Yeah, “olfart”, we need to ignore the butchery of innocent babies. You lefties don’t like spotlights shining on anything that illuminates the perversion, the hate and the lies of the left wing!
Right. Because the execution of some of mankind’s worst examples of humanity is the same as the butchering of innocent children. I see what you did there. Please explain to me again how our meting out justice to the wicked excuses atrocities committed at the hands of abortion doctors, most notably people like Gosnell.
How many abortions are of necessity, i.e. the mother’s life is in danger? How many abortions are because of rape or incest? (both of which I understand why abortions are supported) And then how many abortions are because women today are promiscuous and don’t want to worry about birth control, or because they can’t bother to keep their damn legs shut? How many are because men let the little head drive the bus? Abortion has by and large, in today’s society, become synonymous with birth control. Most people forget that Roe v. Wade was because she was raped and had a child. It wasn’t because she had a child that was an “oops.” But now that’s the norm. The reason we are up in arms about this issue is not just the brutality of it all, but it exposes a hypocritical position liberals have. The only difference between post-birth abortions (Gosnell murdering children) and partial-birth abortions (child is still in the birth canal) is a matter of semantics. Both are fully-developed children; the only difference is one has yet to feel the cold air of the world before it’s murdered.
Using Gosnell as an argument against legal abortion is like using al-Qaeda as an argument against religion. In fact, this is a horrible lesson in what happens when access to abortion services is restricted for the poor.
People like Gosnell are in business because they are the only option for despairing poor people. The one percent have never ever had any difficulty obtaining clean safe abortions.
In my neck of the woods (Rocky Mountains) we had a gynecologist who was a family friend. He said his biggest candidate for abortion was 30 to 45 year old married women who either had a affair or just did not want anymore children. He said virtually all the women wanted it confidential from their husbands.
The problem is you are supporting diametrically opposed positions. You say abortion should be rare, but it should between the woman and her doctor. Those are mutually exclusive, as this country has shown by its predilection to have sex and then just abort the child.And while it may be the woman’s body, it’s also the father’s child. The father should have a say in the matter as well. Of course, in a lot of communities, the father isn’t known because of the nature in which the child was conceived, but in the case of “oops,” the father has just as much to do with that unborn child as the mother. Just because she is carrying the child doesn’t mean it’s her exclusive right to determine that child’s future.I’m with you that in cases of rape, cancer, some birth defects, and medical risk abortions can be justified. I’m a pragmatist about this. I realize there are times where an abortion is warranted. And like you, I believe they should be rare. But leaving it to the whims of the woman and her doctor creates an environment that breeds monsters like Gosnell. And don’t think that republicans are trying to eliminate birth control. It’s just that we believe you pay for your own birth control, not making us pay for you. We also aren’t trying to eliminate programs for the poor, we’re trying to eliminate abuse of those programs for the poor. Let me ask you this: If the Republicans are so against the poor, why are there more people in poverty now than 4 years ago when Democrats held a super-majority? Democrats believe in giving handouts to the poor, whereas Republicans believe in getting the poor back to work and elevating themselves out of poverty. Reliance on the government vs. Self-Reliance. That’s the difference we’re talking about. And that’s why, in today’s society, a lot of people blame everyone else instead of taking responsibility for their own actions, pregnancy included.
Jesus said “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”God’s Bible, all 66 books, teaches respect for human life.God’s Law names murder as punishable….life for life: you murder, you die on conviction in court.-If each “prochoice” (for abortions) person would stop and remember he or she is alive today because Mother did not abort you! Science proves that every human alive on earth was human from conception, with dna and rna and the identification of who is the parent of each human.-Murder is a sin, but God’s Love provided Jesus’ sacrifice of His Holy life to pay for our sins; He arose from the grave to assure the sinner who repents and asks God’s forgiveness and help to live in obedience to God’s will, that we also will arise from the grave to eternal life with Father, Son and Holy Spirit. God can forgive abortionists who repent, mothers who demand someone kill the baby she does not want, and those who support and enable abortion to be available by votes and money. Planned Parenthood is very profitable, as #1 abortion provider. Blood Money.
Don’t like abortion? Support stonger social programs. Look at Germany and the Netherlands’ lax abortion regulation and then look at the rates. Considerably low, because having a kid won’t put you from borderline poverty into deep poverty.
“One of a number of reasonable reasons for abortion.”So you’re supporting taking a life to cover up infidelity in a marriage? Wow, your moral compass is completely jacked up. How about instead of killing an unborn child because of infidelity or poor planning, you just… don’t have sex with someone other than your spouse, or use protection (pretty certain a married couple can afford “the pill”). It all goes back to blaming (aka killing) the child for the adult’s irresponsible actions.
Well, I’m not lumped in with some of my brethren on here. I’m a fiscal conservative, pro-responsibility, social moderate. I think that unless there is proof of rape, incest, or medical necessity (like uhh… prehyclampsia or whatever it’s called), abortion shouldn’t be tolerated. There’s no reason to endanger the health/life of the mother, but at the same time it shouldn’t be used as a form of birth control. I’m keeping religion out of this specifically, because for all the good it’s done, organized religions have been the source of more bloodshed in our species’ history than anything else. So I like to keep the bible-thumping to a minimum (mostly because I disagree with most of it and its premise). My biggest issue is I don’t get why people are so afraid of abstinence and accepting the consequences of their actions, or sterilization (which both my wife and I are, because we’re done having kids). Why do we have to kill something to make up for our mistakes and poor decisions?
I have to wonder where you get your information, because most of that sounds like blue-faced rants of the liberal establishment to make themselves look better. Point-by-point: I’m aware there are risks with every pregnancy. My argument is not that we should support the Catholic position of no contraception; my argument is that if you have a child because of your mistake, killing the child is not the adult thing to do because it’s more convenient. And don’t tell me that being pregnant is so dangerous; we’ve been doing it as a species for literally thousands of years, and frequently under worse conditions than we have now. I also agree that I don’t get to decide what another person does with their body, but a growing child is not a tumor or leech; it is another human being growing inside their mother. And that human being is the product of two people’s actions. Thus, that human being’s future should be determined by those two people’s decisions. However, I do not believe that it is my responsibility to pay for someone’s birth control or abortions. They want to have control over their lives, then they can pay for it themselves. And if they don’t want to pay for it, guess what! Abstinence is available for the Everyday Low Price of free.Now, you took a huge left turn after your arguments regarding abortion. Most of them are blatant lies or falsehoods. First: The GOP has not blocked the economic recovery. First, how do I know this? Because they didn’t have the ability to. In the first portion of Obama’s term, he had an unstoppable super-majority. That means no matter what the GOP thought, said, or did, the Democrats could do whatever they wanted. And what did they accomplish? The jobs-killing PPACA, now tipping the scales at 1.6 Trillion dollars in new deficit spending to pay for it. Oh, and let’s not mention the 30 million people it’s going to hurt, between increased costs, lost wages, and lost jobs. Oh, and while we’re on the PPACA, let’s not forget one of the interesting provisions within the law. Now, not only do you have to turn in your application, you will now need to turn in your tax returns from the prior year so your new employer knows how much income you have when determining your penalty threshold. Talk about invading your privacy. I then move on to your economists saying the stimulus was too small. I dismiss that, because it could have been ten times as much and it still wouldn’t have solved the problem. Private corporations aren’t going to create jobs if they don’t have a demand for those jobs. That’s also not to mention the fact that the PPACA is the #1 reason why employers aren’t hiring right now, because they don’t know what that law is going to do to them. You don’t invest in new employees if you’re just going to have to lay them off in the next year.And let’s talk about your complaining about corporations making record profits without increased hiring. Ever as why? Ever look into it? Because if you did, you’d find that they were able to lean out their processes, automate more, and hire workers outside the country that cost less. It’s about cost, pure and simple. And for that, you should be happy. Because when costs go up, you pay more at the register. Don’t kid yourself. Businesses don’t eat costs because it’s the “right thing to do.” They pass costs on to the consumer. Why do you think things cost what they do? And businesses are in business to make a profit. They are not evil for doing so, because without profitable businesses driving this economy, we would all be serfs, working for the socialist/communist government where we own nothing.
Want to reduce the number of legal abortions? First, teach real sex-ed, rather than “abstinence-only”. Nothing against abstinence, but, as Bristol Palin says, it’s “unrealistic”. There are numerous articles noting that many teenage girls believe that oral or anal sex is not really sex and cannot spread disease. Also, teen pregnancy rates are higher in states with “abstinence-only” programs.
Another is to allow birth control to be readily available. Many moms do the same thing: if you’re going to do it anyway, be safe about it.
Keep in mind that, partly due to hormones found in foods, children are becoming sexually mature earlier, some as young as 8. They cannot understand the consequences of something that feels good. This also means that they have many more reproductive years before they get out of school and mature enough to have a family. This also shows the fallacy of abstinence-only.
Republicans truly want to end abortion entirely, at least the legal kind. That may not be every Republican, but the party has been working around Roe v. Wade for decades, and chipping away at the rights in every state.
I have an idea: if you want to stop paying for someone else’s birth control, stop making me pay for in-vitro fertilization, infertility treatments, etc. If we are so dead-set on making sure that every fetus (or every egg) becomes a child, let’s make sure those children are wanted. There’s a reason why abortions occur, and that reason is that the mother (and often the father) does not want the child. This is not a good environment in which to raise one. So, for all of those who cannot conceive, we will have a ready-and-able supply of adoptable babies. No need to have one of “your own”.
Silly? So is any extreme position. Let’s be rational, and find a way to reduce unwanted pregnancy. If we do that, abortion numbers will reduce.
No one has bothered to mention, not that I’ve seen anyway, that one of the current “trends” in abortion is sex-selective abortion. Having a girl…wanted a boy? Abort and try again.
“…Women should not have to go before a tribunal to determine if they should be allowed to get an abortion…”Actually, a judge is a great idea to weed out the frivolous Abortions. And, let’s give a free Tube Cutting with every abortion. In the case of criminal impregnation, Cut the Tubes of the male AND his parents.
“locoboilerguy said, about 22 hours agoIn my neck of the woods (Rocky Mountains) we had a gynecologist who was a family friend. He said his biggest candidate for abortion was 30 to 45 year old married women who either had a affair or just did not want anymore children. He said virtually all the women wanted it confidential from their husbands.”“Dycel said, about 21 hours ago@locoboilerguyOne of a number of reasonable reasons for abortion.”That’s where I got it from. Clearly you haven’t been reading any of my posts. And when you use terms like “bus bunn(ies),” which have no definition in the real world, you only detract from your argument. What you’re missing is the concept of self-control instead of expecting someone else to take care of your mistakes. You are throwing out meaningless and tangential complaints about everything the left-wing complains about without contributing to the argument. When are you going to stick to the talking points?
“I don’t get why people are so afraid of abstinence – It’s not fear, it just doesn’t work in the overall population at risk, horny teenagers. There, appropriate sex ed is the most effective prevention of pregnancy and STD’s”I would disagree. It’s a social moray that’s changed. When I was in high school (about 20 years ago), a girl (note, not a woman) having a baby was labeled a slut or any other negative words. Now, because our liberal-driven media has done a once-over on our moral structure, teen pregnancies are celebrated. In the 50’s, girls went to communes and then gave the child up. Same in the 70’s, even. In the 90’s, the parents had a say in the matter, and were able to force the child up for adoption. Now, we have a child making an adult decision, and the adults who are paying for the child not having a say in the matter. That, to me, is backwards. So your theory of “more sex ed” preventing pregnancies is actually false. Teens were just as horny in the 50’s, 70’s, and 90’s, but weren’t getting pregnant at nearly the same rate as they are now. It’s because the social structure then frowned upon promiscuity, especially in the teen ranks. There are now orgies being had by teens… pretty certain this wasn’t going on even 20 years ago.Here’s where the disconnect is: Liberal adults think that “educating” a child about sex is equivalent to ensuring they will practice safe sex. The problem with that logic is that it gives teens a green light to have sex in the first place. And I’m sure we all know that the only 100% effective form of birth control is abstinence. I know: I didn’t have sex until I was an adult. So it can be done if you have even an ounce of self-control.“Another is to allow birth control to be readily available. Many moms do the same thing: if you’re going to do it anyway, be safe about it.”I’m sorry Play One, but that logic is why we have teens having sex. My wife was 15 when she first started having sex, because of this logic. They aren’t going to “do it anyway,” if the moral structure of the society says they shouldn’t be. But what has happened is over the past two decades, liberals have been pushing (in various information vectors) to let the girls have fun, too. This, in turn, has encouraged them to believe they are protected from pregnancy and throw caution to the wind. It’s irresponsible, because kids are irresponsible. And that’s what’s being lost. You can teach a kid everything you want. First, they have to want to pay attention, and second they have to be responsible to use it correctly. Most aren’t. But teaching them to practice safe sex gives them a green light to have sex in the first place; it’s implied. And the concept of self-control is lost on them. You can’t unopen Pandora’s Box.And this is paying negative dividends now in our society where now instead of pro-active birth control, we have reactive birth control in the form of abortions. Because people still haven’t learned to keep their legs closed and use the simple word, “No.” They still haven’t learned self-control and responsibility for their actions.
Assuming one actually believes god created us. I know, I know… a deist conservative. Go figure.Here’s why I’m having such a hard time accepting the “they’re just going to do it, so teach them to do it better,” logic. What we had before (abstinence) was working. What we have now (promiscuity with “protection” or abortion) isn’t. These aren’t just whack-job theories I have. I have factual evidence to support that, in the form of illegitimate births and abortion rates. Here is an interesting article that has a specific chart that shows while teens (ages 15-19) in the 50’s were having more children, almost none of them were having them out of wedlock. What that tells me is there were adult teens (18-19) having sex and children, and getting married, with marriage usually coming first.Now if you look at the chart and look at the unwed rates today, there’s a massive spike in it for two reasons: First, because young teen pregnancy is glamorized (see the umpteen shows on public television about it). Second, because teens are told your belief that “they are going to do it anyway, so give them protection,” so they think they are okay to go ahead and do it. And since they are so young, they can’t get married to the guy who got them knocked up. There is no sense of obligation with males, and no sense of sexual conservatism amongst females. That’s what rubs me the wrong way. When I got my girlfriend (now wife of 10 years) pregnant, I stayed with her because that was my obligation. Not to her, but to the child. We kept our son, because we didn’t feel it was fair to him to kill him because of our being irresponsible. So I do have personal experience in this matter, not just some “theory.”
We would all be better off if we ignored the trolls (Ms. Ima, HOWGOZIT, Gore Bane, Brandon, etc.) … all they do is spew the same one-and-two-line bulsit on each page — rants that get under the skin of right-minded people … consider that either (1) none of them care any more than to hit-and-run like most who spray grafitti on any blank space, and don’t really care what anybody thinks, or (2) some right-wing/Tea Party sugah dadda pays them to spew this garbage, making them low-life freeloaders, just as they accuse everybody who actually employs actual thought processes before posting on the Internet.
I would be VERY interested to see a DD214 proving more than three months of honorable service from any of these right-wing trolls … but I expect that could never happen …
Just a couple of cents from a 20-year USMC (Ret) who earned a master’s degree in something other than a redneck agenda …
There is no evidence supporting a single mother is better off than two parents who aren’t happy with each other. In fact, quite the opposite is true. And, more to the point, how is a 16 year old fit to be a parent in the first place? They can’t even raise themselves, much less be responsible for another child.Who verifies factcheck? Just because they have a .org after their name doesn’t make them independent, or even accurate. Just because they call themselves fact checkers does not make it so. I also didn’t say that the Heritage was non-partisan. I just said that if you’re going to read resources, you should read both and list both, instead of listing left-only sites. That’s why I read from Real Clear Politics; it has stories from both camps. And what I can tell you is there is a very clear distinction between which side of the argument various news outlets fall.I welcome all sources of information. But when people like Dycel use self-defined derogatory terms like “bus bunn(ies),” to deprecate someone’s character, I take issue with that. That’s not discussion, that’s slander (or in this case, libel). I wouldn’t take the time to point out my disagreements with you if I thought your opinions had no merit.Simply, I ask you this: What is so great about change when what we have works? Are we changing just for the sake of change? And why is one person or group more important than another? Who decides that? Who is right? Because right now, that’s what’s going on in our society. And while some change is good, a good chunk is bad as well. Why is the concept of marriage so meaningless to some? Why are people so lazy they are unwilling to put forth the effort to make a marriage work? We have questions to which there are no easy answers. The problem, though, is that many in the left/liberal camp is to discard traditions that have held society together for eons and instead of opted to chart new courses entirely in the pursuit of self-aggrandizement and self-realization. People have gotten a hell of a lot more selfish than they were even a generation ago. Why? And more importantly, why is this okay?
Over the top?24 weeks is the same as six months in the womb, a preemie . . . could have been your little sister or brother…over the top?Couldn’t kill them in the womb, so let’s wait until their outside and then do the job right, just like the Nazis’ experimented in the same way.Over the top?You’re dang right it’s over the top, and that’s the only way it can make a difference, or were you a botched abortion?
Freedom From Premium Member about 11 years ago
Spot on!
rogcbrand about 11 years ago
Yeah, “olfart”, we need to ignore the butchery of innocent babies. You lefties don’t like spotlights shining on anything that illuminates the perversion, the hate and the lies of the left wing!
Wraithkin about 11 years ago
Right. Because the execution of some of mankind’s worst examples of humanity is the same as the butchering of innocent children. I see what you did there. Please explain to me again how our meting out justice to the wicked excuses atrocities committed at the hands of abortion doctors, most notably people like Gosnell.
Wraithkin about 11 years ago
How many abortions are of necessity, i.e. the mother’s life is in danger? How many abortions are because of rape or incest? (both of which I understand why abortions are supported) And then how many abortions are because women today are promiscuous and don’t want to worry about birth control, or because they can’t bother to keep their damn legs shut? How many are because men let the little head drive the bus? Abortion has by and large, in today’s society, become synonymous with birth control. Most people forget that Roe v. Wade was because she was raped and had a child. It wasn’t because she had a child that was an “oops.” But now that’s the norm. The reason we are up in arms about this issue is not just the brutality of it all, but it exposes a hypocritical position liberals have. The only difference between post-birth abortions (Gosnell murdering children) and partial-birth abortions (child is still in the birth canal) is a matter of semantics. Both are fully-developed children; the only difference is one has yet to feel the cold air of the world before it’s murdered.
Prof_Bleen about 11 years ago
Using Gosnell as an argument against legal abortion is like using al-Qaeda as an argument against religion. In fact, this is a horrible lesson in what happens when access to abortion services is restricted for the poor.
bgarner about 11 years ago
People like Gosnell are in business because they are the only option for despairing poor people. The one percent have never ever had any difficulty obtaining clean safe abortions.
locoboilerguy about 11 years ago
In my neck of the woods (Rocky Mountains) we had a gynecologist who was a family friend. He said his biggest candidate for abortion was 30 to 45 year old married women who either had a affair or just did not want anymore children. He said virtually all the women wanted it confidential from their husbands.
coffee_mom11 about 11 years ago
Not to mention the ones were born healthy and murdered by severing their spinal cords.
coffee_mom11 about 11 years ago
If you knew anything about this case, you would do the shutting up — some of these babies were murdered after they were born, genius.
Wraithkin about 11 years ago
The problem is you are supporting diametrically opposed positions. You say abortion should be rare, but it should between the woman and her doctor. Those are mutually exclusive, as this country has shown by its predilection to have sex and then just abort the child.And while it may be the woman’s body, it’s also the father’s child. The father should have a say in the matter as well. Of course, in a lot of communities, the father isn’t known because of the nature in which the child was conceived, but in the case of “oops,” the father has just as much to do with that unborn child as the mother. Just because she is carrying the child doesn’t mean it’s her exclusive right to determine that child’s future.I’m with you that in cases of rape, cancer, some birth defects, and medical risk abortions can be justified. I’m a pragmatist about this. I realize there are times where an abortion is warranted. And like you, I believe they should be rare. But leaving it to the whims of the woman and her doctor creates an environment that breeds monsters like Gosnell. And don’t think that republicans are trying to eliminate birth control. It’s just that we believe you pay for your own birth control, not making us pay for you. We also aren’t trying to eliminate programs for the poor, we’re trying to eliminate abuse of those programs for the poor. Let me ask you this: If the Republicans are so against the poor, why are there more people in poverty now than 4 years ago when Democrats held a super-majority? Democrats believe in giving handouts to the poor, whereas Republicans believe in getting the poor back to work and elevating themselves out of poverty. Reliance on the government vs. Self-Reliance. That’s the difference we’re talking about. And that’s why, in today’s society, a lot of people blame everyone else instead of taking responsibility for their own actions, pregnancy included.
disgustedtaxpayer about 11 years ago
Jesus said “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”God’s Bible, all 66 books, teaches respect for human life.God’s Law names murder as punishable….life for life: you murder, you die on conviction in court.-If each “prochoice” (for abortions) person would stop and remember he or she is alive today because Mother did not abort you! Science proves that every human alive on earth was human from conception, with dna and rna and the identification of who is the parent of each human.-Murder is a sin, but God’s Love provided Jesus’ sacrifice of His Holy life to pay for our sins; He arose from the grave to assure the sinner who repents and asks God’s forgiveness and help to live in obedience to God’s will, that we also will arise from the grave to eternal life with Father, Son and Holy Spirit. God can forgive abortionists who repent, mothers who demand someone kill the baby she does not want, and those who support and enable abortion to be available by votes and money. Planned Parenthood is very profitable, as #1 abortion provider. Blood Money.
Stormrider2112 about 11 years ago
Don’t like abortion? Support stonger social programs. Look at Germany and the Netherlands’ lax abortion regulation and then look at the rates. Considerably low, because having a kid won’t put you from borderline poverty into deep poverty.
Wraithkin about 11 years ago
“One of a number of reasonable reasons for abortion.”So you’re supporting taking a life to cover up infidelity in a marriage? Wow, your moral compass is completely jacked up. How about instead of killing an unborn child because of infidelity or poor planning, you just… don’t have sex with someone other than your spouse, or use protection (pretty certain a married couple can afford “the pill”). It all goes back to blaming (aka killing) the child for the adult’s irresponsible actions.
Wraithkin about 11 years ago
Well, I’m not lumped in with some of my brethren on here. I’m a fiscal conservative, pro-responsibility, social moderate. I think that unless there is proof of rape, incest, or medical necessity (like uhh… prehyclampsia or whatever it’s called), abortion shouldn’t be tolerated. There’s no reason to endanger the health/life of the mother, but at the same time it shouldn’t be used as a form of birth control. I’m keeping religion out of this specifically, because for all the good it’s done, organized religions have been the source of more bloodshed in our species’ history than anything else. So I like to keep the bible-thumping to a minimum (mostly because I disagree with most of it and its premise). My biggest issue is I don’t get why people are so afraid of abstinence and accepting the consequences of their actions, or sterilization (which both my wife and I are, because we’re done having kids). Why do we have to kill something to make up for our mistakes and poor decisions?
Wraithkin about 11 years ago
I have to wonder where you get your information, because most of that sounds like blue-faced rants of the liberal establishment to make themselves look better. Point-by-point: I’m aware there are risks with every pregnancy. My argument is not that we should support the Catholic position of no contraception; my argument is that if you have a child because of your mistake, killing the child is not the adult thing to do because it’s more convenient. And don’t tell me that being pregnant is so dangerous; we’ve been doing it as a species for literally thousands of years, and frequently under worse conditions than we have now. I also agree that I don’t get to decide what another person does with their body, but a growing child is not a tumor or leech; it is another human being growing inside their mother. And that human being is the product of two people’s actions. Thus, that human being’s future should be determined by those two people’s decisions. However, I do not believe that it is my responsibility to pay for someone’s birth control or abortions. They want to have control over their lives, then they can pay for it themselves. And if they don’t want to pay for it, guess what! Abstinence is available for the Everyday Low Price of free.Now, you took a huge left turn after your arguments regarding abortion. Most of them are blatant lies or falsehoods. First: The GOP has not blocked the economic recovery. First, how do I know this? Because they didn’t have the ability to. In the first portion of Obama’s term, he had an unstoppable super-majority. That means no matter what the GOP thought, said, or did, the Democrats could do whatever they wanted. And what did they accomplish? The jobs-killing PPACA, now tipping the scales at 1.6 Trillion dollars in new deficit spending to pay for it. Oh, and let’s not mention the 30 million people it’s going to hurt, between increased costs, lost wages, and lost jobs. Oh, and while we’re on the PPACA, let’s not forget one of the interesting provisions within the law. Now, not only do you have to turn in your application, you will now need to turn in your tax returns from the prior year so your new employer knows how much income you have when determining your penalty threshold. Talk about invading your privacy. I then move on to your economists saying the stimulus was too small. I dismiss that, because it could have been ten times as much and it still wouldn’t have solved the problem. Private corporations aren’t going to create jobs if they don’t have a demand for those jobs. That’s also not to mention the fact that the PPACA is the #1 reason why employers aren’t hiring right now, because they don’t know what that law is going to do to them. You don’t invest in new employees if you’re just going to have to lay them off in the next year.And let’s talk about your complaining about corporations making record profits without increased hiring. Ever as why? Ever look into it? Because if you did, you’d find that they were able to lean out their processes, automate more, and hire workers outside the country that cost less. It’s about cost, pure and simple. And for that, you should be happy. Because when costs go up, you pay more at the register. Don’t kid yourself. Businesses don’t eat costs because it’s the “right thing to do.” They pass costs on to the consumer. Why do you think things cost what they do? And businesses are in business to make a profit. They are not evil for doing so, because without profitable businesses driving this economy, we would all be serfs, working for the socialist/communist government where we own nothing.
ghp95134 about 11 years ago
Abort Macht Frei
DavidGBA about 11 years ago
The Pagan Greeks and Romans had a village pit.
I Play One On TV about 11 years ago
Want to reduce the number of legal abortions? First, teach real sex-ed, rather than “abstinence-only”. Nothing against abstinence, but, as Bristol Palin says, it’s “unrealistic”. There are numerous articles noting that many teenage girls believe that oral or anal sex is not really sex and cannot spread disease. Also, teen pregnancy rates are higher in states with “abstinence-only” programs.
Another is to allow birth control to be readily available. Many moms do the same thing: if you’re going to do it anyway, be safe about it.
Keep in mind that, partly due to hormones found in foods, children are becoming sexually mature earlier, some as young as 8. They cannot understand the consequences of something that feels good. This also means that they have many more reproductive years before they get out of school and mature enough to have a family. This also shows the fallacy of abstinence-only.
Republicans truly want to end abortion entirely, at least the legal kind. That may not be every Republican, but the party has been working around Roe v. Wade for decades, and chipping away at the rights in every state.
I have an idea: if you want to stop paying for someone else’s birth control, stop making me pay for in-vitro fertilization, infertility treatments, etc. If we are so dead-set on making sure that every fetus (or every egg) becomes a child, let’s make sure those children are wanted. There’s a reason why abortions occur, and that reason is that the mother (and often the father) does not want the child. This is not a good environment in which to raise one. So, for all of those who cannot conceive, we will have a ready-and-able supply of adoptable babies. No need to have one of “your own”.
Silly? So is any extreme position. Let’s be rational, and find a way to reduce unwanted pregnancy. If we do that, abortion numbers will reduce.
SAStiner about 11 years ago
No one has bothered to mention, not that I’ve seen anyway, that one of the current “trends” in abortion is sex-selective abortion. Having a girl…wanted a boy? Abort and try again.
Fuzzy Thinker Premium Member about 11 years ago
“…Women should not have to go before a tribunal to determine if they should be allowed to get an abortion…”Actually, a judge is a great idea to weed out the frivolous Abortions. And, let’s give a free Tube Cutting with every abortion. In the case of criminal impregnation, Cut the Tubes of the male AND his parents.
pirate227 about 11 years ago
That’s what happens to poor people with no health insurance. They turn to an unlicensed, unregulated butcher.
ConserveGov about 11 years ago
The women that requested abortions at 6 or 7 months into pregnancy should be on trial along with this killer.
Eye for eye says scissors to the neck would be appropriate.
Wraithkin about 11 years ago
“locoboilerguy said, about 22 hours agoIn my neck of the woods (Rocky Mountains) we had a gynecologist who was a family friend. He said his biggest candidate for abortion was 30 to 45 year old married women who either had a affair or just did not want anymore children. He said virtually all the women wanted it confidential from their husbands.”“Dycel said, about 21 hours ago@locoboilerguyOne of a number of reasonable reasons for abortion.”That’s where I got it from. Clearly you haven’t been reading any of my posts. And when you use terms like “bus bunn(ies),” which have no definition in the real world, you only detract from your argument. What you’re missing is the concept of self-control instead of expecting someone else to take care of your mistakes. You are throwing out meaningless and tangential complaints about everything the left-wing complains about without contributing to the argument. When are you going to stick to the talking points?
Wraithkin about 11 years ago
“I don’t get why people are so afraid of abstinence – It’s not fear, it just doesn’t work in the overall population at risk, horny teenagers. There, appropriate sex ed is the most effective prevention of pregnancy and STD’s”I would disagree. It’s a social moray that’s changed. When I was in high school (about 20 years ago), a girl (note, not a woman) having a baby was labeled a slut or any other negative words. Now, because our liberal-driven media has done a once-over on our moral structure, teen pregnancies are celebrated. In the 50’s, girls went to communes and then gave the child up. Same in the 70’s, even. In the 90’s, the parents had a say in the matter, and were able to force the child up for adoption. Now, we have a child making an adult decision, and the adults who are paying for the child not having a say in the matter. That, to me, is backwards. So your theory of “more sex ed” preventing pregnancies is actually false. Teens were just as horny in the 50’s, 70’s, and 90’s, but weren’t getting pregnant at nearly the same rate as they are now. It’s because the social structure then frowned upon promiscuity, especially in the teen ranks. There are now orgies being had by teens… pretty certain this wasn’t going on even 20 years ago.Here’s where the disconnect is: Liberal adults think that “educating” a child about sex is equivalent to ensuring they will practice safe sex. The problem with that logic is that it gives teens a green light to have sex in the first place. And I’m sure we all know that the only 100% effective form of birth control is abstinence. I know: I didn’t have sex until I was an adult. So it can be done if you have even an ounce of self-control.“Another is to allow birth control to be readily available. Many moms do the same thing: if you’re going to do it anyway, be safe about it.”I’m sorry Play One, but that logic is why we have teens having sex. My wife was 15 when she first started having sex, because of this logic. They aren’t going to “do it anyway,” if the moral structure of the society says they shouldn’t be. But what has happened is over the past two decades, liberals have been pushing (in various information vectors) to let the girls have fun, too. This, in turn, has encouraged them to believe they are protected from pregnancy and throw caution to the wind. It’s irresponsible, because kids are irresponsible. And that’s what’s being lost. You can teach a kid everything you want. First, they have to want to pay attention, and second they have to be responsible to use it correctly. Most aren’t. But teaching them to practice safe sex gives them a green light to have sex in the first place; it’s implied. And the concept of self-control is lost on them. You can’t unopen Pandora’s Box.And this is paying negative dividends now in our society where now instead of pro-active birth control, we have reactive birth control in the form of abortions. Because people still haven’t learned to keep their legs closed and use the simple word, “No.” They still haven’t learned self-control and responsibility for their actions.
Wraithkin about 11 years ago
Assuming one actually believes god created us. I know, I know… a deist conservative. Go figure.Here’s why I’m having such a hard time accepting the “they’re just going to do it, so teach them to do it better,” logic. What we had before (abstinence) was working. What we have now (promiscuity with “protection” or abortion) isn’t. These aren’t just whack-job theories I have. I have factual evidence to support that, in the form of illegitimate births and abortion rates. Here is an interesting article that has a specific chart that shows while teens (ages 15-19) in the 50’s were having more children, almost none of them were having them out of wedlock. What that tells me is there were adult teens (18-19) having sex and children, and getting married, with marriage usually coming first.Now if you look at the chart and look at the unwed rates today, there’s a massive spike in it for two reasons: First, because young teen pregnancy is glamorized (see the umpteen shows on public television about it). Second, because teens are told your belief that “they are going to do it anyway, so give them protection,” so they think they are okay to go ahead and do it. And since they are so young, they can’t get married to the guy who got them knocked up. There is no sense of obligation with males, and no sense of sexual conservatism amongst females. That’s what rubs me the wrong way. When I got my girlfriend (now wife of 10 years) pregnant, I stayed with her because that was my obligation. Not to her, but to the child. We kept our son, because we didn’t feel it was fair to him to kill him because of our being irresponsible. So I do have personal experience in this matter, not just some “theory.”
PMcDonald1963 about 11 years ago
We would all be better off if we ignored the trolls (Ms. Ima, HOWGOZIT, Gore Bane, Brandon, etc.) … all they do is spew the same one-and-two-line bulsit on each page — rants that get under the skin of right-minded people … consider that either (1) none of them care any more than to hit-and-run like most who spray grafitti on any blank space, and don’t really care what anybody thinks, or (2) some right-wing/Tea Party sugah dadda pays them to spew this garbage, making them low-life freeloaders, just as they accuse everybody who actually employs actual thought processes before posting on the Internet.
I would be VERY interested to see a DD214 proving more than three months of honorable service from any of these right-wing trolls … but I expect that could never happen …
Just a couple of cents from a 20-year USMC (Ret) who earned a master’s degree in something other than a redneck agenda …
Wraithkin about 11 years ago
There is no evidence supporting a single mother is better off than two parents who aren’t happy with each other. In fact, quite the opposite is true. And, more to the point, how is a 16 year old fit to be a parent in the first place? They can’t even raise themselves, much less be responsible for another child.Who verifies factcheck? Just because they have a .org after their name doesn’t make them independent, or even accurate. Just because they call themselves fact checkers does not make it so. I also didn’t say that the Heritage was non-partisan. I just said that if you’re going to read resources, you should read both and list both, instead of listing left-only sites. That’s why I read from Real Clear Politics; it has stories from both camps. And what I can tell you is there is a very clear distinction between which side of the argument various news outlets fall.I welcome all sources of information. But when people like Dycel use self-defined derogatory terms like “bus bunn(ies),” to deprecate someone’s character, I take issue with that. That’s not discussion, that’s slander (or in this case, libel). I wouldn’t take the time to point out my disagreements with you if I thought your opinions had no merit.Simply, I ask you this: What is so great about change when what we have works? Are we changing just for the sake of change? And why is one person or group more important than another? Who decides that? Who is right? Because right now, that’s what’s going on in our society. And while some change is good, a good chunk is bad as well. Why is the concept of marriage so meaningless to some? Why are people so lazy they are unwilling to put forth the effort to make a marriage work? We have questions to which there are no easy answers. The problem, though, is that many in the left/liberal camp is to discard traditions that have held society together for eons and instead of opted to chart new courses entirely in the pursuit of self-aggrandizement and self-realization. People have gotten a hell of a lot more selfish than they were even a generation ago. Why? And more importantly, why is this okay?
padgetster about 11 years ago
Over the top?24 weeks is the same as six months in the womb, a preemie . . . could have been your little sister or brother…over the top?Couldn’t kill them in the womb, so let’s wait until their outside and then do the job right, just like the Nazis’ experimented in the same way.Over the top?You’re dang right it’s over the top, and that’s the only way it can make a difference, or were you a botched abortion?