It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

My body-My choice

page: 4
33
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 07:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: PlasticWizard

Similar to your earlier post, I would assume that when a fetus is self sufficient, it becomes a life. That is my stance at this point and you will find many variants. Even with scientific proof, there would still be detractors and neighsayers.

Who is to be the judge then?


By saying that, if someone has a disability and isn't self sufficient then we can just abort them too. That opens up a whole other can of disability worms we don't need right now.

There needs be a line drawn in the sand and consciousness, I think, is the best way to make everyone "happy" in the long run.. Noone on both sides of the argument will be totally happy in the end but it's a common ground I think most can agree on. Like we have in terms of braindead patients on life support.
edit on 23-1-2017 by PlasticWizard because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-1-2017 by PlasticWizard because: Extra word




posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: kibric

Australian Elite pedo ring:



80's Franklin SRA scandal:



Recent Belgium pedo scandal:



John Ghosh:



And a thread here on ATS Ireland Pedo ring, 77 people.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

New Zealand Prime Ministers John Key resigns, daughter (Cherrygate):

themillenniumreport.com...

edit on 23-1-2017 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: PlasticWizard

I don't disagree, I'm just not sure if that common ground can be met. The same for what circumstances are acceptable for abortion. I by no means have the answers mind you.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 07:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: veracity

originally posted by: SFUSA
It's not about their choice, it's about forcing the taxpayer to subsidize their choice.


abortions are paid by the taxpayer?


Yes. Planned parenthood receives taxpayer monies which they use for rent, utilities, receptionists, nurses, doctors, staffing, advertising, waiting room magazine subscriptions, medical supplies, renovations, etc.; all of which planned parenthood utilizes to provide service for women to kill their children. If that wasn't the case I doubt you'd have an aversion to cutting federal funding for planned parenthood, as they could simply transfer the planned parenthood abortion account to a new business across the street that doesn't receive federal funding and the only difference would be a name change.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 07:26 PM
link   
An unborn baby is a distinct life-form. "Choice" should end, when an innocent human life is involved. Hey... is a soldier who was drafted and is fighting for his country, an "innocent" human life?
edit on 1/23/2017 by carewemust because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Since Roe v Wade there have been almost 60 million abortions. Reported. Let that sink in.

That's more lives than the entire baby boomer generation.

58 million. We have murdered an entire generation of Americans.

It's the most repulsive thing I have ever had to live among.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 07:29 PM
link   
I found it odd that both competition over State lines and tort reform was lauded by both sides and yet it disapeared from the actual ACA. Something stunk to high heaven about that and I imagine it was due to a disturbing relationship between the insurance companies and the Dem's involved, including the Obama Administration. The whole thing stunk.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: SFUSA

originally posted by: veracity

originally posted by: SFUSA
It's not about their choice, it's about forcing the taxpayer to subsidize their choice.


abortions are paid by the taxpayer?


Yes. Planned parenthood receives taxpayer monies which they use for rent, utilities, receptionists, nurses, doctors, staffing, advertising, waiting room magazine subscriptions, medical supplies, renovations, etc.; all of which planned parenthood utilizes to provide service for women to kill their children. If that wasn't the case I doubt you'd have an aversion to cutting federal funding for planned parenthood, as they could simply transfer the planned parenthood abortion account to a new business across the street that doesn't receive federal funding and the only difference would be a name change.


oh, it just pays for the building, etc, i see. Taxpayers don't pay for the actual abortion.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 07:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555

If memory serves, there was a large influence from ABA Lobbyists during the inception of ACA.
edit on 23-1-2017 by DBCowboy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 07:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Blaine91555

If memory serves, there was a large influence from ABA Lobbyists during the inception of ACA.


The American Bar Association you mean? These acronyms are driving me nuts.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 07:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar

#makeincandesentagain



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 07:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blaine91555

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Blaine91555

If memory serves, there was a large influence from ABA Lobbyists during the inception of ACA.


The American Bar Association you mean? These acronyms are driving me nuts.


Yes.

Apologies.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: veracity

originally posted by: SFUSA

originally posted by: veracity

originally posted by: SFUSA
It's not about their choice, it's about forcing the taxpayer to subsidize their choice.


abortions are paid by the taxpayer?


Yes. Planned parenthood receives taxpayer monies which they use for rent, utilities, receptionists, nurses, doctors, staffing, advertising, waiting room magazine subscriptions, medical supplies, renovations, etc.; all of which planned parenthood utilizes to provide service for women to kill their children. If that wasn't the case I doubt you'd have an aversion to cutting federal funding for planned parenthood, as they could simply transfer the planned parenthood abortion account to a new business across the street that doesn't receive federal funding and the only difference would be a name change.


oh, it just pays for the building, etc, i see. Taxpayers don't pay for the actual abortion.


No I claimed taxpayers subsidize planned parenthoods rent, utilities, receptionists, nurses, doctors, staffing, advertising, waiting room magazine subscriptions, medical supplies, renovations, etc; all of which they utilize to service women who kill their babies.
edit on 23-1-2017 by SFUSA because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: AboveBoard

originally posted by: odzeandennz
why should you be required to have car insurance. its your body, your risk. i hope that goes away too.


Because if you run into me with your car and cause
me physical and material damages beyond what you can pay, then I shouldn't have to suffer. That is why you are required to carry a certain level of car insurance.


Suffer, it is a personal responsibility according to the republicans, just as senior citizens should suffer for getting old.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 07:56 PM
link   
There is/are quite a number of ways to not get pregnant ranging from $2 for condom all the way up to hormonal implants.

The above is "choice" and birth control.

If one is too lazy, stupid, ignorant or cheap to use what's available and still insist on playing then that does not empower murder.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 08:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blaine91555
I found it odd that both competition over State lines and tort reform was lauded by both sides and yet it disapeared from the actual ACA. Something stunk to high heaven about that and I imagine it was due to a disturbing relationship between the insurance companies and the Dem's involved, including the Obama Administration. The whole thing stunk.


I find that odd as well, but do not think the Dems were the only ones involved. US politicians are as crooked as snake, and while the head has changed, the body remains the same, we need to throw all of the bastards out.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 08:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Blaine91555
I found it odd that both competition over State lines and tort reform was lauded by both sides and yet it disapeared from the actual ACA. Something stunk to high heaven about that and I imagine it was due to a disturbing relationship between the insurance companies and the Dem's involved, including the Obama Administration. The whole thing stunk.


I find that odd as well, but do not think the Dems were the only ones involved. US politicians are as crooked as snake, and while the head has changed, the body remains the same, we need to throw all of the bastards out.


I'd not be surprised in the least if both sides played a part in it. I agree, we need some fresh faces for things to change. The problem is, it is we the people who keep voting the same jerks into office.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 08:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phoenix
There is/are quite a number of ways to not get pregnant ranging from $2 for condom all the way up to hormonal implants.

The above is "choice" and birth control.

If one is too lazy, stupid, ignorant or cheap to use what's available and still insist on playing then that does not empower murder.





Maybe if people would teach their kids these kinds of things, it would change, oh wait the number of abortions is down over the last 20 years. Ignorance in this day and age are no excuse, even with Zombie Sky Fairies.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 08:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blaine91555

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Blaine91555
I found it odd that both competition over State lines and tort reform was lauded by both sides and yet it disapeared from the actual ACA. Something stunk to high heaven about that and I imagine it was due to a disturbing relationship between the insurance companies and the Dem's involved, including the Obama Administration. The whole thing stunk.


I find that odd as well, but do not think the Dems were the only ones involved. US politicians are as crooked as snake, and while the head has changed, the body remains the same, we need to throw all of the bastards out.


I'd not be surprised in the least if both sides played a part in it. I agree, we need some fresh faces for things to change. The problem is, it is we the people who keep voting the same jerks into office.


I agree, I am independent, but lean left. I do not know anyone that would oppose across state lines, or tort reform.

I am fairly radical in the point, that profit needs to be taken out of medicine. Haven't quite got the details down, but would be willing to share ideas.



posted on Jan, 23 2017 @ 08:24 PM
link   
The amount of comments in this thread dictating or assuming how a woman should feel about her choice in life is sickening.

A woman doesn't want to have a child for certain reasons, then you have no right to tell her otherwise. Just like no-one has a right to tell you how to buy a car, choose a career, spend your money or raise YOUR children.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join