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.
Evangelicals are extremely trusting of anybody who waves a Bible and speaks in their language a.k.a. "Christianese." That's actually one of the things that's the most alarming about the Trump movement.
I think Evangelicals place close to as much faith in Trump as they do God.
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,462,489 times
Reputation: 12187
I don't like abortion but am pro choice even to the point current Dems do.
Abortion is never an ideal ending to pregnancy. It is only considered when...
1 The mother is selfish and doesn't want a child
2. The mother would like to have the child but is in a bad situation (poor, father left, she was raped, etc)
3. The mother faces serious health problems if live birth is attempted.
I don't see how anyone benefits from the govt forcing a woman to give birth in any of those situations. Options 1 and 2 and the child is at high risk of lifelong poverty / deviant behavior.
Just wondering how people feel about the Democrats' new abortion position. That position was articulated by Virginia Governor Ralph Northam, when he stated that one option would be to deliver the baby, make him or her comfortable, and then have a discussion with the mother about whether the baby should live or die.
Personally, I strongly disagree. What do you think?
I disagree also, because delivering a critically ill infant with no chance of survival, propels families into bankruptcy, due to inadequate health insurance. On the basis of this, and to spare their baby more suffering, it makes sense to abort in the last trimester. These families hold and grieve their infants after the delivery just as others do, after the birth and death of their infant. But these families won't be wallowing in debt, that is a responsible choice. I think some folks don't understand that third trimester abortions are rare and are reserved only for the above described scenario.
If someone is willing to adopt the "baby" (and pay its medical bills) the right wing may have a point.
When there are no kids aging out of the system without being adopted we can talk about adding more to it.
Currently 20,000 children age out every year.
Sure there is ..... the 4th Trimester begins after the baby is born.
Normal people call killing a baby after birth - Murder. Leftists call it a medically necessary Abortion under these new laws they are pushing.
I disagree also, because delivering a critically ill infant with no chance of survival, propels families into bankruptcy, due to inadequate health insurance. On the basis of this, and to spare their baby more suffering, it makes sense to abort in the last trimester. These families hold and grieve their infants after the delivery just as others do, after the birth and death of their infant. But these families won't be wallowing in debt, that is a responsible choice. I think some folks don't understand that third trimester abortions are rare and are reserved only for the above described scenario.
Think again.
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.
