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 11-25-2008, 08:04 AM
 
Location: Texas
44,259 posts, read 64,375,553 times
Reputation: 73937

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Who are any of us to decide when an infant becomes a "person".

link
That, mah dear, is exactly my point. It doesn't seem right to have it both ways...

"Oh, no, it's my body; oh, it's not a person, anyway. Here comes the abortion..."

and then

"Oh, no, there's something wrong with my fetus! Spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to fix it!"

?????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-25-2008, 08:09 AM
 
3,255 posts, read 5,080,544 times
Reputation: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
With the exception of Catholics, why as a rule do right wing pro-lifers oppose welfare and other social programs that benefit poor mothers? I would think that they would be promoting such social welfare programs as a way to encourage young women to carry their "child" to term. I would think that would up front in the fight for quality child care for poor and working mothers, school nutrition programs, and affordable health care, yet these same people line up behind every right wing conservative who calls for cuts in social spending.

Inquiring minds want to know.
Please do not confuse the anti abortion folks with the pro life folks. Pro life folks consider all human life sacred and do support programs and interventions for human rights. If you think you are doing God's work, and your target audience of young women are not religious, then you will support state funded programs with your taxes to meet the goal of reducing abortions. You will also support things like school lunch programs to help poor children get the education they need to break the cycle of poverty. You will also support dignity of life initiatives for the elderly, the infirmed, and those in prison. natural birth to natural death.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2008, 08:15 AM
 
Location: Texas
38,859 posts, read 25,544,683 times
Reputation: 24780
Quote:
Originally Posted by skoro View Post
If there were fewer unwanted pregnancies, there would be less demand for abortions. Yet many ardent pro-lifers are almost as strongly opposed to birth control. What gives?

Here's something I've observed in discussions with activist pro-lifers...

They seem to be anti-sex, for some reason. I can only speculate, but it must somehow be tied to the biblical viewpoint that sex is dirty and shouldn't be performed for any purpose other than procreation. They have this attitude that anyone who enjoys sex should have to be burdened by supporting any children that result. A sort of payback for sexual pleasure.

I seriously doubt that they're as pro-life as they are anti-sex.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2008, 08:21 AM
 
Location: Wheaton, Illinois
10,261 posts, read 21,758,251 times
Reputation: 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
can only speculate, but it must somehow be tied to the biblical viewpoint that sex is dirty
Like Woody Allen said, it IS dirty if you're doing it right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2008, 08:26 AM
 
1,862 posts, read 3,343,406 times
Reputation: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdbrich View Post
Probably because we know a church can do a better job than the government can do.

And I don't like having my tax money taken to give to a "charity" like planned parenthood.

Truth be told, we give more money to charities, per capita, than the non-religious. We like to solve society's problems by charitable organizations. Liberals tend to prefer to just pay more taxes and not get involved.
Liberals, like myself, will agree to pay higher taxes to help our fellow citizens, AND also give to charity. We do get "involved". We also do volunteer work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2008, 08:27 AM
 
1,372 posts, read 3,765,635 times
Reputation: 459
They believe the church should handle that, not a big ugly gov't. I agree...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2008, 08:28 AM
 
Location: Texas
44,259 posts, read 64,375,553 times
Reputation: 73937
Liberals tend to give less and expect more intervention from the government. They are more generous with other people's money (ie, taxes). Conservatives tend to be the opposite - less taxes and let the community/individuals/churches take care of the situation. So this is a no-win argument.

The Giving Gap: Is the right more generous than the left? - Reason Magazine
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2008, 08:29 AM
 
1,862 posts, read 3,343,406 times
Reputation: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
Here's something I've observed in discussions with activist pro-lifers...

They seem to be anti-sex, for some reason. I can only speculate, but it must somehow be tied to the biblical viewpoint that sex is dirty and shouldn't be performed for any purpose other than procreation. They have this attitude that anyone who enjoys sex should have to be burdened by supporting any children that result. A sort of payback for sexual pleasure.

I seriously doubt that they're as pro-life as they are anti-sex.
They hate the idea that people are having fun outside of marriage - in fact, MORE fun than in marriage. So, they don't want birth control, because they think (for some crazy reason) that if kids don't get it, they won't have sex.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2008, 09:19 AM
 
6,762 posts, read 11,631,332 times
Reputation: 3028
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
With the exception of Catholics, why as a rule do right wing pro-lifers oppose welfare and other social programs that benefit poor mothers? I would think that they would be promoting such social welfare programs as a way to encourage young women to carry their "child" to term. I would think that would up front in the fight for quality child care for poor and working mothers, school nutrition programs, and affordable health care, yet these same people line up behind every right wing conservative who calls for cuts in social spending.

Inquiring minds want to know.

Because we should not sit around and wait for government to do everything for us. Why not have non profits and charity organizations take care of this? Government is inefficient in general and I would prefer my money go to private charities rather than having to be filtered through the porky hands of our govt where half of it will be lost in the red tape and govt inefficiencies.

I involve myself both personally and financially in community programs and if more people would get off their arses and do the same, there wouldn't be enough need for people to whine that big daddy government should step in with taxpayers dollars and take over everything.

A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take away everything you have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2008, 09:21 AM
 
6,762 posts, read 11,631,332 times
Reputation: 3028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
Here's something I've observed in discussions with activist pro-lifers...

They seem to be anti-sex, for some reason. I can only speculate, but it must somehow be tied to the biblical viewpoint that sex is dirty and shouldn't be performed for any purpose other than procreation. They have this attitude that anyone who enjoys sex should have to be burdened by supporting any children that result. A sort of payback for sexual pleasure.

I seriously doubt that they're as pro-life as they are anti-sex.
Wow! Are you really that ignorant???? Unbelievable.
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:52 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