This is disturbing on so many levels:
Setting aside for a moment Rudy's "personally opposed" argument, he seems to be claiming here that the government has a responsibility to pay for a citizen's expression of their "rights". If the government does not pay for the abortion, then they would be "depriving" someone of their constitutional rights.
Clearly, Rudy's poor reasoning does not end with the abortion issue. Does he feel the same way about the second amendment, which is actually in the Constitution? If the government does not pay for guns for those who could not otherwise afford them, are we "depriving" them of their Constitutional rights? Is he is in favor for providing weapons to some individuals at tax-payer expense for certain circumstances?
Let's pray that the situation discussed frequently on this blog does not occur.