DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Plane on March 07, 2011, 11:01:28 AM
-
Do you see an advert from NARAL atop the page here?
If you don't , well then they arn't reading this text about the Abortion quandry and planned parenthood , these terms ought to attract the ad.
Big letters say "Stop the fight against contraception"which is of course not the point of any legislation being proposed . Planned Parenthood is trying to say that if their funding is cut the effect will be a reduction in contraception, even though the desired effect is a reduction in abortion.
If contraception is really important to Planned Parenthood why don't they capitulate on the Abortion and devote their entire effort to pregnancy prevention? The attacks from pro -life politicians would cease , the threat to their funding would be reversd.
Except of course what they charge for abortions itself , is that a major sorce of funding for them?
-
The main opponent of abortions is the Holy Mother Church, and it also opposes contraception. Originally, it supported banning all contraceptives by state law, until Connecticut's law was found unconstitutional long ago.
-
Most Prodistants do not like abortions , even finding an agnostic who will admit to -likeing- abortions is difficult, everyone seems to call abortions regrettable.
This bill is not about contraception in any respect except that Planned Parenthood wants to make the connect , because , there are a -lot- of people who do like contraception.
If Planned Parenthood stopped supporting aborrtions as if they loved them more than life itself they would be able to doubble their financeing of contraception and education, which only a small minority object to.
If Planned Parenthood was sincere , why don't they capitulate and use the resulting increase in funding for makeing "regrettable" abortions less often needed?
-
I see no reason why they should abandon their principles to suck up to the fundies. They would get no real support from them, and would still be opposed by the Catholics.
-
I see no reason why they should abandon their principles to suck up to the fundies. They would get no real support from them, and would still be opposed by the Catholics.
I see no reason for the government to pay for or defray the costs of abortions, any more than they should pay for or defray the costs for any elective surgeries.
-
I see no reason why they should abandon their principles to suck up to the fundies. They would get no real support from them, and would still be opposed by the Catholics.
I see no reason for the government to pay for or defray the costs of abortions, any more than they should pay for or defray the costs for any elective surgeries.
Yeah but, in 1962, HAD the government gave out free abortions things might be a lot different today.
-
Abortions were available in 1962. Anyone at a University, could find reputable doctors willing to perform them discretely and for a reasonable payment plan.
-
If you look at crime statistics, there is a huge dropoff in the crime rate in the 80's and 90's. This coincides with the availability of birth control pills in the 1960's and the availability of abortions. The obvious correlation is that there were fewer neglected males in their most crime-prone years (17 through 30).
It would seem to make sense to provide a free abortion to any woman requesting one as a far cheaper alternative to school dropouts, criminal and other antisocial behavior in the future, which is much more costly to society and taxpayers.
-
If you look at crime statistics, there is a huge dropoff in the crime rate in the 80's and 90's. This coincides with the availability of birth control pills in the 1960's and the availability of abortions. The obvious correlation is that there were fewer neglected males in their most crime-prone years (17 through 30).
It would seem to make sense to provide a free abortion to any woman requesting one as a far cheaper alternative to school dropouts, criminal and other antisocial behavior in the future, which is much more costly to society and taxpayers.
Are you speaking of the cash value of a person?
-
[/quote]
Are you speaking of the cash value of a person?
[/quote]
Yes, that is how Liberals look at everything. From a cash standpoint. Understand though they always remove themselves from the equation.
-
What is good about modern liberals is the "we are all in this together" attitude that allows them to be self sacrificeing.
What is bad about them is the same attitude which allows them to demand sacrifice of others.
-
There are two ways of looking at a ban on abortions: one from the viewpoint of the pregnant woman who knows she cannot deal with a baby at this point of her life and another from the viewpoint of society: what are the consequences of banning or not banning abortion?
From both standpoints, things turn out demonstrably better if abortions are simply left up to the woman and her doctor.
Note that the crime rate in Europe, where abortions are often covered by national heath insurance, is far lower. Unwanted children have a tendency to grow up as adults with serious antisocial problems: criminals, wife-beaters, bad mothers.
If those that want abortions to be illegal really gave a damn, they would offer adoption services, support for women during pregnancy and child care. But mostly, they don't. Mostly, they are hypocrites who overdosed on catechism.
-
What is good about modern liberals is the "we are all in this together" attitude that allows them to be self sacrificeing.
What is bad about them is the same attitude which allows them to demand sacrifice of others.
Yes but when you examine their actions you will see they don't match their lip service. Like paying taxes, how many Obama admin people had issues with not paying their taxes? The man in charge of Treasury, Little Timmy G somehow missed paying his taxes but now he's making sure all of us pay ours. So you see what I mean by they always remove themselves from the equation. Oh and another thing, has one of them ever sent in more money than is required to pay on their taxes? Don't hold your breath, they itemize deductions like it's nobody's business. Just look at Charlie Rangle, he makes up deduction,s and overlooks paying taxes on profits. And JFK, as in John Kerry avoids millions in dock fees by docking his boat 1 state over from his. Yeah they are one big pile of a piece of work.
-
From both standpoints, things turn out demonstrably better if abortions are simply left up to the woman and her doctor.
It's not so hot from the viewpoint of the aborted baby.
-
From both standpoints, things turn out demonstrably better if abortions are simply left up to the woman and her doctor.
It's not so hot from the viewpoint of the aborted baby.
Especially late term abortions. I'm not so sure women with a conscience mentally survives killing their child. I know our president is very comfortable with it though.
-
XO says:
From both standpoints, things turn out demonstrably better if abortions are simply left up to the woman and her doctor.
The fact remains that the vast majority of abortions are elective. Can you give me a good reason why the government should pay for a nose job, a tummy tuck or any other non life threatening reason for surgery with taxpayer dollars?
-
XO says:From both standpoints, things turn out demonstrably better if abortions are simply left up to the woman and her doctor.
The fact remains that the vast majority of abortions are elective. Can you give me a good reason why the government should pay for a nose job, a tummy tuck or any other non life threatening reason for surgery with taxpayer dollars?
you forgot penis enlargement, which XO had done not once but twice.
-
I do not favor the government paying for cosmetic surgery.
A nose job or a tummy tuck will not grow up, become a felon, and rob a liquor store, a bank or your home.
With an unwanted fetus, this could happen rather easily.
-
A nose job or a tummy tuck will not grow up
Lack of a nose job or tummy tuck for someone needing one desperately could lead to low self esteem manifested by antisocial and or criminal behavior.
-
I do not think that this is true. You should provide proof that people with fat tummies and large noses are more likely to commit crimes.
-
One of my favorite wastes of time is to scroll through mugshots from the various towns that publish them, and though you can't tell if the suspects are overweight, you can discernj that the vast majority are stone cold ugly.
Is there a correlation? Don't know. But i know what I see.
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/blotter (http://www.palmbeachpost.com/blotter)
-
There are two ways of looking at a ban on abortions: one from the viewpoint of the pregnant woman who knows she cannot deal with a baby at this point of her life and another from the viewpoint of society: what are the consequences of banning or not banning abortion?
Not three ways?
What is deficient in the adoption services that are being offered?
-
The main problem is that people who adopt children do not wish to adopt minority children as a rule: they would prefer to adopt foreign orphans.
Of course, adoption is ghastly expensive as well.
The government cannot actually ban abortions. It can make them illegal within the borders of the US. So women who wish to have an abortion and can afford to do so, will go elsewhere, or will find someone in the US that will do abortions anyway.
So all the law can do is prevent POOR women from having abortions. That is the net result. And of course, criminals of the violent sort are most likely to be poor.
Prevent abortions today, get mugged in 20 years by that innocent young baby you saved.
-
I need to help kill that innocent young baby because I should fear him?
-
I need to help kill that innocent young baby because I should fear him?
Preemptive, like Bush's war on terrorism. Common ground is always nice every now and then.
-
I would like to see the evidence that children are cared for better now than they were in 1975.
Or that it is difficult to find adoptive homes right now.
Even for minority infants.
-
The main problem is that people who adopt children do not wish to adopt minority children as a rule: they would prefer to adopt foreign orphans.
You have some evidence for that point? Because I have evidence that people are *prevented* from adopting minority children by courts, not because they "choose" not to do so.
Also, most foreign orphans are "minority" children anyway, so the whole statement is kinda silly...
-
The main problem is that people who adopt children do not wish to adopt minority children as a rule: they would prefer to adopt foreign orphans.
You have some evidence for that point? Because I have evidence that people are *prevented* from adopting minority children by courts, not because they "choose" not to do so.
Also, most foreign orphans are "minority" children anyway, so the whole statement is kinda silly...
Speaking of foreign born if you have ever been around a kid born in Africa or even an adult, they are truly beautiful people and a joy to hang out with. Now compared to many of the Blacks born here these Africans are unbelievably happy, nice, kind, respectful and DON"T have a chip on the shoulder. Sure I do run into some Black folk here that don't carry the chip but still there is a refreshing attitude that emanates from foreign born Blacks. That rule rarely applies to other foreigners, like Europeans.
-
Chinese, Korean, Ethiopian and similar orphans would be identified as minority members. I doubt that a Ukrainian born adoptee or a Moldovan adoptee with an English name would be identified as any sort of minority member.
As I understand it, while some White people will adopt Black babies, they are far less likely to adopt older Black children that have been taken away from their parents by social services people. I base this on what I have read in the Miami Herald. There are a lot of such children in foster care, and not all of them are appear to be members of some "minority".
I have a friend who adopted a Taiwanese girl. When he and his wife go out with her, some dimwit always has to say something silly, like "What a beautiful child! She's adopted, isn't she?"
Duh!
-
Chinese, Korean, Ethiopian and similar orphans would be identified as minority members. I doubt that a Ukrainian born adoptee or a Moldovan adoptee with an English name would be identified as any sort of minority member.
As I understand it, while some White people will adopt Black babies, they are far less likely to adopt older Black children that have been taken away from their parents by social services people. I base this on what I have read in the Miami Herald. There are a lot of such children in foster care, and not all of them are appear to be members of some "minority".
I have a friend who adopted a Taiwanese girl. When he and his wife go out with her, some dimwit always has to say something silly, like "What a beautiful child! She's adopted, isn't she?"
Duh!
yeah but with your kind they could be dating. So people should ask for clarification.
-
As I understand it, while some White people will adopt Black babies, they are far less likely to adopt older Black children that have been taken away from their parents by social services people.
How does this affect the situation of abortion?, Older Children would seem to be a year or two past worry about being aborted.
Infants are in demand .
-
What should happen is that the anti-abortionists should offer support for the pregnant mothers. They generally do not.
The fact is that as a rule, everyone likes babies, fetuses not so much. Once the baby is born, the tendency is to keep the child.
My position is that it should be 100% up to the woman and her doctor whether she has a baby or not. People who oppose abortions should offer an attractive alternative, and they don't. They prefer to pass laws and criminalize things.
Many want to "teach the woman a lesson": that the Wages of Sin is a baby she does not want, and for her to not take her punishment is against God and Society and should be against the government as well.
-
What should happen is that the anti-abortionists should offer support for the pregnant mothers. They generally do not.
The fact is that as a rule, everyone likes babies, fetuses not so much. Once the baby is born, the tendency is to keep the child.
My position is that it should be 100% up to the woman and her doctor whether she has a baby or not. People who oppose abortions should offer an attractive alternative, and they don't. They prefer to pass laws and criminalize things.
Many want to "teach the woman a lesson": that the Wages of Sin is a baby she does not want, and for her to not take her punishment is against God and Society and should be against the government as well.
My position is that the government should not be providing tax payer monies to pay for or defray elective surgery.
And it is also my position that the government has no more business telling me whether i may or may not get a nose job or other elective surgery than they do telling me whether i can or can not buy my grandson a happy meal.
-
What should happen is that the anti-abortionists should offer support for the pregnant mothers. They generally do not.
Actually, they generally DO.
It's only people who willfully ignore the support that's offered think it doesn't exist.
-
Abortions are not exactly like nose jobs.
One does not have to raise and educate a new nose for 18 years.
I know of no major campaign to provide support for pregnant women. They are too quiet about it if this is what they do.
-
They are too quiet about it if this is what they do.
That would be a problem, so do you like the idea of lisense plates that not only support crisis pregnancy centers but also advertise the idea?
http://www.fund-adoption.org/Home.asp (http://www.fund-adoption.org/Home.asp)
(http://login.npwebsiteservices.com/TheChildrenFirstFoundation/images/NYChooseLIfePlatenewlogo2sm.jpg)
Heart warming story comes with thisWe were actually “chosen” by a young, expecting 18-year old, and for everyone involved, adoption turned her crisis pregnancy “nightmare” into our “dream come true.” This mature young woman told us she was very glad she had chosen adoption and that her first goal was to finish high school and then go onto college. Marriage and family, she said, would come later on. We thanked her for courageously choosing adoption and for her great “gift of life” to us.
http://www.fund-adoption.org/AboutUs.asp (http://www.fund-adoption.org/AboutUs.asp)
-
One does not have to raise and educate a new nose for 18 years.
That's why pro-life groups fund a number of adoption centers.
I know of no major campaign to provide support for pregnant women. They are too quiet about it if this is what they do.
Then you must be blind. I see ads for them all the time. Both when I lived in Maryland and here in Minnesota.