So when they say they want abortion safe, legal, and rare...

[Derideo_Te]

Then let's try the definition of being personally responsible:

If you can't afford to have a child, don't have sex.

Simple, huh?

I've still never received an adequate explanation of why I should finance other people's sex lives.

How is that "Just say no" campaign working? Teen pregnancies in states where sex ed is restricted are way higher than comparable states where kids learn what causes pregnancies. So "just say no" is unrealistic.

I don't believe I ever mentioned anything about abstinence-only education. Could you link for me where I did, please? Thanks.

As for your second question I was under the impression you wanted to reduce abortions. For a few paltry dollars you get to reduce abortions by up to 70%. There is a cost for everything. The alternative which is to ban 98% of all abortions and not provide contraception will end up costing you a fortune in taxes instead. You will be picking up the tab for new schools, public education, busing, school meals for the million+ additional children born each and every year. But weren't you opposed to having to pay higher taxes? Too bad, nothing you can do about that once there are millions more unwanted kids running around. Do you know where so many of those unwanted kids end up? How much are you going to be paying for the inevitable increases that will be needed for law enforcement, legal services, etc, etc?

Is that the direction you really want to go just to save a couple of bucks in the short term?

Maybe bleeding-heart liberals could offer to pay for stuff out of their own pockets for a change. It counts as generosity if you give your own money. Matter of fact, it's far more generous than forcing the government to take money from others to give it to your special-interest group, isn't it?

You advocated abstinence as a means of birth control. The statistics from abstinence-only sex ed make a compelling argument that it doesn't work for teenagers so it isn't any great leap to make to consenting adults.

I know that nothing I post is going to change your mind, Dave. All I am doing is trying to do is give you pragmatic answers to your questions. We both know that when push comes to shove and there are more kids who need an education that property and state taxes are going to rise to meet the demand. There is nothing either of us are going to be able to do to stop that happening.

From my personal perspective abortions are not the solution but they are inevitable. As a "bleeding-heart liberal" on social issues and a fiscal conservative I am making a pragmatic calculation. Whatever it costs me now will be a pittance compared to the alternative in the future. So yes, this "bleeding-heart liberal" will "finance other people's sex lives" because I don't want to be saddled with the consequence of not doing so. I will be happy to see the reduction in abortions that my "bleeding-heart liberal" tax dollars have made possible too.

But that is just me. I do these things because of who I am. Money simply isn't as important to me as people are. I care that there will be fewer unwanted kids running around because to me every child should be wanted. 50% of all pregnancies each year in the USA are unintended. My "bleeding-heart liberal" tax dollars might be able to reduce that to just 15%. If that happens I will be happy knowing that I made a very small difference in improving the lives of others. We each tread our own path and we each have to face ourselves in the mirror. This is something I can live with and rest easy that it is the right decision for myself. You have to make your own decision and I know that it isn't an easy one. I wish you well.

Peace
DT

 

[JakeStarkey]

A silly statement this: "Maybe bleeding-heart liberals could offer to pay for stuff out of their own pockets for a change".

In fact, an abortion is far less expensive than supporting mom and child.

In fact, contraception is far less expensive than abortion.

daveman, think, man, think.

 

[Derideo_Te]

A silly statement this: "Maybe bleeding-heart liberals could offer to pay for stuff out of their own pockets for a change".

In fact, an abortion is far less expensive than supporting mom and child.

In fact, contraception is far less expensive than abortion.

daveman, think, man, think.

Jake, for you and I this might be a straightforward fiscally conservative decision. But for Dave and millions like him the decision has a strong emotional and spiritual element. He has to come to terms with that part of himself and it is perfectly possible that how he perceives this will never align with the pragmatism of fiscal conservatism. But that is his decision to make because he has to live with himself. Whatever he does decide will be what is best for himself and I can respect that.

Peace
DT

 

[daveman]

daveman got walloped in this thread.

Nothing in the bill will incrementally make abortion any safer; nothing has proved that at all.

The bill, therefore, is to cut access and availability to women, not protect them.

Your opinion is noted and discarded as prog drivel.

Gotta get to bed early tonight, boy. You have to catch the school bus in the morning.

And you continue to fail. The insults are all you have, daveman.

One, show how it significantly improves the safety of women. (You can't)

Two, explain why a midwife NP can deliver a baby but a MSN with training can't safely perform abortions.

This is why you are laughed at on this OP.

I'm laughed at in this thread because there are people who don't give a shit about women, DAMN sure don't give a shit about babies, and they don't mind showing their contempt for human life.

 

[daveman]

How is that "Just say no" campaign working? Teen pregnancies in states where sex ed is restricted are way higher than comparable states where kids learn what causes pregnancies. So "just say no" is unrealistic.

I don't believe I ever mentioned anything about abstinence-only education. Could you link for me where I did, please? Thanks.

As for your second question I was under the impression you wanted to reduce abortions. For a few paltry dollars you get to reduce abortions by up to 70%. There is a cost for everything. The alternative which is to ban 98% of all abortions and not provide contraception will end up costing you a fortune in taxes instead. You will be picking up the tab for new schools, public education, busing, school meals for the million+ additional children born each and every year. But weren't you opposed to having to pay higher taxes? Too bad, nothing you can do about that once there are millions more unwanted kids running around. Do you know where so many of those unwanted kids end up? How much are you going to be paying for the inevitable increases that will be needed for law enforcement, legal services, etc, etc?

Is that the direction you really want to go just to save a couple of bucks in the short term?

Maybe bleeding-heart liberals could offer to pay for stuff out of their own pockets for a change. It counts as generosity if you give your own money. Matter of fact, it's far more generous than forcing the government to take money from others to give it to your special-interest group, isn't it?

You advocated abstinence as a means of birth control. The statistics from abstinence-only sex ed make a compelling argument that it doesn't work for teenagers so it isn't any great leap to make to consenting adults.

Advocating abstinence is not the same as advocating abstinence-only education.

I know that nothing I post is going to change your mind, Dave. All I am doing is trying to do is give you pragmatic answers to your questions. We both know that when push comes to shove and there are more kids who need an education that property and state taxes are going to rise to meet the demand. There is nothing either of us are going to be able to do to stop that happening.

From my personal perspective abortions are not the solution but they are inevitable. As a "bleeding-heart liberal" on social issues and a fiscal conservative I am making a pragmatic calculation. Whatever it costs me now will be a pittance compared to the alternative in the future. So yes, this "bleeding-heart liberal" will "finance other people's sex lives" because I don't want to be saddled with the consequence of not doing so. I will be happy to see the reduction in abortions that my "bleeding-heart liberal" tax dollars have made possible too.

But that is just me. I do these things because of who I am. Money simply isn't as important to me as people are. I care that there will be fewer unwanted kids running around because to me every child should be wanted. 50% of all pregnancies each year in the USA are unintended. My "bleeding-heart liberal" tax dollars might be able to reduce that to just 15%. If that happens I will be happy knowing that I made a very small difference in improving the lives of others. We each tread our own path and we each have to face ourselves in the mirror. This is something I can live with and rest easy that it is the right decision for myself. You have to make your own decision and I know that it isn't an easy one. I wish you well.

Peace
DT

We disagree on some parts of this issue, and agree on other parts. Thanks for the civil discussion.

 

[Rct_Tsoul]

I was thinking that before a woman decides to get an abortion ......... she should watch this video:
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdj7zKGiDNw&feature=youtube_gdata_player"]Warning: This is FUCKED UP[/ame]
hmm...........

 

[churchmouse]

Not sure what everyones positions are but will just say this.

No one has the right to decide for another living human being whether they should live or die. Science confirms that a new human life starts at CONCEPTION.

I have heard on this forum abortion is good for numerous reasons....that no child should live unless they are wanted. How many born children are not wanted by their parents? Who is born into a perfect family. To kill for any reason, especially because the circumstances are not right...is inhumane it is outright killing. It is taking a hit out on a human being.

Shame on those of you who love killing and who support abortion for any reason.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Not sure what everyones positions are but will just say this.

No one has the right to decide for another living human being whether they should live or die. Science confirms that a new human life starts at CONCEPTION.

I have heard on this forum abortion is good for numerous reasons....that no child should live unless they are wanted. How many born children are not wanted by their parents? Who is born into a perfect family. To kill for any reason, especially because the circumstances are not right...is inhumane it is outright killing. It is taking a hit out on a human being.

Shame on those of you who love killing and who support abortion for any reason.

Abortion supporters don't "love killing".

For someone who is allegedly opposed to "killing" you are condemning some women to death by denying them an abortion. These same women might already have other children to raise and care for but because their latest pregnancy has serious life threatening complications you want to deprive those children of their mother. So this begs the question as to why you support the killing of the mother in order to save a fetus that won't survive anyway?

 

[daveman]

I was thinking that before a woman decides to get an abortion ......... she should watch this video:
Warning: This is FUCKED UP
hmm...........

Oh, no. Can't have that. Can't have women reminded that a life is about to end. She might exercise her right to choose and choose the WRONG decision -- to not abort.

Right, abortion supporters?

 

[Derideo_Te]

I was thinking that before a woman decides to get an abortion ......... she should watch this video:
Warning: This is FUCKED UP
hmm...........

Oh, no. Can't have that. Can't have women reminded that a life is about to end. She might exercise her right to choose and choose the WRONG decision -- to not abort.

Right, abortion supporters?

Nothing wrong with her watching the video if she is undecided and chooses to do so of her own free will. However no one should be compelled by law to watch that video in order to obtain an abortion.

 

[YoungRepublican]

I don't understand how abortion is still an issue. It was decided forty years ago, people need to get with the times. Here is the deal with abortions though. Let's just say me and my girlfriend are fornicating and the condom breaks. My swimmers go on up and do what they are supposed to do. Now she is pregnant. So now, I need to leave school, ruining my career and passion for good. She needs to find a few jobs to be able to pay for diapers, medicine, cribs, etc. and now her life is ruined as well. Now, our child is born into two unprepared parents who can barely afford the bills, let alone all of the things that they need. This is a good example, imagine those in the community who are already poor? You are taking away their chance at life for some moral code that was reasoned silly in the 1970's. This isn't murder, or anything close to it. Do you really think that the Supreme Court would say, "ya know what, lets take the most awful law in the land at make it legal, as long as their only killing children", and then in the next forty years, with conservative SC, and Presidents, this law is never overturned. Well, that's because they only let people with actual educations and intelligence in these positions of power.

The bottom line is simple, either we can force these people into having children they don't want, so the children can grow up in a home that is'nt ready to have them, and doesn't want them, so they can get into their teens and go out an d commit crimes and be just as poor as their parents are. Or, we can allow parents to have children when they are ready and those children can have a shot at a real life. A successful life. But, no, this is still an issue for some reason. Some people want children to grow up unwanted in poor homes so they can go out and be part of the problem. Duh, why wouldnt we want that

 

[YoungRepublican]

And it is a statistical fact that abortion and crime rate is in direct correlation. When Row v. Wade was passed, the American crime rate was on a steep rise, and continued to rise over the 80's and early 90's, then what happened? The crime rate drops drastically. Why? Because when all of the crime all of these unwanted children would have committing when they were 18 (prime crime rate) they were never around to commit the crime. Want to know how they found this out? Five states legalized or allowed easier processes for abortion three years earlier than the rest of the nation. Was it a coincidence that their crime rate fell 30 percent more than the way the rest of the country did in fifteen years after it was legalized? Then you look at the states that not only made it easier for abortions to be had, versus the states that just made it "legal", crime rate is shown to be 30% lower in the states that made it easier to get abortions.

Here is the crazziest stat. All of the data points to people under the age of 25 (people young enough to be exposed to legalized abortion) where the crime rate drops. There is no statistical data showing a lower crime rate for people over 25 (people not exposed to abortions) These are numbers, and I know they scare a lot of you, but they don't lie. Abortion has done a greater job at lowering the crime rate than any DARE program, police force, crime legislation etc. period. Funny thing is the precise opposite thing happened in Romania. Romania made abortion illegal, and guess what happened to them? Crime rate shoots up drastically. Why? Because thousands of unwanted, poor, children were being born committing crime like they were going to.

 

[Noomi]

I was thinking that before a woman decides to get an abortion ......... she should watch this video:
Warning: This is FUCKED UP
hmm...........

Oh, no. Can't have that. Can't have women reminded that a life is about to end. She might exercise her right to choose and choose the WRONG decision -- to not abort.

Right, abortion supporters?

Not a late term abortion. This is a second trimester abortion, probably at around 22 weeks.

 

[JoeB131]

I was thinking that before a woman decides to get an abortion ......... she should watch this video:
Warning: This is FUCKED UP
hmm...........

Oh, no. Can't have that. Can't have women reminded that a life is about to end. She might exercise her right to choose and choose the WRONG decision -- to not abort.

Right, abortion supporters?

Most abortions are performed between 8-12 weeks, when the fetus is the size of a kidney bean and looks like a cocktail shrimp.

So why would making her watch a probably medical necessary late abortion make her feel bad, exactly?

 

[mamooth]

The goal of pro-lifers is a statist utopia, similar to communist Romania.

Decree 770 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
---
To enforce the decree, society was strictly controlled. Contraceptives disappeared from the shelves and all women were forced to be monitored monthly by a gynecologist. Any detected pregnancies were followed until birth. Secret police kept their eye on operations in hospitals closely.

...

In the seventies, birth rates declined again. Economic pressure on families remained, and people began to seek ways to circumvent the decree. Wealthier women were able to obtain contraceptives illegally, or bribed doctors to give diagnoses which made abortion possible. Especially among the less educated and poorer women there were many unwanted pregnancies. These women could only utilize primitive methods of abortion, which led to infection, sterility or even their own death. The mortality among pregnant women became the highest of Europe during the reign of Ceauşescu. While the childbed mortality rate kept declining over the years in neighboring countries, in Romania it increased to more than ten times of that of its neighbors.
---

(Golly, that Dave sure does care about women.)

 

[YoungRepublican]

I was thinking that before a woman decides to get an abortion ......... she should watch this video:
Warning: This is FUCKED UP
hmm...........

Oh, no. Can't have that. Can't have women reminded that a life is about to end. She might exercise her right to choose and choose the WRONG decision -- to not abort.

Right, abortion supporters?

I would watch the video in HD if they wanted me to. As long as my life isn't ruined, you can hand me some pop-corn and a slurpy and I will watch away. You think making some girl watch an abortion is going to stop her from making sure that her life isn't over with? What does that even accomplish?

 

[JoeB131]

The goal of pro-lifers is a statist utopia, similar to communist Romania.

Decree 770 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
---
To enforce the decree, society was strictly controlled. Contraceptives disappeared from the shelves and all women were forced to be monitored monthly by a gynecologist. Any detected pregnancies were followed until birth. Secret police kept their eye on operations in hospitals closely.

...

In the seventies, birth rates declined again. Economic pressure on families remained, and people began to seek ways to circumvent the decree. Wealthier women were able to obtain contraceptives illegally, or bribed doctors to give diagnoses which made abortion possible. Especially among the less educated and poorer women there were many unwanted pregnancies. These women could only utilize primitive methods of abortion, which led to infection, sterility or even their own death. The mortality among pregnant women became the highest of Europe during the reign of Ceauşescu. While the childbed mortality rate kept declining over the years in neighboring countries, in Romania it increased to more than ten times of that of its neighbors.
---

(Golly, that Dave sure does care about women.)

Good point. As much as the nutters try to equate abortion (a medical procedure) with "Communism" (an economic system), the only country that ever tried to compell pregnancy was a Communist dictatorship.

And they failed, miserably.

 

[JoeB131]

I was thinking that before a woman decides to get an abortion ......... she should watch this video:
Warning: This is FUCKED UP
hmm...........

Oh, no. Can't have that. Can't have women reminded that a life is about to end. She might exercise her right to choose and choose the WRONG decision -- to not abort.

Right, abortion supporters?

I would watch the video in HD if they wanted me to. As long as my life isn't ruined, you can hand me some pop-corn and a slurpy and I will watch away. You think making some girl watch an abortion is going to stop her from making sure that her life isn't over with? What does that even accomplish?

I think this falls into the same category as making them shove a wand up her hoo-ha.

It's about shaming them.

 

[koshergrl]

Naturally, the men who have abortion fantasies think that it's "shameful" to have an ultrasound that increases the safety with which an abortion can be performed.

 

[JoeB131]

Naturally, the men who have abortion fantasies think that it's "shameful" to have an ultrasound that increases the safety with which an abortion can be performed.

The Ultrasound has nothing to do with the procedure, other than to show a woman an fuzzy image of a fetus and make her think its human.

Even legit OB/GYN's won't do an ultrasound that early in a pregnancy.