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.
Fetus, not baby. And if the parents won't be able to take care of a baby?
it is funny that 100 percent of the people insistent on abortion being a good thing were not themselves aborted and would not choose the situation for themselves even if their parents were poor.
you could not be here today to advocate for abortion if you had been aborted.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,594,858 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas
Do you tell people with Down syndrome that they should have been aborted?
They deserved to be tortured and killed in the womb because of a genetic issue?
that sounds like eugenics to me.
You're being ridiculous, doctors if they detect conditions like Downs in the fetus, they ask the parents if they'd like to choose to abort the pregnancy
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,594,858 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas
it is funny that 100 percent of the people insistent on abortion being a good thing were not themselves aborted and would not choose the situation for themselves even if their parents were poor.
you could not be here today to advocate for abortion if you had been aborted.
Another ridiculous point. And as a matter of fact, there is a famous editorial titled "My mother should have aborted me", I forget who the author was, but it was dead serious. Mainly described how horrible the mothers life was and how burdensome being her son was to her and made her bad life worse. Author argued legitimately he shouldn't exist and his mothers life should have been better
Are there funds that offer support for women considering abortions to cover the expenses of carrying them to term (if they can't on their own) and putting the baby up for adoption? And how well are they funded?
I'd hope this option exists and that is funded well enough to cover those who wish to take that path. On quick check I see this group but I dunno how many they have assisted: https://www.americanadoptions.com/pr...on_or_adoption
I dunno if it should get state or federal funds but I'd consider supporting that. I'd favor it over telling everyone that they can't have to choice to make the decision that they feel is best all things considered in any case.
This country has all kind of entitlement programs for poor people so it is funny when liberals act like there is no government money to take care of a baby.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,594,858 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas
Don't taxpayers pay for abortions?
This country has all kind of entitlement programs for poor people so it is funny when liberals act like there is no government money to take care of a baby.
No, they don't. Because people like you made it so no taxpayer money would go towards abortion
"Most states have followed the federal government's lead in restricting public funding for abortion. Currently only seventeen states fund abortions for low-income women on the same or similar terms as other pregnancy-related and general health services. (See map.) Four of these states provide funding voluntarily (HI, MD, NY,1 and WA); in thirteen, courts interpreting their state constitutions have declared broad and independent protection for reproductive choice and have ordered nondiscriminatory public funding of abortion (AK, AZ, CA, CT, IL, MA, MN, MT, NJ, NM, OR, VT, and WV).2 Thirty-two of the remaining states pay for abortions for low-income women in cases of life-endangering circumstances, rape, or incest, as mandated by federal Medicaid law.3 (A handful of these states pay as well in cases of fetal impairment or when the pregnancy threatens "severe" health problems, but none provides reimbursement for all medically necessary abortions for low-income women.) Finally, one state (SD) fails even to comply with the Hyde Amendment, instead providing coverage only for lifesaving abortions."
Pete is the next Beto... And end the same way as well...
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.
