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)
 
Old 06-14-2019, 09:27 AM
 
Location: New Market, MD
2,573 posts, read 3,493,304 times
Reputation: 3259

Advertisements

So many fine pro-lifers here who would adopt "all" to-be-born babies only IF........


Most also believe women will have abortion just for fun or because it is too 'easy' whatever the hell that means. As long as that 'baby' is inside the mother she decides what she wants to do with it.

 
Old 06-14-2019, 09:58 AM
 
Location: colorado springs, CO
9,512 posts, read 6,059,204 times
Reputation: 28830
Quote:
Once they are born, our taxes will go up, because the children will need CHIP, SNAP, and Food Stamps. Are you willing to pay more taxes?
The only thing more ironic than that welfare was brought to us by the very same political promoters of abortion, has got to be that their followers never seem to recognize that.

There have always been those who can't comprehend of the value of life other than their own but it's a flaw of the history blind, perpetually entitled & it grows like cancer in the first world. People who don't respect life come up with bizarre explanations for those who do & that's who has raised your taxes to pay for welfare.

Certain administrations led by people with an overinflated view of their own life's importance, simply assumed that large families were desired for help on the farm & in old age & they thought that high infant & child mortality & low life expectancy motivated people to have a lot of kids, to replace the kids they lost.

If they knew anything about people who love life; they would have known that they were wrong.

Based on that wrong assumption, they believed that declining fertility rates; AKA population control, AKA devaluation of human life; could be achieved by decreasing the mortality rates of the children already born. Given that poverty is directly associated with mortality; the public policy was designed to accommodate the poor with subsidies; in order to reduce their fertility. Children were seen as replaceable with urbanization (no farm hands needed) & social security. "Child quality versus quantity". Enter abortion ...

This has only served to enhance poverty. Which will, theoretically; lead to increased fertility rates. In fact, a few decades before that; one of the worst & largest devaluations of human life led to the Baby Boom.

The answer for taxpayers avoiding paying more taxes will not be found by devaluing human life even more; that will only lead to some even more ironic outcome.
 
Old 06-14-2019, 10:14 AM
 
21,382 posts, read 7,902,269 times
Reputation: 18149
Quote:
Originally Posted by coschristi View Post
The only thing more ironic than that welfare was brought to us by the very same political promoters of abortion, has got to be that their followers never seem to recognize that.

There have always been those who can't comprehend of the value of life other than their own but it's a flaw of the history blind, perpetually entitled & it grows like cancer in the first world. People who don't respect life come up with bizarre explanations for those who do & that's who has raised your taxes to pay for welfare.

Certain administrations led by people with an overinflated view of their own life's importance, simply assumed that large families were desired for help on the farm & in old age & they thought that high infant & child mortality & low life expectancy motivated people to have a lot of kids, to replace the kids they lost.

If they knew anything about people who love life; they would have known that they were wrong.

Based on that wrong assumption, they believed that declining fertility rates; AKA population control, AKA devaluation of human life; could be achieved by decreasing the mortality rates of the children already born. Given that poverty is directly associated with mortality; the public policy was designed to accommodate the poor with subsidies; in order to reduce their fertility. Children were seen as replaceable with urbanization (no farm hands needed) & social security. "Child quality versus quantity". Enter abortion ...

This has only served to enhance poverty. Which will, theoretically; lead to increased fertility rates. In fact, a few decades before that; one of the worst & largest devaluations of human life led to the Baby Boom.

The answer for taxpayers avoiding paying more taxes will not be found by devaluing human life even more; that will only lead to some even more ironic outcome.
You bring up a very good point.

The reaction to tragedy is ALWAYS a reinforcement of love, life, and family. Babies.
 
Old 06-14-2019, 10:28 AM
 
2,448 posts, read 888,256 times
Reputation: 2421
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Maybe you can link to the Democratic party platform section that says "a woman shall have a right to an abortion at any point of a pregnancy for any reason whatsoever?"

Thanks.
"The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right. Abortion is an intensely personal decision between a woman, her family, her doctor, and her clergy; there is no place for politicians or government to get in the way."

Pay particular attention to that last part, after the semicolon. If there is "no place for politicians or government to get in the way," that means there is no role for the state to regulate abortions. That means that the party supports an absolute right of women to have abortions at any point in the pregnancy for any reason whatsoever. As such, most Democrats legislate this way and oppose any restrictions upon it.

As David Byrne might say, "Any questions?"
 
Old 06-14-2019, 10:44 AM
 
Location: London
12,275 posts, read 7,113,068 times
Reputation: 13660
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMESMH View Post
Thank goodness. What I don't understand is why these busybodies think it is any of their business. If they don't believe in abortion, then don't have one. The ones who are men (and I'm a man)....I wonder even more what the motivation is behind each position.
Religion aside, more people = more cheap labor, and more people who have to pay into social security. Basically exactly what the left wants with illegal immigration, except it sounds more patriotic. The left and the right ultimately want the same thing.

Never mind that those same people would theoretically be entitled to social security down the road. But that of course won't be a concern to those currently trying to ban abortion.
 
Old 06-14-2019, 10:51 AM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,165,148 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiociolliscalves View Post
"The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right. Abortion is an intensely personal decision between a woman, her family, her doctor, and her clergy; there is no place for politicians or government to get in the way."

Pay particular attention to that last part, after the semicolon. If there is "no place for politicians or government to get in the way," that means there is no role for the state to regulate abortions. That means that the party supports an absolute right of women to have abortions at any point in the pregnancy for any reason whatsoever. As such, most Democrats legislate this way and oppose any restrictions upon it.

As David Byrne might say, "Any questions?"
They support RvW which says that first trimester abortions is up to the woman, second trimester can be regulated but not banned, third trimester can be banned, but must include exceptions for maternal health and fetal viability.
 
Old 06-14-2019, 11:00 AM
 
2,448 posts, read 888,256 times
Reputation: 2421
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
They support RvW which says that first trimester abortions is up to the woman, second trimester can be regulated but not banned, third trimester can be banned, but must include exceptions for maternal health and fetal viability.
You're ignoring the final sentence, which I highlighted. If the party states that government should have no role whatsoever in regulating "decisions between women and their doctors," how would that allow the state to stop third trimester abortions?

What you should be able to understand, if you choose to, is that the party can argue for supporting Roe v Wade but also argue that the state should have nor role in interfering with abortion rights. In fact, that's precisely what the plank states.

Let me make it even simpler for you: "We support Roe v Wade, but we would go even further and argue that the state has no role in regulating choices made between a woman and her doctor, which includes abortion."
 
Old 06-14-2019, 11:02 AM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,165,148 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiociolliscalves View Post
You're ignoring the final sentence, which I highlighted. If the party states that government should have no role whatsoever in regulating "decisions between women and their doctors," how would that allow the state to stop third trimester abortions?

What you should be able to understand, if you choose to, is that the party can argue for supporting Roe v Wade but also argue that the state should have nor role in interfering with abortion rights. In fact, that's precisely what the plank states.

Let me make it even simpler for you: "We support Roe v Wade, but we would go even further and argue that the state has no role in regulating choices made between a woman and her doctor, which includes abortion."
They said that they fully support RvW which is the law of the land. Quit trying to change what was said.
 
Old 06-14-2019, 11:07 AM
 
18,340 posts, read 18,963,331 times
Reputation: 15656
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice View Post
Why is it prolifers responsibility to take care of the world? Don't prochoicers care about children? Don;t they want to protect and care for them?

Explain to me in detail, how women don't understand that having sex makes babies.
Explain to me in detail, how women don't understand that if they have sex and do not use BC, they will probably get pregnant.

Explain to me in detail, how women who refuse to take any responsibility for ANY actions, and then get pregnant means that other people -- prolifers only, again, per this thread -- should be held 100% responsible for her actions.

Name another situation where YOU are held 100% responsible for actions you did not do.
Women know all of it. We still have sex btw abortion is taking responsibility
 
Old 06-14-2019, 11:09 AM
 
21,382 posts, read 7,902,269 times
Reputation: 18149
Quote:
Originally Posted by hothulamaui View Post
Women know all of it. We still have sex btw abortion is taking responsibility
Do they? Why isn't the abortion rate close to zero then?

Killing something so you don't have to take care of it is not responsibility. It's avoidance of responsibility by killing it away.

Responsibility would be giving birth, and finding a family who would be thrilled to adopt. That's responsibility.
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.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:39 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