Donald Trump says IVF should be free, paid for by government or insurance companies

a reply to: lilzazz

Thanks.

Edited to add .... 28 years ago we adopted. When we did, we paid for the whole thing and it was very expensive. If IVF is "free" and paid for by the government, then does that mean that adoption should be "free" as well ?? No matter if it's an adoption from the state, or through private means .... If all IVF is paid for by the government tax money, then shouldn't ALL adoption be as well?

Yes. Absolutely it should.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
This will be an unpopular statement here, but here goes ...

While in the swing state of Wisconsin, Donald Trump made the following statement ... "Your government will either pay for IVF treatment or mandate that insurance companies pay for it".

Full disclosure .. I was going to vote Libertarian but that candidate is so bad that I'm going to hold my nose and vote for Donald Trump. But I have to say I fully disagree with his statement. IVF is insanely expensive, and many many children die in the process of getting that one live baby. Our tax money should not be paying for peoples huge medical bills to make a baby in a lab. If people want babies, then they should be the ones to pay for it to happen. And forcing insurance companies to pay for the IVF baby making process will mean that those insurance companies will just jack up the price of their rates and people will be paying more for insurance.

Nothing is 'free'. So saying that IVF should be free is not true, everything gets paid for by someone and nothing is 'free', and saying that it should be free sounds like the Democrats who go around saying 'free stuff free stuff' to get votes.

So what do YOU all say? "Free IVF" paid for by your tax money or paid for by raising insurance premiums for everyone ???? Good idea or no???

NY Post - We are the party of the family

WATERTOWN, Wis.— Former President Donald Trump announced his new in-vitro fertilization policy while touring the midwest Thursday night, telling a full crowd at a town hall in La Crosse, Wisconsin that “your government” will either pay for IVF treatment or mandate that insurance companies pay for it.

“We want people to have babies,” Trump said to the roaring approval of the audience.

Edited to add .... 28 years ago we adopted. When we did, we paid for the whole thing and it was very expensive. If IVF is "free" and paid for by the government, then does that mean that adoption should be "free" as well ?? No matter if it's an adoption from the state, or through private means .... If all IVF is paid for by the government tax money, then shouldn't ALL adoption be as well?

No. We are not a "party of the family", ie diverting tax payer dollars to make more kids. Procreation is not essential healthcare. We have a chronic disease epidemic that must be reduced dramatically before we can spare the funds for cute little initiatives like this one. I understand the logic behind prohibiting certain types of abortion which has a strong moral imperative involved, reproduction is not what I call moral imperative particularly given the thousands of unhomed, unloved children in our nation. Just look at the foster system statistics. As long as that number remains in the triple or quadruple digits procreation will never be a priority. Normalize adoption for families struggling to conceive.

Eternity in Purgatory...

Miserable on Earth...

Not much of a choice is it?

a reply to: FlyersFan

Woo hoo, now illegals can have 25 more children thanks to IVF, is all free for all, then put all of them on government welfare, while at it, lets add sex changes mutilation and hormone treatment also.

My son and his wife are doing IVF, the cost for them in Florida Is 50,000 dollars, I hope if Trump wins, he will reimburse the money to them.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

"Many think IVF is a mortal sin...."

For those people who believe that the human soul is implanted at conception, yes.

Dozens of eggs get fertilized during IVF. Only one or two get to be implanted in a uterus to gestate. Others get flushed or something. Murder according to some.

a reply to: FullHeathen

No anymore, Some states has laws that claim embryos are children and protected by law.

Alabama Supreme Court rules frozen embryos are ‘children' under state law

www.nbcmiami.com...

originally posted by: pianopraze
Democrats forcing taxpayers to pay for gender change.

Republicans forcing taxpayers to pay for fertilization.

Libertarians want to stop government forcing taxpayers to pay*



Hell we want to stop most taxes period, especially federal taxes.



*except for the far left socialist asshole who somehow got elected this time to Libertarian candidate.

We Libertarians are always in the middle on this. I want less taxation from BOTH sides of the aisle. Less giving money to nations who hate us like Iran. That just made no sense to give money to a known terrorist nation that preaches genocide of Jews like the Arabs do around Israel. Their version of Islam Shiite is to be destroyed by the other versions. Like the Catholic Popes trying to destroy the "heretics" in the middle ages.

ETA

RON PAUL WAS RIGHT!

a reply to: Justoneman

Politics has become a circus, where the best clown win the elections.

I am sure that IVF will never be approved by congress the same way that paying for students' loans never made it to reality.

But when it comes to tax dollars, we have not control over it or how is used, we get rob by the same people we elect into power.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: FlyersFan

"Your government will either pay for IVF treatment or mandate that insurance companies pay for it".

So either tax payers will be paying for people to have children or insurance companies will put up their rates to cover the cost of people claiming for IVF.

Adoption is the best way for childless couples who can't afford IVF to have children not IVF paid for by the state / tax payer , IMO.

Kind of defeats the purpose of procreation don’t you think?
You know, passing on your genetic material.

At least a lab baby is genetically yours, instead of raising someone else’s ‘accident’

originally posted by: Maybenexttime
This is a really good idea, he makes sense for once.

This happens in numerous European countries. You get 2 or 3 or 4 "free" cycles depending. After that it's up to you to spend your own money.

He's right America needs to support those that want kids.. America does need babies.

That’s interesting, maybe Americans should stop with the bolt on industry, let chicks be happy with natural boobs and regular arses, not to mention wrinkles and creases.

Take a hefty percentage of that plastic surgery money and plow it into fertility treatments.

Time to stop finding faults in the mirror America and start laying back and thinking of uncle sam, he needs that future tax money 👍

a reply to: marg6043

I can't be expected to know everything.

In high school we used to debate the ethics of test tube babies. It was hypothetical at the time. Years later (1978) it was real. They called it IVF instead of test tube babies.

But not everybody thinks of a soul being formed at conception. RCC adopted the doctrine officially in the 1800s. Since the days of Aristotle the question has been asked with various answers given.

Some people might still ask "Soul? What's that?"

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: FlyersFan
This will be an unpopular statement here, but here goes ...

While in the swing state of Wisconsin, Donald Trump made the following statement ... "Your government will either pay for IVF treatment or mandate that insurance companies pay for it".

Full disclosure .. I was going to vote Libertarian but that candidate is so bad that I'm going to hold my nose and vote for Donald Trump. But I have to say I fully disagree with his statement. IVF is insanely expensive, and many many children die in the process of getting that one live baby. Our tax money should not be paying for peoples huge medical bills to make a baby in a lab. If people want babies, then they should be the ones to pay for it to happen. And forcing insurance companies to pay for the IVF baby making process will mean that those insurance companies will just jack up the price of their rates and people will be paying more for insurance.

Nothing is 'free'. So saying that IVF should be free is not true, everything gets paid for by someone and nothing is 'free', and saying that it should be free sounds like the Democrats who go around saying 'free stuff free stuff' to get votes.

So what do YOU all say? "Free IVF" paid for by your tax money or paid for by raising insurance premiums for everyone ???? Good idea or no???

NY Post - We are the party of the family

WATERTOWN, Wis.— Former President Donald Trump announced his new in-vitro fertilization policy while touring the midwest Thursday night, telling a full crowd at a town hall in La Crosse, Wisconsin that “your government” will either pay for IVF treatment or mandate that insurance companies pay for it.

“We want people to have babies,” Trump said to the roaring approval of the audience.

Edited to add .... 28 years ago we adopted. When we did, we paid for the whole thing and it was very expensive. If IVF is "free" and paid for by the government, then does that mean that adoption should be "free" as well ?? No matter if it's an adoption from the state, or through private means .... If all IVF is paid for by the government tax money, then shouldn't ALL adoption be as well?

No. We are not a "party of the family", ie diverting tax payer dollars to make more kids. Procreation is not essential healthcare. We have a chronic disease epidemic that must be reduced dramatically before we can spare the funds for cute little initiatives like this one. I understand the logic behind prohibiting certain types of abortion which has a strong moral imperative involved, reproduction is not what I call moral imperative particularly given the thousands of unhomed, unloved children in our nation. Just look at the foster system statistics. As long as that number remains in the triple or quadruple digits procreation will never be a priority. Normalize adoption for families struggling to conceive.

Or alternatively raise your own kids and if you can’t get them to the stage where they become autonomous individuals that’s on you.

Does it take a ‘global village’ to raise a child?

originally posted by: FullHeathen
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

"Many think IVF is a mortal sin...."

For those people who believe that the human soul is implanted at conception, yes.

Dozens of eggs get fertilized during IVF. Only one or two get to be implanted in a uterus to gestate. Others get flushed or something. Murder according to some.

With that logic whenever a woman has her period she is murdering a person. She is unclean and must seperate herself from society until she is cleansed, where have I heard that before?

a reply to: FullHeathen

To me no having a soul in a live human body is impossible, no matter how the body was created as long as is a living brain it will have a soul.

I have seen many children from invitro and they are perfectly normal smart kids just like the ones born from natural conception.

Soo in my believes that are many, if is a body with a working brain it will be a soul.

Symbiotic relationship, soul needs a body, a body will not survive without a soul.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
"Many think IVF is a mortal sin...."

Do they? That's retarded.

The Catholic church says it is. Wanna' know why? Because the Catholic church believes that life begins at conception and when people do IVF they conceive 5 or 6 babies and only one will live through the process. That's a whole lotta' children who die in the process. The purposeful killing of preborn children ... the mortal sin.

originally posted by: Athetos
I Sounds like you have the classic crab in the bucket mentally.

I have no idea what the supposedly means.
And I doubt that I would care what it means ....

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Procreation is not essential healthcare.

Exactly.

a reply to: Dalamax

With that logic whenever a woman has her period she is murdering a person. She is unclean and must seperate herself from society until she is cleansed, where have I heard that before?

Leviticus 15:19-33

I did a google search: can a woman have a period if an egg is fertilized. I couldn't get a clear answer. Closest was Quara, but it was behind a pay wall.

Only fertilized eggs count. So if a fertilized egg attaches to the fallopian tube (ectopic pregnancy), removing it to save the mother's life is murder according to some.

a reply to: FullHeathen

Thank goodness I am not a follower or believer of any organized religion, they are outdated, archaic and out of touch with real science and reality.

I always thought that the breath of life on a human being was at the moment of birth, if the fetus is never born is will never be a human living being. Plain and simple.