these unborn children and the children themselves. Common decency and care for fellow man are qualities that most people strive to live for in their own lives. Isn't it great to finally have a President in the White House who is an excellent role model (It's been a long time since we've been able to say that!)?

The Bush administration had hinted last summer that they were in favor of extending CHIP to include fetuses. At the time, the National Governors Association cautioned Health and Human Services that while some states would embrace the new option and some would immediately reject it, other states would face divisive battles over whether to go along. I think every state should hold a referendum on the issue and place it on the ballot in November. Let the people of each state decide whether they want unborn children to be covered under CHIP. My guess is that a large majority of states would allow CHIP to cover prenatal care expenses for unborn children. It's the right thing to do!

One final thought:

As for the concern of pro-abortion activists that this action by the Bush administration would undermine their arguments against abortion, I think they need to go back to the drawing board and seriously examine their real reasons for supporting abortion in the first place. And don't give me that "right to choose" malarkey either! Most women who get pregnant had their "right to choose" when they decided whether they were going to have sex or not. The mature, responsible woman who gets pregnant does the right thing and carries her baby through birth and then makes the decision to keep the baby or give him up for adoption. The immature, irresponsible, selfish, spoiled woman who happens to get pregnant does the wrong thing by killing innocent life without regard to the far-reaching physical, emotional and spiritual consequences of her actions on her baby, herself and her family. That fetus was a little baby slaughtered at the altar of inconvenience. The real choice is yours! Enough with semantics, a baby is a baby!

Post a comment for this column

You must be logged in to participate. You may use the MyVoice! area at the top of this page to log in, or you may set up a new account.


Use the partisanometer to put this columnist in his place - liberal or conservative? Just click left or right. First, you'll need to sign on.

Join in the fun! Sign on and give your rating on the partisanometer.


Join in the fun! Sign on and give this article a thumbs down or a thumbs up.


Refer Column

Refer this column to a friend. Highlight the fields below, fill them out and press "Send."



Send your comment to the author of this column.


This column has no comments. If you would like to make a comment, go here.

Site Stuff

Sessions: 814837
Members: 829

  South Carolina Headlines
Made possible by The Worthwhile Company, Inc.