“Right to Life” Groups Sue to Let People Die

RighttoLife

Four Republican lawmakers in Ohio have filed a lawsuit on behalf of “Right to Life” groups in an effort to prevent the state from expanding Medicaid

These so-called “Right to Life” groups are more or less determined to ensure that current mortality rates are preserved by keeping as many as 275,000 people off Medicaid.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of four state representatives and Right to Life chapters in Cleveland and Cincinnati (Ohio Right to Life supported the expansion). It asks justices to order the Controlling Board to reconvene and reject the proposal, and to prohibit the state Department of Medicaid from receiving funds for the expansion. [...]

GOP State Reps. Ron Young of LeRoy, Matt Lynch of Chagrin Falls, Ron Hood of Ashville, Andy Thompson of Marietta, and John Becker of Cincinnati are the lawmakers who signed onto the lawsuit.

Apparently the Right to Life does not apply to those who live under 133 percent of the federal poverty level, which is who the expansion of Medicaid will cover. In total as many as 275,000 residents of Ohio are expected to be covered by the expansion.

If you’re among those 275,000 individuals, the Cleveland and Cincinnati chapters of “Right to Life” don’t want you to have healthcare and thus life.

The expansion of Medicaid, which would preserve the lives of thousands of people, will not cost the state of Ohio anything for the first several years.

“Right to Life” is obviously some kind of inside joke.

This entry was posted in Healthcare and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • trgahan

    Yeah, the whole “Right to Life” movement isn’t a scam to keep the base frothy and at the polls, it’s all about the sanctity of life regardless of party.

    From my experience the average “Right To Life” mindset is just like the underpants gnomes: Any Democratic legislation_?_More Abortions!: Any Republican legislation_?_Less Abortions!

  • Razor

    You have the right to “life” if you’re a white Christian fetus.

  • GrafZeppelin127

    Someone has to explain why the “right to life” doesn’t include a right to health care.

    “Well, you don’t have a right to other people’s services, because that would be slavery.”

    OK.

    First of all, there are plenty of instances in which you actually do have a right to other people’s services, many of which are specifically enshrined in the Constitution. If you’re accused of a crime, you have a right to the services of an attorney, as well as a judge, jury, court personnel, and witnesses, all at their own or at public expense, not yours.

    Second, services are contracts, slavery is property. Contracts are not property; contractual rights are not the same as property rights.

    Third, if you want to get all reductive about it, if person [X] does not have a “right” to the services of person [Y], what gives the zygote/embryo/foetus — assuming it is a “person” — a “right” to the “services” of the mother? If a doctor can’t be compelled to treat another person, why can a woman be compelled to carry and bear another person? [Yes, I know this is disgusting and offensive and awful, but that’s the analogy they’re drawing even if they don’t realize it.]

    This is what happens when you try to apply logic and legal reasoning to what is a purely emotional argument.

    If there is a “right to life,” it should include a right to health care. You have a right to legal representation and a jury trial when your liberty is at stake, and you have a right to police protection when your property is at stake; why shouldn’t you have a right to medical treatment when your life is at stake? Or do we not actually value life more than liberty and property?

    • D_C_Wilson

      If this is slavery, then ER doctors have been enslaved for 30 years now. That’s when Congress made it illegal for an ER ro refuse life saving treatment even if the patient has no insurance and cannot pay.

    • Zen Diesel

      The Right doesn’t believe in logic or governing for that matter. The only thing that matters to them is to fulfill the prophecy of the Dominion Jesus via the Looney Tunes in office that they have voted for.

  • Badgerite

    This is the problem with the ‘Right to Life’ groups. It seems to me that it is a legitimate issue. That is where and when does the state interest in preserving life begin and end. But it is an issue that is clearly being used for illegitimate political purposes, ( as in seeing that more people die due to lack of adequate healthcare or sticking their noses into family and patient decisions with respect to end of life issues). The contradiction is glaring and you can’t have it both ways.

  • fry1laurie

    Ron, Matt, Ron, Andy and John. Notice there are no women in this?