Can Reps modify abortion stance?

It's completely irrelevant, because the numbers show the exact opposite in the US. Incidence of abortion, teen pregnancy, unintended pregnancy...all have increased with the increase of sex ed in schools, widespread availability of birth control, and abortion on demand.

You haven't explained THAT. The Netherlands is just a distraction.
 
It's completely irrelevant, because the numbers show the exact opposite in the US. Incidence of abortion, teen pregnancy, unintended pregnancy...all have increased with the increase of sex ed in schools, widespread availability of birth control, and abortion on demand.

You haven't explained THAT. The Netherlands is just a distraction.

Because that simply isn't true.

The only thing that has "increased" is the reportage of such incidents.

Back in the say, when someone had a baby out of wedlock, they were sent off to live with relatives. When they wanted to get rid of an unwanted baby, they quietly had it done.

So the "spike" you talk about is actually getting decent figures in the 1980's, and from there on out, going down.
 
Teen Pregnancy has been on the decline since 1983...

2010_Teen_Pregnancy_Rate.jpg


as has Abortion...

stats_by_year.jpg
 
Last edited:
It's completely irrelevant, because the numbers show the exact opposite in the US. Incidence of abortion, teen pregnancy, unintended pregnancy...all have increased with the increase of sex ed in schools, widespread availability of birth control, and abortion on demand.

You haven't explained THAT. The Netherlands is just a distraction.

Because that simply isn't true.

The only thing that has "increased" is the reportage of such incidents.

Back in the say, when someone had a baby out of wedlock, they were sent off to live with relatives. When they wanted to get rid of an unwanted baby, they quietly had it done.

So the "spike" you talk about is actually getting decent figures in the 1980's, and from there on out, going down.

The "reportage" increased yearly for 23 years after rvw, then the reportage reduced for a few years, then increased again?

Surely even you have to recognize that is an insane theory. In fact, it's batshit crazy.

But don't let that stop you.
 
Last edited:
Oh, yay, mysterygrams again.

Those are effective tools when it comes to pushing lies.
 
Who else was constantly using fake infograms and pretending they meant something?

Oh yeah, the psycho who wished fire aids on me during one of the most spectacular meltdowns usmb has ever experienced....are you two buds?
 
The "reportage" increased yearly for 23 years after rvw, then the reportage reduced for a few years, then increased again?

Surely even you have to recognize that is an insane theory. In fact, it's batshit crazy.

But don't let that stop you.

Um, no, the number peaked in 1985, and has declined ever since. Math clearly isn't your strong point.
 
Still astronomically higher than it was in 1972, or 1973, or 1975, or 1980...

So where did the infograms come from, skippy?
 
Still astronomically higher than it was in 1972, or 1973, or 1975, or 1980...

So where did the infograms come from, skippy?

Why do you care (Inicdently, you can find out pretty easy. Google it.)

It wasn't astronomically higher, just more accurately reported.

the fact is, the birth rate didn't drop dramatically after Roe v. Wade. Which means there were as many abortions being preformed (unreported) as afterwards.

It just took until about 1980 to get somewhat accurate figures.
 
You mean PP wasn't run efficiently? How odd...and how at odds with the pro-abortion propagada...

so where did the instagrams come from, Mr. Abortion Propaganda?
 
So when the democrats lose in two years will they modify their hate America stance?

Not entirely sure that would mean anything if it does happen.

It just means that we had a mid-term.

Frankly, the GOP was supposed to gain this election. They were supposed to retake the Senate. Instead they lost seats.

The very fact that they are running Herman Cain against Saxby Chambliss shows they learned nothing from this election.
 
Along with the far lefties, the extremists in the libertarian and right wings, like Thanatos, will have to change their hate America stance.

So when the democrats lose in two years will they modify their hate America stance?
 
This fetus is no different the millions killed in the name of "choice" except instead of being killed he was operated on to correct a defect while he still resided in his mother's womb.

AMAZING: A picture began circulating in November 2002. It should be "The Picture of the Year," or perhaps, "Picture of the Decade." It won't be. In fact, unless you obtained a copy of the U.S. paper which published it, you probably would never have seen it.

The picture is that of a 21-week-old unborn baby named Samuel Alexander Armas, who is being operated on by surgeon named Joseph Bruner. The baby was diagnosed with spina bifida and would not survive if removed from his mother's womb. Little Samuel's mother, Julie Armas, is an obstetrics nurse in Atlanta. She knew of Dr. Bruner's remarkable surgical procedure. Practicing at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, he performs these special operations while the baby is still in the womb.

During the procedure, the doctor removes the uterus via C-section and makes a small incision to operate on the baby. As Dr. Bruner completed the surgery on Samuel, the little guy reached his tiny, but fully developed hand through the incision and firmly grasped the surgeon's finger. Dr. Bruner was reported as saying that when his finger was grasped, it was the most emotional moment of his life, and that for an instant during the procedure he was just frozen, totally immobile.

The photograph captures this amazing event with perfect clarity. The editors titled the picture, "Hand of Hope." The text explaining the picture begins, "The tiny hand of 21-week-old fetus Samuel Alexander Armas emerges from the mother's uterus to grasp the finger of Dr. Joseph Bruner as if thanking the doctor for the gift of life."

Little Samuel's mother said they "wept for days" when they saw the picture. She said, "The photo reminds us pregnancy isn't about disability or an illness, it's about a little person" Samuel was born in perfect health, the operation 100 percent successful. Now see the actual picture, and it is awesome...incredible....and hey, pass it on! The world needs to see this one!

558965_4029065521012_1468145800_n.jpg


Here he is 10 years later

0_22_armas_450.jpg


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,519181,00.html
 
Last edited:
Abortion is a losing issue on a national level for Reps. It's trying to impose moral values on a majority that doesn't want it. It's seeking a political remedy for what is considered a religious issue. 50% of Catholics voted for Obama. Reps seem to be all over the board on the issue while trying to avoid the subject. I think we need a clear, this is what we stand for, message. There are over 1 million abortions in the US every year. We are not outlawing abortion we are moving forward with government sponsored abortion. There is no magic wand to stop abortion, why not use tactics that have a chance of success.

It doesn't matter anymore. Just looking at the second post you get the picture. They only listen to information that feeds their fire. Right up till the day of the election many of them believed that Mittens would win in a landslide. They are so wrong on every issue that concerns women that abortion isn't even that big of a deal outside of their bubble.
 
Abortion is a losing issue on a national level for Reps. It's trying to impose moral values on a majority that doesn't want it. It's seeking a political remedy for what is considered a religious issue. 50% of Catholics voted for Obama. Reps seem to be all over the board on the issue while trying to avoid the subject. I think we need a clear, this is what we stand for, message. There are over 1 million abortions in the US every year. We are not outlawing abortion we are moving forward with government sponsored abortion. There is no magic wand to stop abortion, why not use tactics that have a chance of success.

It doesn't matter anymore. Just looking at the second post you get the picture. They only listen to information that feeds their fire. Right up till the day of the election many of them believed that Mittens would win in a landslide. They are so wrong on every issue that concerns women that abortion isn't even that big of a deal outside of their bubble.

We believed Obama would win.
Americans vote themselves a paycheck these days first and foremost.
Obama hands out the most candy.
Nothing else matters.
 
This fetus is no different the millions killed in the name of "choice" except instead of being killed he was operated on to correct a defect while he still resided in his mother's womb.

AMAZING: A picture began circulating in November 2002. It should be "The Picture of the Year," or perhaps, "Picture of the Decade." It won't be. In fact, unless you obtained a copy of the U.S. paper which published it, you probably would never have seen it.

The picture is that of a 21-week-old unborn baby named Samuel Alexander Armas, who is being operated on by surgeon named Joseph Bruner. The baby was diagnosed with spina bifida and would not survive if removed from his mother's womb. Little Samuel's mother, Julie Armas, is an obstetrics nurse in Atlanta. She knew of Dr. Bruner's remarkable surgical procedure. Practicing at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, he performs these special operations while the baby is still in the womb.

During the procedure, the doctor removes the uterus via C-section and makes a small incision to operate on the baby. As Dr. Bruner completed the surgery on Samuel, the little guy reached his tiny, but fully developed hand through the incision and firmly grasped the surgeon's finger. Dr. Bruner was reported as saying that when his finger was grasped, it was the most emotional moment of his life, and that for an instant during the procedure he was just frozen, totally immobile.

The photograph captures this amazing event with perfect clarity. The editors titled the picture, "Hand of Hope." The text explaining the picture begins, "The tiny hand of 21-week-old fetus Samuel Alexander Armas emerges from the mother's uterus to grasp the finger of Dr. Joseph Bruner as if thanking the doctor for the gift of life."

Little Samuel's mother said they "wept for days" when they saw the picture. She said, "The photo reminds us pregnancy isn't about disability or an illness, it's about a little person" Samuel was born in perfect health, the operation 100 percent successful. Now see the actual picture, and it is awesome...incredible....and hey, pass it on! The world needs to see this one!

558965_4029065521012_1468145800_n.jpg


Here he is 10 years later

0_22_armas_450.jpg


Ten Years Later, Boy's 'Hand of Hope' Continues to Spark Debate | Fox News

Most abortions happen before 10 weeks, so your picture is pointless.

Besides the fact, as KG pointed out in another thread, it really doesn't matter what the fetus looks like. Are you less pro-life when it looks like a kidney bean?
 
Abortion is a losing issue on a national level for Reps. It's trying to impose moral values on a majority that doesn't want it. It's seeking a political remedy for what is considered a religious issue. 50% of Catholics voted for Obama. Reps seem to be all over the board on the issue while trying to avoid the subject. I think we need a clear, this is what we stand for, message. There are over 1 million abortions in the US every year. We are not outlawing abortion we are moving forward with government sponsored abortion. There is no magic wand to stop abortion, why not use tactics that have a chance of success.

It doesn't matter anymore. Just looking at the second post you get the picture. They only listen to information that feeds their fire. Right up till the day of the election many of them believed that Mittens would win in a landslide. They are so wrong on every issue that concerns women that abortion isn't even that big of a deal outside of their bubble.

We believed Obama would win.
Americans vote themselves a paycheck these days first and foremost.
Obama hands out the most candy.
Nothing else matters.

Only a handfull of the least crazy RWers though Obama would win. Your perception that Obama won because of freebies is just stupid. Obama won for a lot of reasons. Latinos wanted some respect...is THAT a freebie? Women don't believe that there are "degrees" of rape...Is THAT a freebie? Most Americans realize that the destruction of the middle class is tied to the war on unions... You think THAT is a freebie issue? The truth is that if anyone is of a mind that a president can or would give them something free to get them to vote...they are so stupid that they would never get off their asses to vote anyway....not even for a free cell phone.. I've got two cell phones that cost 12 bucks each and they work just fine. You guys have some stupid ideas what motivates other people.
 

Forum List

Back
Top