Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 07-20-2013, 05:58 AM
 
11,768 posts, read 10,262,817 times
Reputation: 3444

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
It's a false choice based on false assumptions.

The overwhelming majority of Americans support significant restrictions on abortion and more women support these restrictions than men.

This means anytime and for any reason abortion is on its way out.

This doesn't mean that when that day comes the welfare rolls will explode because free baby sitters are not readily available as the word "no" and consistent use of contraceptives will make a roaring comeback.
I haven't heard that.


Pew Forum: A Slight but Steady Majority Favors Keeping Abortion Legal

 
Old 07-20-2013, 06:51 AM
 
10,875 posts, read 13,811,333 times
Reputation: 4896
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover View Post
not the federal government limiting our rights?
That's what the GOP's war on women is all about, forcing huge government and anti-freedom BS on them.
 
Old 07-20-2013, 07:21 AM
 
7,300 posts, read 6,733,220 times
Reputation: 2916
Quote:
Originally Posted by emerald_octane View Post
They shouldn't unless they're willing to take care of the child.

What business of mine is it if Trish up the block uses Abortion as a form of birth control. I don't have to feed , clothe, or bear the child.
 
Old 07-20-2013, 07:22 AM
 
7,300 posts, read 6,733,220 times
Reputation: 2916
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceece View Post
It's always a conundrum. If you don't work you are lazy but if you have kids you should either be able to afford child care (so...have a high income) or afford to stay home and not work (so...be rich). Then you get the stink eye if you don't want kids at all by a society that thinks it's natures way. And if you get divorced and need spousal support because you did stay home you're a golddigger who should stick those 3 kids into the daycare everyone expects you to afford on your new part time minimum wage job(s).

Seriously, woman have enemies on all sides and up the middle. There will ALWAYS be a "war" on them from one idiot or another. Don't pretend otherwise.
 
Old 07-20-2013, 08:43 AM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,759,995 times
Reputation: 35920
Just to post #40. If I'm repeating something, I apologize.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffdano View Post
A fundamental flaw in the OPs assertion is that women's care equals abortion facility. A medical facility that caters to women (for example a regular ob/gyn) has nothing to do with what recent abortion related laws change.

But since the OP refuses to consider that a fetus is another body, inside a woman's, with different DNA, he might never consider that another approach to pregnancy makes any sense at all.
Since when is "Women's Health Care" synonymous with abortion? Women's health care is actually so much more than that!

Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
If the left was really concerned about women's economic statuses they would tell them to quit having babies when they aren't married...but they don't and you know why? Because then they wouldn't vote for the Freebie Party. If all women and all minorities would just open their eyes and see who benefits from them being poor, it is the lefties that they keep in power that give poor people hand outs instead of the truth and opportunities to be self-sufficient. As long as you are a victim that need them, they benefit power-wise.
Ha, ha! So you think all unwed mothers vote Democratic? LOL, LOL, LOL!
 
Old 07-20-2013, 08:47 AM
 
Location: On the Group W bench
5,563 posts, read 4,262,489 times
Reputation: 2127
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffdano View Post
Why should the government pay for born children? They didn't pay for mine. Parents should in most cases pay to take care of their babies. If the government assistance for poor mothers with babies was as insufficient as you claim, why do so many in poverty have so many babies?

The idea by the way it to prevent unwanted pregnancy. Avoid it if you don't want a baby. It is voluntary to create one.
So your magical thinking will automatically stop people from having unprotected sex, and therefore solve the problem? Uh huh.

That's the thing about cons. They're all about what people should do, but when that fails and they're confronted with, you know, "reality," they stick their fingers in their ears and shout "LA LA LA I can't hear you personal responsibility the end."
 
Old 07-20-2013, 08:49 AM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,759,995 times
Reputation: 35920
Repost:

Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547 View Post
THE GOVERNMENT DOESNT PAY FOR ABORTIONS. How many times does that have to be explained to you? The teavangelicals are trying to make abortion (paid for by the individual--not the state--no federal funds can be used for abortions by law) completely illegal.
 
Old 07-20-2013, 08:51 AM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,759,995 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffdano View Post
Why should the government pay for born children? They didn't pay for mine. Parents should in most cases pay to take care of their babies. If the government assistance for poor mothers with babies was as insufficient as you claim, why do so many in poverty have so many babies?

The idea by the way it to prevent unwanted pregnancy. Avoid it if you don't want a baby. It is voluntary to create one.
And that is what "Women's Health Care" is about, partially anyway.
 
Old 07-20-2013, 08:53 AM
 
Location: On the Group W bench
5,563 posts, read 4,262,489 times
Reputation: 2127
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
Nice deflection I am still waiting to hear the outrage over those women who repeatedly get pregnant.
And I'm still waiting to hear your solution to the problem of people (and I do mean "people," since it takes a man to create a baby, too) having unprotected sex. Magic wand?

Again the magical thinking. "I'm outraged over women having unprotected sex!!! Make it stop! Somehow! Oh, wait ... it didn't stop? Well, I'm against dealing with the problems that come after that. LA LA LA I can't hear you."
 
Old 07-20-2013, 08:53 AM
 
26,497 posts, read 15,074,947 times
Reputation: 14644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post

Ha, ha! So you think all unwed mothers vote Democratic? LOL, LOL, LOL!
Not who you were talking to, but the Republicans tend to win married women votes (Romney +9) and the Democrats win unmarried women votes (Obama +36).

My political science class exit polling over a decade ago in college had unwed mothers going for Democrats at just above 70%.

Presidential Race - 2012 Election Center - Elections & Politics from CNN.com
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.


Closed Thread


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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:35 AM.

© 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