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.
How many millions of abortions take place every year? You actually believe there would be people waiting in line for all these babies? No way... not too many people are standing in line for drug addicted babies, those that have health issues or black/brown babies. Sure white, healthy babies would have plenty of "takers", but forget about the rest. I have a friend who is a social worker in DC and there are PLENTY of children that no one wants to adopt, so they end up in foster care, from one place to another.
And if abortion were not available it would cost a lot of money to raise all these children in foster homes etc. We are talking about millions every YEAR. Yes, the taxes would have to be raised, money doesn't grow in trees.
How many millions of abortions take place every year? You actually believe there would be people waiting in line for all these babies? No way... not too many people are standing in line for drug addicted babies, those that have health issues or black/brown babies. Sure white, healthy babies would have plenty of "takers", but forget about the rest. I have a friend who is a social worker in DC and there are PLENTY of children that no one wants to adopt, so they end up in foster care, from one place to another.
And if abortion were not available it would cost a lot of money to raise all these children in foster homes etc. We are talking about millions every YEAR. Yes, the taxes would have to be raised, money doesn't grow in trees.
Well, what the heck. If it's all about money, can't we have some of those poor children bumped off, too? They're only a couple of months past abortion age. I mean, who needs such a drain on the economy?
How many millions of abortions take place every year? You actually believe there would be people waiting in line for all these babies? No way... not too many people are standing in line for drug addicted babies, those that have health issues or black/brown babies. Sure white, healthy babies would have plenty of "takers", but forget about the rest. I have a friend who is a social worker in DC and there are PLENTY of children that no one wants to adopt, so they end up in foster care, from one place to another.
And if abortion were not available it would cost a lot of money to raise all these children in foster homes etc. We are talking about millions every YEAR. Yes, the taxes would have to be raised, money doesn't grow in trees.
interesting... I also find that while gays and lesbians are unable to adopt because they "choose" a lifestyle that does not produce children, therefore it is unacceptable for them to be able to aid in supporting any child by providing a loving caring home... society would rather leave them in an orphan home.. than see two men or two women take on the job... but alas!!! disabled and crack babies are definetely available to gays and lesbians because nobody wants those babies...
"Lake of Fire," currently on limited release in the United States, unwinds over more than two and a half hours of interviews with some of the leading figures from the pro-life and pro-choice camps.
I don't think I could watch this movie but it is out there with all the ugly truth.
Thanks very much for this link, this truth needs to be exposed.
Well, what the heck. If it's all about money, can't we have some of those poor children bumped off, too? They're only a couple of months past abortion age. I mean, who needs such a drain on the economy?
Oh please. It's usually the right wing republicans that are anti-choice... the same people that are against raising taxes, welfare, health care for children etc. They are only pro-choice if their taxes don't go up and someone else pays. On the other hand they support wars, such as the one in Iraq, that kill innocent kids that are already born, only mistake they made was being born in the wrong country....
Most liberals are pro-choice and don't mind paying taxes
interesting... I also find that while gays and lesbians are unable to adopt because they "choose" a lifestyle that does not produce children, therefore it is unacceptable for them to be able to aid in supporting any child by providing a loving caring home... society would rather leave them in an orphan home.. than see two men or two women take on the job... but alas!!! disabled and crack babies are definetely available to gays and lesbians because nobody wants those babies...
Yep, isn't that interesting. Always two sets of standards, aren't there?
Oh please. It's usually the right wing republicans that are anti-choice... the same people that are against raising taxes, welfare, health care for children etc. They are only pro-choice if their taxes don't go up and someone else pays. On the other hand they support wars that kill innocent kids that are already born, only mistake they made was being born in the wrong country....
Most liberals are pro-choice and don't mind paying taxes
Oh please, yourself. What were you proposing, aside from a dollars-and-sense argument for abortion? My response, an exaggerated parody of your expressed point of view, highlights the heartlessness of your reasoning. Would you care to reply to it -- while remaining on the topic of abortion?
The abortion rate is dropping as it is...........thank God.
Between abstinence and actually using birth control.
Another factor that has to be considered is there is nowhere the social stigma attached to an unmarried pregnant female hence more and more of them who 'accidently' wind up PG feel much less 'pressure' to abort-------whether from family, BF's or society at large.
BTW: to the Pro-Life crowd out there; where is the social pressure on men to shoulder the responsibility of unplanned pregnancies?
Too; many of us guys are just pigs (yes, I was extremely wild when younger, the difference if looking for a 'good time'; I stayed with women past age 35-40------they are less fertile than the younger ones and most of them made damn sure that there were infertile, either by proper birth control or tubal ligation)
Oh please, yourself. What were you proposing, aside from a dollars-and-sense argument for abortion? My response, an exaggerated parody of your expressed point of view, highlights the heartlessness of your reasoning. Would you care to reply to it -- while remaining on the topic of abortion?
I already laid out my reasons for being pro-choice in several posts on this thread. Don't need to repeat them.
The fact is there are millions of abortions each year. There aren't going to be millions of people that will want to adopt all these unwanted babies every year. I was simply asking how you, meaning anti-choice people, plan to pay for the upbringing of these kids, if abortion wasn't a choice???
Very interested in the answer to this question, instead of just spin....
So far I haven't heard a realistic plan.
And I live in MA, moved here by choice, obviously I am more than willing to pay taxes
TriMT7 there is no reason to raise taxes to achieve what you are suggesting, there are plenty of people on waiting lists for any child to adopt who will me more than happy to pay the expenses involved.
No. There are people on waiting lists for healthy WHITE babies, not *all* babies.
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.
