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.
Women can do what they want with their own bodies when they don't put the taxpayers on the hook for what happens when they exercise those choices. Celibacy is FREE.
if you have a problem paying taxes and worried that those taxes are going to abortions...why not fight the taxes laws?
Seems odd to want to ban all abortions because some may be tax funded.
As a Texas taxpayer, yes, I am sick of this obscene waste of money in an attempt to roll back reproductive choice back to the back-alley days of pre-Roe.
Only you should determine your morals and values. I dont want you infecting my child with your 'supposed' knowledge of values or your morality.
I dont want you teaching my child your version of spirutality though your prayers in my public schools...that is my job. I dont know or care what your values and morals are...that is your business.
Yet again, here are our politicians posturing over a bill they know will get shot down. Roe Vs. Wade makes it quite clear what's allowed and what isn't. The so-called "fiscally conservative" Tea Party in Wisconsin just threw a bunch down the drain: Judge blocks new Wisconsin abortion law - Houston Chronicle It'll happen in Texas also when it gets challenged.
Anyone else tired of posturing that costs millions?
Roe v. Wade is not being touched. Women in Texas are still allowed to kill a child.
There is nothing in Roe v. Wade, that says there cannot be strict requirement to get that abortion, that is perfectly legal to do.
Women can do what they want with their own bodies when they don't put the taxpayers on the hook for what happens when they exercise those choices. Celibacy is FREE.
So what do you do with babies born to mothers who can't afford to raise them, and in turn, our supported by the government?
Roe v. Wade is not being touched. Women in Texas are still allowed to kill a child.
There is nothing in Roe v. Wade, that says there cannot be strict requirement to get that abortion, that is perfectly legal to do.
Looking at the ruling too isolated. The restrictions put on clinics are what was considered to be breaking the precedent in the WI ruling. Same thing will happen to Texas. It is like the Palin quote: "You can put lipstick on a pig, but its still a pig" and that is what this bill is, like the others, a "dressed up, help womens health" faux bill.
It isn't any coincendence these bills are supported by Religious groups and not Medical groups.
As I understand it, the bill improves standard of care requirements -which can't be bad- and prohibits abortions (with sensible exceptions) after 20 weeks, which is the halfway point in the pregnancy. That's plenty of time for a woman to make her 'choice', isn't it? Some here argue that a fetus is part of the woman's body, like a wart or something. Be that as it may, is it unreasonable to give the benefit of the doubt to nascent life at this late point at the very least?
There are certainly pro-Life fanatics. Opposition to these eminently sensible and humane limits on terminating nascent human beings is evidence plain of pro-abortion fanaticism.
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.
