Republican Governor of Illinois SURRENDERS to Democrats - Makes Public-Funded Abortions LEGAL.

originally posted by: Raxoxane
a reply to: introvert

But why must the taxpayer foot the bill for other's crappy decisions? Like not making sure to be on reliable birth control and falling pregnant so the taxpayer has to pay for murdering the unwanted baby? At least that's how i understand the OP.

You would rather force the woman to bear a child that will need to be supported at the taxpayers' expense? Healthcare, education, food stamps, prison....?

You conservative Christians don't REALLY think these rich billionaires share your Christian/moral values?

They run for office primarily to get themselves and their boys club richer. Maybe a little has to do with the status and power but it's primarily about money.

Trump and Romney both used to be pro-Choice but later "changed". They didn't "change", They looked at the demographics and adjusted their message. That's what you do in business. Women having unplanned kids is bad for business - they made a business decision.

And yes, I know someone is going to reply and point out how the Dems also are hypocrites - I agree.

a reply to: Raxoxane

Oops.

a reply to: [post=22736083]Raxoxane[/post
Oops

a reply to: Raxoxane

The Republicans, locally and nationally, are making it harder and harder for poor and rural women to get reproductive advice and access. The Republicans have been herding women with laws toward prison for many years. Like this 20 week abotion ban There are lots of spaces for women prisoners.

I hope other governors get a clue.

a reply to: DJW001

No.What i would rather see happen,is for women who do not want children,to be on reliable birth control so the issue of abortion does not even come up in the first place.When i see all the different ways that American women spend their time and money,i have to wonder why some of that time and money cannot be spent on preventing an unwanted pregnancy through purchasing effective birth control.There is such a thing as personal responsibility.

a reply to: carewemust

Illinois governor Bruce Rauner just didn't have the personality for rallying the public behind him, so he eventually gave in to the corrupt swamp creatures demands. (Illinois legislature is predominantly Democrats.) Since the state's Medicaid budget is perpetually exhausted, our once fiscally conservative governor's decision to add additional burden to the program, is totally insane.

Yea. I wonder how THAT occurred? It's not like they weren't voted in by the people or anything right?

a reply to: Raxoxane

Which is something you would say, if you did not understand that the only highly reliable birth control is to have no sex, which would place the ladies in a state of sexual repression not experienced since before the sixties.

People on birth control conceive, people using condoms conceive, even people who have had procedures to tie their tubes conceive, but you know who next door to never conceives? Virgins and abstinent persons (other than the Mother of Christ of course, but if ever there was a statistically irrelevant anomalous result...). Unless that is your preference, which would be draconian and unsupportable of you, there is no argument there at all. Oh, and by the way, many forms of chemical contraception are known to contribute to cervical cancer and a whole host of other terrible things, so please, explain why a woman, just because she seeks in the natural manner, the comfort of companionship and the physically necessary benefits of a healthy sexual existence, ought to risk cancer and other health related risks associated with contraceptive use, just because you have a problem with it?

originally posted by: Raxoxane
a reply to: introvert

But why must the taxpayer foot the bill for other's crappy decisions? Like not making sure to be on reliable birth control and falling pregnant so the taxpayer has to pay for murdering the unwanted baby? At least that's how i understand the OP.

Which would you rather foot the bill for a relatively cheap abortion or a single mother's welfare over 18 years?

a reply to: TrueBrit

Although contraception can occasionally fail,the odds of unwanted pregnancies are enormously reduced by use of contraceptives.What do you think would happen,if because of fear of cancer,women just stop using them altogether?

a reply to: Raxoxane

Who cares what happens? More important question, do you or do you not believe in their right to make that call for themselves, without being judged over it by over zealous, authoritarian, footstamping goons of the corporatist owners of the country you live in?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: carewemust

The majority of voters in Illinois support abortion rights. He has no choice but to bow to the will of the people. It's called "democracy," and if you don't like it you can always move to Venezuela.

Venezuela is too left leaning for most of ATS, I think they’d much prefer the Libertarian Paradise of Somolia.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I know very well that not everyone shares my horror of and indescribable disgust with the practise of abortion,but in my opinion the issue should seldom arise in the first place if women used reliable contraception.Look i don't expect of others what i am unwilling to do,myself.I have all my life been on some form of birth control,and no unwanted children.My 20yo daughter is on birth control,because she wants ideally a baby only in about 5 year's time.My oldest daughter recently had twin baby boys,at the age of 25,and happily married to a competent man who can provide for them.It is Not that difficult to do things the sensible way,if you are determined to.

a reply to: TrueBrit

I support responsible,sensible decisions.Of course everyone has the right to,in regards to this topic,do as they please with their bodies.If they wish to forego contraception-well their lives,their choice.Pity it becomes the problem of all of society when people flounder through life making either no decisions and let the chips fall where it may,or crappy decisions-when it comes to something like procreation.About the rest of your post,i am not sure what you're on about.You seem to infer that i am some judgemental draconian thing,which is whatever..

a reply to: Raxoxane

Abortion rates in the U.S. have been steadily going down every year. Organizations like Planned Parenthood (thank God for Margaret Sanger!) get some credit for that, by providing education and free or low-cost birth control. More aggressive sex ed in public schools have been helpful as well. I think abortions will continue to go down until they are a rare anomaly, but even with good birth control habits, sometimes an unwanted pregnancy happens anyway. My step-daughter was on the pill, but got pregnant anyway while she was in college. I guess she was in the 1%.

a reply to: Raxoxane
I don't want to get in a situation where a girl I'm dating needs an abortion either, but sometimes you have to make the impossible decisions in life. Life isn't hollywood. Sometimes it just sucks.

However, the thread JUST got done establishing that contraceptives have fail rates. So here. Let's play pretend and reask the question. A girl uses contraception, it fails now which would you rather pay for, a cheap abortion or 18 years of welfare to a single mother?

I consider myself a conservative, (not a republican) I have no problem with a woman choosing to have an abortion thats on her, tax dollars going to pay for it bothers me.

a reply to: Raxoxane

Well that is what it is.

For a start, not everyone has access to information in the United States, and by that, I mean access to the level of information you have, on tap. Many places are not well served by data providers, and access to data is too expensive for many people in your country, such that internet access is simply NOT ubiquitously available to ALL people in your society. You have access to information which informs your decision making. Well done. But a young girl growing up with nothing, may have to choose between data access and heating and lighting, and only a moron would choose the internet over the basics of survival.

The lack of access to information is the fault of society, which dictates that everything must have a price, and indeed, Americas businesses over charge for things like information AND medical care.

Assuming everyone has access to the same information, is false, and basing an outlook on that erroneous assumption, and then having the temerity to lambast those who operate from a poorer access to information, just because you happen to have some, is precisely as draconian and unfair as being biased against a person over the way they choose to operate their bodies.

AND ANOTHER THING:

Half the reason anyone is getting out of their box about the cost to the taxpayer of abortions, is the fact that just visiting a doctor in order to get prescriptions for birth control, can be costly, before you actually add the cost of the medication itself. A doctors visit could be as little as $35 (which is far too expensive anyway) or as much as $250. You add the cost of the medication, which for something that is not bound to cause medical complications at some stage, could be as much as another $50.

If a person who has not the access to information you have, because they cannot afford it, intends to engage (as they have a right to, whether or not they are well off enough to afford either birth control, an abortion, or the access to the information which might lead them to realise the benefit of either thing), in sexual intercourse as a necessary part of their healthy and otherwise totally normal lives, then they should not have to consider taking out a pay day loan in order to make that possible!

a reply to: Raxoxane

Nope, accidents happen, stuff happens, contraceptives are not fail-safe.

There are approximately 125,000 abortions a day worldwide, do you think that can ever be stopped? Perhaps with educaqtion itr can be reduced, but if abortion is illegal, people will find illegal methods or try to DIY.

Abortion should be legal.

Tax payers should not pay for abortions.

In much the same way that taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for the upkeep of monuments to the slave era, they shouldn't have to pay for abortion. I know that's an odd comparison. I firmly believe that tax dollars should support women's health clinics as long as it's private pay for abortions. It's absolutely unfair to make people who are extremely opposed to abortion, pay for it... especially since it is against many people's religion.