Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [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 01-22-2009, 09:02 PM
 
4,104 posts, read 5,308,979 times
Reputation: 1256

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by KevK View Post
They are not paying for abortions- they are helping fund birth control which is BADLY needed in the third world if they are ever going to raise the standard of living there. Look at China with its one child policy- a country that used to be horrible overpopulated and poor as dirt. The one child policy has done wonders for China.

Unless you happen to be born a female - then not so wonderful:

http://www.gendercide.org/case_infanticide.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-22-2009, 09:02 PM
 
Location: The Heart of Dixie
10,214 posts, read 15,920,736 times
Reputation: 7197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Langlen View Post
I've got absolutley no problem with this. The easier it is for a woman to get an abortion, the better IMO. Nobody should be forced to go through pregnancy if they don't want to. I personally want the US to adopt Canada's programs for free abortions.
If you don't want to go through pregnancy than either don't screw around or if you do screw around take birth control and use a condom.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2009, 09:06 PM
 
4,104 posts, read 5,308,979 times
Reputation: 1256
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ View Post
OMGosh, that reminds me of a story...was it Bradbury?--it was in a novel, and you could "give back/give up" your child up to age 8 or something. Was it Fahrenheit 451, maybe?

Sorry to go OT. Carry on...

I think you were just referring to the new law in Nebraska:

Nebraska law allows abandonment of teens - Kids and parenting- msnbc.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2009, 09:07 PM
 
4,104 posts, read 5,308,979 times
Reputation: 1256
Quote:
Originally Posted by beenhereandthere View Post
Isn't that another country?
Yeah, but they have lots of oil!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2009, 09:09 PM
 
Location: Floribama
18,949 posts, read 43,596,850 times
Reputation: 18760
How about federal funding for women in third world countries to get their tubes tied, wouldn't that make more sense?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2009, 09:38 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,729,686 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevK View Post
They are not paying for abortions- they are helping fund birth control which is BADLY needed in the third world if they are ever going to raise the standard of living there.
To further elaborate on this point, the Bush administration would not fund any health care provider that even referred women for abortion at another facility. Obama is lifting the ban on giving money to such organizations. He is not proposing paying for the abortions, just for other services.

Quote:
Originally Posted by th3vault View Post
If I have a heart attack and require life saving surgery, guess who's on the hook for the bill?

If I need an organ transplant, guess who's paying for it? I am.

Does the federal government pay for "life saving" surgery? No.

So why should taxpayers be paying for an elective surgery?
If you need care and cannot afford it, you will get put on medicaid and they will pay for it. Much elective surgery is paid for by medicare and medicaid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcadca View Post
GOOD!! my tax dollars should not have to pay for this. Let the countries where the people live pay for it! Oh and if a woman can not afford a baby DON'T get pregnant! I'm not a "christian nut" I just do not think I should have to pay for people in OTHER countries to get an abortion or anything else for that matter.
"Don't get pregnant is like "just say no". It doesn't always work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweetclimber View Post
If they didn't want to go through pregnancy, they shouldn't have gotten pregnant. If a woman doesn't want to have a child, at least have the baby and give it up for adoption, don't murder it
See above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by southernnaturelover View Post
How about federal funding for women in third world countries to get their tubes tied, wouldn't that make more sense?
Well, that is basically what is happening with the lifting of this ban. US money can be used for tube-tying, even if the organization uses other monies for abortion, or refers people for abortions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2009, 09:39 PM
 
4,104 posts, read 5,308,979 times
Reputation: 1256
Quote:
Originally Posted by southernnaturelover View Post
How about federal funding for women in third world countries to get their tubes tied, wouldn't that make more sense?

Paying inter-city girls to go on birth control was considered genocide by the left. Paying for their abortions is just good old fashioned "pro choice". Go figure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2009, 09:40 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,729,686 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewMexicanRepublican View Post
Paying inter-city girls to go on birth control was considered genocide by the left. Paying for their abortions is just good old fashioned "pro choice". Go figure.
The above is not exactly true. Some people did not like the idea of paying people to go on birth control, not the entirety of people who vote Democratic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2009, 10:22 PM
 
4,104 posts, read 5,308,979 times
Reputation: 1256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
The above is not exactly true. Some people did not like the idea of paying people to go on birth control, not the entirety of people who vote Democratic.
You are technically correct, but...


"Ironically, during the 1990's, Black and Democratic leaders, who were some of the largest proponents of providing free or low-cost birth control to disadvantaged teens, were some of the largest opponents of the controversial programs to provide monthly stipends and one-time payments to teens if they would agree to have the Norplant implants."

"Louis Farrakhan, along with other prominent Black and Democratic leaders referred to the programs as "genocide", with racist and eugenic undertones."

"Norplant, distributed by Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories, became the center of controversy during the early 1990's when some Black and Democratic leaders objected to the racial implications of the cash-for-control programs proposed in many US inner cities. "These programs target the Black children of the inner city - and are nothing more than an attempt to kill the Willie Hortons before they are born" "
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2009, 10:35 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,729,686 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewMexicanRepublican View Post
You are technically correct, but...


"Ironically, during the 1990's, Black and Democratic leaders, who were some of the largest proponents of providing free or low-cost birth control to disadvantaged teens, were some of the largest opponents of the controversial programs to provide monthly stipends and one-time payments to teens if they would agree to have the Norplant implants."

"Louis Farrakhan, along with other prominent Black and Democratic leaders referred to the programs as "genocide", with racist and eugenic undertones."

"Norplant, distributed by Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories, became the center of controversy during the early 1990's when some Black and Democratic leaders objected to the racial implications of the cash-for-control programs proposed in many US inner cities. "These programs target the Black children of the inner city - and are nothing more than an attempt to kill the Willie Hortons before they are born" "
Well, that program sounds like it mainly benefitted Norplant. I know there are such concerns in the black community, but you are quoting information that is at least 15 years old.
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 > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 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