U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 08-13-2015, 08:17 AM
 
40,114 posts, read 24,362,017 times
Reputation: 12624

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veneficus View Post
lol @ libs suddenly being concerned about money that isn't theirs.

edit: my guesstimate is 1.2M

My own kid was in the nicu for two months and it ran 120k.
Probably one of the biggest reasons women choose abortion is the cost of pregnancy and giving birth, especially if there are potential complications, and the cost of raising a child.

Most women who have abortions have already had children or are raising children, so the consideration of the financial impact of an unwanted pregnancy is perfectly legitimate and valid. It's MATURE and RESPONSIBLE to think of the costs involved, financial and otherwise. And there is nothing wrong with women considering themselves and their families.

 
Old 08-13-2015, 08:19 AM
 
2,085 posts, read 1,370,887 times
Reputation: 1401
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~HecateWhisperCat~ View Post
Yes, but I don't think you do. This is another one of nononeseneguys lovely attempts to call out PP and its supporters. The chance of surviving at 23 weeks is slim and requires extraordinary care. A fetus is simply not viable enough at that stage.
A friend of ours had a preemie at 25 weeks, and though he's had medical issues, he's a happy little baby boy.

The more advances there are in medical science, the earlier we're going to be able to save premature babies.
 
Old 08-13-2015, 08:23 AM
 
1,603 posts, read 891,457 times
Reputation: 1168
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Probably one of the biggest reasons women choose abortion is the cost of pregnancy and giving birth, especially if there are potential complications, and the cost of raising a child.

Most women who have abortions have already had children or are raising children, so the consideration of the financial impact of an unwanted pregnancy is perfectly legitimate and valid. It's MATURE and RESPONSIBLE to think of the costs involved, financial and otherwise. And there is nothing wrong with women considering themselves and their families.
Everyone has insurance now remember?

Have you forgotten the glorious ACA?

I was lucky our kid was born before the ACA, we only paid something like 2k out of pocket out of 120k.

With the Unaffordable Care Act it'd have been around 15k out of pocket.
 
Old 08-13-2015, 08:24 AM
 
4,986 posts, read 2,667,107 times
Reputation: 2738
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Probably one of the biggest reasons women choose abortion is the cost of pregnancy and giving birth, especially if there are potential complications, and the cost of raising a child.

Most women who have abortions have already had children or are raising children, so the consideration of the financial impact of an unwanted pregnancy is perfectly legitimate and valid. It's MATURE and RESPONSIBLE to think of the costs involved, financial and otherwise. And there is nothing wrong with women considering themselves and their families.
Now if only society would take that mindset toward the leeches of society.
 
Old 08-13-2015, 08:25 AM
 
624 posts, read 300,161 times
Reputation: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veneficus View Post
lol @ libs suddenly being concerned about money that isn't theirs.

edit: my guesstimate is 1.2M

My own kid was in the nicu for two months and it ran 120k.
A child was expensive to save? The solution is obviously to kill him/her!
 
Old 08-13-2015, 08:27 AM
 
624 posts, read 300,161 times
Reputation: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~HecateWhisperCat~ View Post
Yes, but I don't think you do. This is another one of nononeseneguys lovely attempts to call out PP and its supporters. The chance of surviving at 23 weeks is slim and requires extraordinary care. A fetus is simply not viable enough at that stage.
Was the baby alive or not?

Our ate you arguing that the baby was not alive, but suddenly became alive weeks later?
 
Old 08-13-2015, 08:27 AM
 
Location: North America
14,210 posts, read 10,110,918 times
Reputation: 5547
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vejadu View Post
A friend of ours had a preemie at 25 weeks, and though he's had medical issues, he's a happy little baby boy.

The more advances there are in medical science, the earlier we're going to be able to save premature babies.
With each week it's more likely that is able to take place. Currently it's 24 weeks and has been so since the 90's. Eventually it likely will get to that point but it's not at this moment.
 
Old 08-13-2015, 08:29 AM
 
Location: North America
14,210 posts, read 10,110,918 times
Reputation: 5547
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winning Guy View Post
Was the baby alive or not?

Our ate you arguing that the baby was not alive, but suddenly became alive weeks later?

What are you babbling on about?
 
Old 08-13-2015, 08:29 AM
 
624 posts, read 300,161 times
Reputation: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Probably one of the biggest reasons women choose abortion is the cost of pregnancy and giving birth, especially if there are potential complications, and the cost of raising a child.

Most women who have abortions have already had children or are raising children, so the consideration of the financial impact of an unwanted pregnancy is perfectly legitimate and valid. It's MATURE and RESPONSIBLE to think of the costs involved, financial and otherwise. And there is nothing wrong with women considering themselves and their families.
Nothing wrong with killing because of costs?
 
Old 08-13-2015, 08:31 AM
 
40,114 posts, read 24,362,017 times
Reputation: 12624
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veneficus View Post
Everyone has insurance now remember?

Have you forgotten the glorious ACA?

I was lucky our kid was born before the ACA, we only paid something like 2k out of pocket out of 120k.

With the Unaffordable Care Act it'd have been around 15k out of pocket.
The majority of women seeking abortions are single mothers, in their 20's. Do you think they have thousands of dollars at their disposal?

I'm very happy that you have a healthy child that you wanted, and that you can now cherish.

But YOUR reality isn't everyone else's reality. For many women, an unwanted pregnancy can mean financial ruin. It can mean ending up homeless, for themselves and the children they already have. These women aren't being selfish thinking of themselves. Who else is going to think of them? You? And what of the others who blame them for having abortions, and then blame them for not having abortions and being "welfare queens". They have every right to consider the impact an unwanted pregnancy is going to have on their lives, and for taking the action that's right for them.
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.


Closed Thread

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
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top