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.
What are you saying? That we should not have a military?
I'm saying republicans are full of it. A lot of woman might have that baby if we had a NHS. They could afford to without having to get on the welfare train. It's all such a scam, I'm saying republicans don't really give a crap about saving peoples lives, babies or not. If you cared so much you wouldn't be screaming to prevent health care. You would want people who are dying to be covered, you would want to actually save lives. You don't, stop saying you care when you don't. You just wan't everything to go back to the way it was in the fifties.
Just be honest, just for one stinking minute. That's what I'm saying.
It's all about money and God, which in itself pretty gross. Why have a military that you can't heal when they get home because you won't part with the money after the fact?
If you are for saving the innocent then have your military, have your anti abortion laws but with that comes healthcare for all and freedom for all. With that comes taking care of that military. I don't think you can handle all of it.
That's what I'm saying.
I have a good reason. It is against the law for tax dollars to be used to pay for abortions. The sonograms would be considered a part of the abortion prep....just like any meds and supplys used.....the woman herself has to pay for it. Insurance wouldn't even be allowed to pay for it....for the same reason....pro-lifers are against any part of their premium money possibly being used for an abortion.
Good luck with getting pro-lifers to agree to pay for what would become a part of the abortion process.
Just as with babies and children....pro-lifers want them born.....but don't want to pay for them. They want the sonograms, but don't want want to pay for them.
Ya know, the Repulican/Conservative motto: "Your problem....not mine."
Again, this is an issue with making it happen, not a reason why the idea itself is no good. At any rate, why did you bring it up? Must be that someone thinks it's a good idea. I'm not saying I'm going to push for it to be mandatory. You asked what I thought of the concept, so I agreed with it. Like I told you before, anything within the boundaries of the law to discourage but not prohibit (or delay the inevitable) abortion I'm all for. It being illegal to use tax dollars to pay for ultrasounds prior to an abortion means that there'd have to be another way of accomplishing it, not that I wouldn't be on board with the idea itself - because requiring an ultrasound isn't illegal.
Oh, and Democrats/liberals say "Your problem, not mine" too.
I am certain that not all states have such a law - California does a lot of things that other states don't do - which is part of the reason many people are leaving our beautiful home.
And part of the reason people like myself are quite happy here... I don't love the high COL, but otherwise it's the perfect place for me!
Quote:
However, California by itself does not define "society". It is quite a jump from noting that California may require something- to calling doing such a thing a "societal duty".
Any civilized society SHOULD have either universal/free healthcare, or some options for low-cost healthcare - at least in my opinion, although I'm sure I am not alone in that thought.
Regardless, Planned Parenthood provides an invaluable service for many many women (and men to a lesser degree). Do you really want to withhold the other 97% of their services, just because you don't agree with 3% of what they do? Again, if you applied that theory to all aspects of life, it would be difficult to find any businesses or services that pleased anyone.
You never studied statistics, psychology, or sociology - did you?
You never studied psychology or you'd know that humans just do not stop having sex.
YOU have never studied world history because YOU think the world was perfect before 1960...no one ever had illicit sex, sex for fun, sex for relief, sex for love, everyone adhered to YOUR idea of "moral", and no one had abortions....
No, it doesn't bother them to let kids with cancer get canceled by their insurance company and not get the medicine they need to live either. They vote against healthcare for all, healthcare for people with anything serious that could lead to death. It's not the death they care about it's keeping woman in their place. That's what God wants. wink wink
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what they care about and it isn't saving babies, it has to do with God wanting woman to have babies, lots and lots of babies.
AMEN ! Well put and absolutely true and the Repugs just canNOT deny it.....
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.
...no one ever had illicit sex, sex for fun, sex for relief, sex for love, everyone adhered to YOUR idea of "moral", and no one had abortions....