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.
What lies, what in the world are you even talking about and what makes you think this is all about right to life versus right to choose? This is about the safety of a woman.
What lies?
Are you standing behind all of the statements pro-lifers have made in this thread as truth? Really?
And no, this is not about the safety of women, this is about trying to regulate legal abortion out of existence.
Surely you have heard about people, especially children, dying in the dentist's chair, funny that we haven't heard any pro-lifers demanding that dentist's have admitting privileges at a hospital, isn't it? Maybe if only women went to the dentist we would.
No matter how you want to spin it, abortion is infanticide.
Turkey slaughters 1.5 million Armenians and it is called genocide. Hitler slaughters 6+ million Jews and other "undesirables" and it is called a holocaust, but when Democrats slaughter 56+ million Americans between 1973 and 2013 they call it "pro-choice."
The Democratic Party should be called the Necrophilia Party for their love of death, particularly American deaths.
Do you really believe conservative, Republican women don't have abortions?
Still waiting for you to explain how Roe v Wade promotes ethnic cleansing.
This is one of the big reasons I have long supported gay marriage. While your post is very misleading as most kids in foster care are not adoptable, they are simply waiting to hopefully be placed back into the care of their parents, for the percentage of others, all these new families present a good opportunity to place them in permanent homes.
My post is not misleading. All kids are adoptable. And no they are not waiting to placed back with their parents. They were given up for adoption because their parents don't want them.
Oh for heavens sake: we do not ignore them: too many libs do not even understand who aborts, what the foster system is really like and which party is more inclined to adopt children?
The majority of kids in foster care are kids who could have been aborted, but mommy chose to have them. You are so pro abortion and don't say you are not, your posts have shown this in the past; maybe you think there should be a test to see if women would make good moms before they are allowed to carry their babies? Are you aware of who the average women is who aborts? She is a young women who doesn't want her life interrupted by the thought of raising a child, she isn't the mom that ends up with her kids being raised in the foster system.
A large number of us with adopted children are Republicans. There is nothing that says Republicans or Democrats adopt more or have more foster kids for that matter. Many foster parents I might add are Republicans. I should know, I was one for many years, most of those involved in the program we knew also were Republicans.
I'm for women having a choice. No one is pro abortion. You guys spend too much time worrying about the unborn when the ones already here are ignored. Some are adopted, many are not. Why don't we focus on them. And many abort because they can't afford another child. They have their reasons and it should be their decision and theirs alone...definitely not ours.
As others have pointed out, abortion is legal but highly regulated in most states.
I'd prefer the government stay entirely out of reproductive matters but I can live with a modicum of regulation. That's far preferable IMO to living under a regime that either prohibits or mandates it, as has been done in China. Make no mistake: any government that can prohibit abortion can also mandate abortion. Once a government asserts its sovereignty in reproductive matters, the game's up.
I never cease to be surprised when a person who distrusts and/or abhors government interference in general wants to turn over sexual and reproductive decisions to that same government. What's up with that?
There are times when regulations are needed, this has nothing to do with right versus left. I am not taking a stand her on abortion rights or who should have one or shouldn't have one, I am taking a stand on the safety of those involved. I can not imagine having any serious medical procedure like an abortion without knowing my doctor is part of a hospital staff.
If that's your primary concern, be assured that 1st trimester abortions are statistically one of the safest of all medical treatments for women - more so than, say, a tooth extraction. The risk begins to creep up with 2nd trimester procedures but even so it's still less risky than many preventative health screening tools and for sure safer than childbirth.
Why didn't you address the rest of my post about all the kids in foster care. Why do republicans constantly ignore them. You don't want abortion, that's fine. Please tell me what the outcome is for these unwanted kids who are already here. Stop preaching for those who are not born and actually do something for these kids who are already here. Good grief, what is wrong with some of you. Why aren't we taking care of the kids who need homes. Some grow up in foster care never knowing a loving home but your fixation is on abortion. Why don't you care about these kids.
Option 3: make individuals once again accountable for their actions instead of trying to push the consequences for bad decision making off on responsible individuals who didn't cause the problem.
Never understood how a public pool can have a sign that says "no life guard on duty, swim at your own risk" but copulating requires no such assumption of risk.
Option 3: make individuals once again accountable for their actions instead of trying to push the consequences for bad decision making off on responsible individuals who didn't cause the problem.
Never understood how a public pool can have a sign that says "no life guard on duty, swim at your own risk" but copulating requires no such assumption of risk.
Sex always has risks, but that doesn't mean people won't have sex and that doesn't mean women should be force to give birth to and raise a child she didn't want. No point in bringing a child into that type of life.
Plus, it should be a woman's choice if she wishes to have a fetus growing inside her, not the government's choice.
Sex always has risks, but that doesn't mean people won't have sex and that doesn't mean women should be force to give birth to and raise a child she didn't want. No point in bringing a child into that type of life.
Plus, it should be a woman's choice if she wishes to have a fetus growing inside her, not the government's choice.
OK, then don't tale off your panties.
Leave them on, or at least keep the semen out of your vagina.
You must have a very low opinion of women to believe they are too innately irresponsible to be held accountable for choosing to copulate without the benefit of inexpensive and readily available contraceptives.
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.
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.
