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.
You know your absurd argument swings both ways with regard to Israel right? Ya gotta wonder why Dems don't support Israel when the State pays............
I'd support giving money to them for their health care needs. Then again, I have relations there going back to Abraham. But I don't expect you and others to pay for it.
Glad to hear most people are not single issue voters. Republicans on this board seem to think there are actually 3 or 4 issues.....
Abortion
Jews
Guns
More money for them from tax cuts
Taking away health care from as many people as possible
It is sad that anyone would argue for the right to take the life of babies. It really is.
If a pregnant woman knew that it was almost certain that the baby would be condemned to a life full of hardship and suffering, would it not be merciful for her to prevent that?
Sure, ideally she'd have never gotten pregnant at all, but if she already did, why not end the baby's future of misery before it could develop and be born to experience it?
There are countless people who are birthed and live only to end their lives themselves. And there are many more who wish they were never born, but don't attempt suicide only due to threats of being sent to Hell for it, the impact on loved ones, or for fear of not succeeding and living life... as a vegetable.
If a woman truly feels this would be the likely outcome of her baby, she may conclude that the kindest thing to do would be to terminate the pregnancy.
I'm not going to take sides in this, save to pint out that the pro-choice / reproductive-rights advocacy is often linked to strident feminism and various sexual splinter groups -- and this alliance is, in turn, opposed by a second coalition, equally strident, and centered around religious beliefs. A relatively-small group of tragic cases -- rape, incest, and severe disability / dysfunctionality -- are caught between the two, in a battle where each side seeks to impose its own interpretation of things, entirely at the expense of the other.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 05-18-2019 at 09:15 PM..
Erm... Did you have a thought, stewed on it, then typed?
First, we are we. There is no they. There is no us vs. them.
EVERYONE wants common sense. I am pro-life. YET, the Alabama law is WAY WAY TOO harsh!
I want abortions to be for incest, rape, and the life of the mother. I want them to be used sparingly and in the most extreme need. Pro-Life people, ALL of us want exactly that! We do not want them to be on demand and Roe v Wade is supposed to be exactly that!
YOU and many of the "pro-choice" are the ones who have it twisted.
r v w NEVER intended that 50M babies would be aborted over 40 years. Think about that!
50M lives snuffed out.
This isn't about women's reproductive health, this is about 50M baby daddy's who don't give a crap about their children and the dumbass women who gladly throw it all away.
If the choice crowd cared about women they'd act like they give a crap, but they do not! It's trading innocent lives for cash, nothing more.
Actually Jesus comes again on the Mt. of Olives and takes people up into the air to meet him. But you were close enough.
It's like candidate X gets voted in. Your team wins!!!! Suddenly all is right with the world!!!! The savior will fix it for you !!!!
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.