Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-24-2018, 05:31 AM
 
9,617 posts, read 6,064,273 times
Reputation: 3884

Advertisements

This is for the court system to decide. Strictly dependent on whether the regulations and or laws are constitutional. That and not on my tax dollar are the only opinions I have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohhwanderlust View Post
I agree.

But states should also not be imposing endless government regulations to abortion providers that essentially are designed to shut them all down.

The whole "no intervention by government" concept works both ways, y'know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-24-2018, 11:22 AM
 
Location: London
12,275 posts, read 7,138,783 times
Reputation: 13661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Bell View Post
If they didn't accept government funds (taxpayer's money) then they wouldn't be government regulated.
Yes they would.

The regulations apply to all abortion providers within the jurisdiction, not just "government funded" ones.

https://www.texasobserver.org/texas-...ortion-clinic/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2018, 11:26 AM
 
Location: London
12,275 posts, read 7,138,783 times
Reputation: 13661
Quote:
Originally Posted by earthlyfather View Post
This is for the court system to decide. Strictly dependent on whether the regulations and or laws are constitutional. That and not on my tax dollar are the only opinions I have.
Well, court decisions don't change the fact that people aren't going to just stop having sex, nor will they magically become wealthy and/or good parents.

The only way to reduce the overload of unwanted children in the state system is to make it easier for women to prevent and/or end any pregnancies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2018, 12:27 PM
 
Location: Finland
6,418 posts, read 7,249,167 times
Reputation: 10440
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares View Post
Why would she even need a pain killer if it was a normal birth. By the time you have delivered the pain is gone. I would imagine if you were given pain meds for the birth itself those meds would take awhile to wear off.
Are you forgetting about after pains when the uterus is still shrinking back down? I certainly needed painkillers after my vaginal birth (less than 5 months ago so the memory is fresh) because the after pains were horrendous, I actually needed gas and air for a few hours after I gave birth and then regular paracetemol and occasional tramadol for the after pains. Plus of course the pain in the whole crotch area is really bad for the first few days afterwards. I know I forgot about it from my first birth but my second is recent enough for me to remember just how painful it was.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2018, 12:33 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
42,850 posts, read 26,275,432 times
Reputation: 34058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natsku View Post
Are you forgetting about after pains when the uterus is still shrinking back down? I certainly needed painkillers after my vaginal birth (less than 5 months ago so the memory is fresh) because the after pains were horrendous, I actually needed gas and air for a few hours after I gave birth and then regular paracetemol and occasional tramadol for the after pains. Plus of course the pain in the whole crotch area is really bad for the first few days afterwards. I know I forgot about it from my first birth but my second is recent enough for me to remember just how painful it was.
I had two kids and never had any severe pain. I had an episiotomy and that was painful for awhile but no "after pains".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2018, 12:43 PM
 
Location: London
12,275 posts, read 7,138,783 times
Reputation: 13661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natsku View Post
Are you forgetting about after pains when the uterus is still shrinking back down? I certainly needed painkillers after my vaginal birth (less than 5 months ago so the memory is fresh) because the after pains were horrendous, I actually needed gas and air for a few hours after I gave birth and then regular paracetemol and occasional tramadol for the after pains. Plus of course the pain in the whole crotch area is really bad for the first few days afterwards. I know I forgot about it from my first birth but my second is recent enough for me to remember just how painful it was.
Adoption is looking better and better to me...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2018, 12:44 PM
 
Location: The analog world
17,077 posts, read 13,366,942 times
Reputation: 22904
I did have afterpains after my second and third were born, but I was nursing, so no painkillers, not even OTC. Certainly not opioids.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2018, 01:14 PM
 
Location: Finland
6,418 posts, read 7,249,167 times
Reputation: 10440
I was nursing too but I still had painkillers, those pains are really really bad but very quickly forgotten. It's only for a few days that it's that bad though so only while you're still in the hospital so no longer term prescription with the risk of addiction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2018, 01:15 PM
 
Location: Finland
6,418 posts, read 7,249,167 times
Reputation: 10440
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohhwanderlust View Post
Adoption is looking better and better to me...
Oh I am really seeing the upsides of adoption now! But I bet in a few months time I'll have forgotten how bad it was, like the others posting here, just like I did with my first.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-24-2018, 01:18 PM
 
1,532 posts, read 1,061,136 times
Reputation: 5207
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovecrowds View Post
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare...to-foster-care

https://www.beckershospitalreview.co...ster-care.html

It seems like more women than ever are getting pregnant when they can't even take care of themselves.

Liberals have been treating children and parenthood as a joke since the early 70s and now there is a generation of children that will be growing up in foster homes.

Unlike former generations that had family-values, there is all of the sudden a massive amount of females who are having babies and all of the sudden and out of blue they decide parenting isn't for them so they just send their children to foster homes so they can have a vacation from parenthood and form a new relationship and maybe have another baby.

Why are so many female heroin addicts with codependency problems getting pregnant and having as many babies as they can.

I think much of the problem is Obamacare and the health exchanges sending these female heroin addicts to "treatment" for a only a tiny out of pocket expense and then they meet a heroin addict male and the female with issues starts having babies to keep the man.

This increase in foster care didn't start until around the time Obamacare was implemented. So one can't help but conclude that codependent females are forming relationships with men in treatment and having babies and relapsing.

Sadly, because of Obamacare and the free "treatment" programs these female heroin addicts are there is a tremendous amount of children in foster care that hard-working taxpayers are paying for.

Seems like unlike past generations there are a tremendous amount of lonely millennial females who are getting pregnant when they can't take of themselves and then all of the sudden they decide they don't want the baby and that the state should take care of it, while they go on a vacation from parenthood at the taxpayer's expense.


Why do you suppose there is an epidemic of males impregnating females when these males have no i tention of caring for the offspring they father.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:48 AM.

© 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