Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-23-2009, 12:43 PM
 
35,016 posts, read 39,159,646 times
Reputation: 6195

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by justamere10 View Post
I guess I misunderstood then. Please explain to me why Fox News was wrong and that no tax dollars will be spent to pay for abortions in foreign countries.
Your tax dollars go to pay for abortions here in the United States right now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-23-2009, 12:43 PM
 
Location: Utah
2,331 posts, read 3,375,261 times
Reputation: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
“We are experiencing an unprecedented economic crisis that has to be dealt with and dealt with rapidly,”
So the solution is to kill more unborn people? Sorry, I just don't know how your statement is relevant to this topic, please explain, thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2009, 12:44 PM
 
Location: NJ/NY
10,655 posts, read 18,665,293 times
Reputation: 2829
Quote:
Originally Posted by justamere10 View Post
I guess I misunderstood then. Please explain to me why Fox News was wrong and that no tax dollars will be spent to pay for abortions in foreign countries.
Just because you think it's a "baby", doesn't mean you should decide what an aid organization does with money already allocated to this, for a woman in a third world country who is carrying a pregnancy as the result of rape.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2009, 12:46 PM
 
Location: N/A
904 posts, read 687,866 times
Reputation: 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
Meaningless question, your tax money IS NOT going to be used to kill unborn babies.
Then why was that the reason it was unfunded before? I think your mis-informed
Note: George W. Bush spent more on Aids than any other persons pen on this earth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2009, 12:56 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,468,904 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by justamere10 View Post
So the solution is to kill more unborn people? Sorry, I just don't know how your statement is relevant to this topic, please explain, thanks.
At a time where we have no more money $400,000,000 is no little sum. No need to spend money overseas if we don't have any here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2009, 12:59 PM
 
Location: Utah
2,331 posts, read 3,375,261 times
Reputation: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtoli View Post
The same amount of money that was made available to overseas family planning will not change. That money is not strictly going to fund abortions. It funds organizations that perform a wide variety of family planning services - and now can be spread out even more to organizations that also provide abortions. Will some money now go to abortions? Yes. Will more of that money now reach women in need of birth control, HIV medication/testing, STD prevention/testing, prenatal case. Absolutely. All this does is make services of all kinds more accessible to women overseas.
As I understand it the Obama move resulted in the overturning of Bush's ban on federal funding of groups that provided abortion as one of their services.

Family planning groups already exist and many probably have been receiving taxpayer dollars for a long time. The Obama change then is that they will (probably for most once again) be able to facilitate the killing of unborn children and not risk losing their funding. To me it's all about abortion, not about those other things you mention.

Is that correct?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2009, 12:59 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,468,904 times
Reputation: 4799
If abortion rights activist are so hell bent on health care over seas why don't the donate money to those organizations. Odd they push hard for this and complain how bad our health care system is....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2009, 01:02 PM
 
Location: Utah
2,331 posts, read 3,375,261 times
Reputation: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
Your tax dollars go to pay for abortions here in the United States right now.
That does not justify Obama's change to allow federal funds to flow to organizations that facilitate the killing of unborn babies in foreign countries.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2009, 01:04 PM
 
Location: NJ/NY
10,655 posts, read 18,665,293 times
Reputation: 2829
Quote:
Originally Posted by justamere10 View Post
As I understand it the Obama move resulted in the overturning of Bush's ban on federal funding of groups that provided abortion as one of their services.

Family planning groups already exist and many probably have been receiving taxpayer dollars for a long time. The Obama change then is that they will (probably for most once again) be able to facilitate the killing of unborn children and not risk losing their funding. To me it's all about abortion, not about those other things you mention.

Is that correct?
Not all groups were receiving funding, due to the fact that some offered abortion.

Now those groups can ALSO offer services to women.

You place the value of a potential life over the life of an already born, suffering woman. Due to the fact that a clinic could possibly offer an abortion, you would take away all other services this woman could obtain, such as birth control, which would PREVENT further abortions, simply because the clinic offers abortion as a service.

Would you rather the woman have access to a choice of birth control or an abortion, or access to nothing at all? It would not necessarily stop the woman from obtaining a abortion somewhere else, whereas, having all services available could prevent another unplanned pregnancy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2009, 01:06 PM
 
Location: NJ/NY
10,655 posts, read 18,665,293 times
Reputation: 2829
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
If abortion rights activist are so hell bent on health care over seas why don't the donate money to those organizations. Odd they push hard for this and complain how bad our health care system is....
I do.

I volunteer as well.

Maybe people so fanatically against abortion could donate towards organizations that do not provide abortions and work towards reducing them, rather than demonizing the women that obtain them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:23 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top