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.
This just horrible. But for pro-abortion organizations like Planned Parenthood, it is a measure of their success in their minds, and something to be pleased about.
Only a racist would defend policies that produce an outcome like this.
It's all going according to plan by the racist democrats who promote abortion.
Oh that's great. Take charge of your life by slaughtering the innocent. Fascism anyone? Total and utterly selfish self-absorption anyone?
Thats not selfish. Having an abortion is a selfless act. Knowing you can't care for and give a good life to a child right now but having the kid anyway is what's selfish.
No child deserves to be born to someone who never wanted them and to live with that terrible quality of life.
He/she doesn't have to become a thug but then again outside of a small minority left-wing right to life Catholics, the vast majority of bible thumping "right to lifers" don't want to pay for prenatal care, they don't want to pay for early childhood development, they don't want to pay for better schools, they don't want to pay for what little TANF and WIC pays for, they sure as hell don't want "Section 8" housing in neighborhoods free from the pressures of gangs and drug dealing, so what the hell do you think is going to happen to MANY of those poor innocent lives they keep screaming about?
Cue: "Well why do we have to pay for the poor choices of others!"
Because you bloody idiots, your innocent life shouldn't have to pay for the sins of their mothers either that or the mom's will do what they need to do, end an unwanted pregnancy!
I have never heard of an insurance policy that did not cover prenatal care.
I don't know what age "early childhood education" falls under. 3? 4? 5? 6?
Conservatives want to strengthen schools by keeping unions out and offering school choice/vouchers.
I would like to see TANF/WIC/section 8 abolished though.
I have never heard of an insurance policy that did not cover prenatal care.
Ah, you mean Medicaid, the expansion of which conservatives have been fighting tooth and nail.
Quote:
I don't know what age "early childhood education" falls under. 3? 4? 5? 6?
Whatever age it we decided upon, you don't want to pay for it.
Quote:
Conservatives want to strengthen schools by keeping unions out and offering school choice/vouchers.
Fighting unions and "choice/vouchers" is BS and you should know it. You are spending money to unaccredited, poorly staffed, unsupervised, sink holes for tax payer money, without improving education one iota.
Quote:
I would like to see TANF/WIC/section 8 abolished though.
Ah, you mean Medicaid, the expansion of which conservatives have been fighting tooth and nail.
It's welfare. Welfare is bad. This is not a difficult concept.
Quote:
Whatever age it we decided upon, you don't want to pay for it.
I pay for my kids daycare out of my own pocket.
Quote:
Fighting unions and "choice/vouchers" is BS and you should know it. You are spending money to unaccredited, poorly staffed, unsupervised, sink holes for tax payer money, without improving education one iota.
Education is superior in my new non-union school state compared to the old union school state.
We pay a seventh of the property tax too.
Quote:
Always easy to be generous with other peoples money.
Actually, most Americans self-identify as pro-life and support significant restrictions on abortion.
I don't know the veracity of that statement, but I can tell you that Roe vs. Wade is the law of the land. Thus, woman's right to choose is a Constitutional right and thus it is here to stay. Good luck with amending the Constitution, that's nearly impossible for something like this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
And with states enacting new laws all the time to limit abortion on demand, it`s safe to say that nothing has been settled.
The Red States are always playing games by imposing restrictions that are clearly intended to hinder or restrict the right to choose. They enact a bunch of nonsense and say, "let's see if courts would strike this restriction!!" Eventually, the SCOTUS would have to step in to rule whether the restrictions unduly burden women's right to choose. In sum, restrictions might seem "open for discussion", but the right to choose has been settled.
There are parents letting their kid drink beer and hold a gun but no, let's focus our attention on those who are smart enough to realize they aren't capable of raising a child. These kids have no chance at living when their parents brought them in a bad situation to begin with and aren't capable to provide for them.
I rather people not have kids at all if they can't take the responsibility to raise them. They aren't better off in a foster home or with a married couple who's own relationship is unstable.
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.
