Obama lifts ban on abortion funds

very true. I don't think I've ever seen it put more succinctly.


I'm glad the funding is back. It will help cut down on teen pregnancies. Maybe some of them will make something of themselves instead of being baby factories.

Yeah well I don't believe my tax dollars should go to fund faith-based organizations either...

Wanna trade?

reply to post by HunkaHunka

---

Yes I will trade, because faith based organizations that offer grant money are not killing anyone.

reply to post by TasteTheMagick

---

But let's not shed a tear for the unborn babies murdered for this research that you hold so dearly. Murder one to help save another,,,, doesn't add up to me.

reply to post by HunkaHunka

---

That was an ignorant response. How can you possibly compare the two? One is murder, and the other is religion. Think buckwheat!!!

reply to post by Christian Voice

---

Well, actually, it isn't murder. Perhaps by your definition, but who are you?

Hey, if you want to have sex you should accept the possible consequences. Abortion is not birth control and too many people use it like that.

What is wrong with teaching teenagers tp simply not have sex until they are ready to deal with the possible outcome? What happens when they are given a condom by their school and it doesn't work and they end up pregnant?

Handing out condoms to teenagers is just saying "hey, go have sex and when the guy misuses it or it breaks, or hey, even if it simply just doesn't work, there is always that abortion thing for ya!"

Let's see: Pro-life is better than anti-life. I do not agree with partial abortion especially when the fetus looks like a human and survives outside the womb prematurely. Which means, I agree with stem cell research. Also, the health of both the mother and child is important.

Which brings me to this conclusion: After seeing how people are merely animals with reproductive rights and have a difficult time controlling their urges, I suppose this move by Obama of lifting ban on abortion funds is good timing.

I mean people already have access to drugs, alcohol and smoking. So why not make people more aware of their responsibility to control themselves 'better' and protect their health and ultimately the lives of future generation?

Furthermore, I've already read horror stories about how adoption and abuse goes on with the bad placement of children in foster homes. Once again, this is CHANGE, whereby religious dogmas must be eliminated with but a simple stroke of Obama's almighty pen.

The technology to intervene on behalf of mother and child is already here anyway! So there is no excuse to think this form of anti-life is 'bad'.

(Disclaimer: The paragraphs above were but my very quick summary of my rambling opinions only. Thank you.)

reply to post by leisuredrummer

---

Teaching abstinence works about as well as torturing to get facts - it doesn't. You can teach abstinence as a method, but you better incorporate real safe-sex tips in or else you'll have more pregnancies and more STDs.

I find it sickening that the murder of more thousands of innocent children is being cheered as "getting back at bush".

It just shows the depth of ignorance that blind hate can create.

More brillaince....."sex-ed" has been crammed down the worlds throat for 40 years...........guess what hasn't worked.........please show me data where this stupid idea has done anything to reduce unwanted pregnancy? How about the increase in STD's?.....

reply to post by heliosprime

---

Have you ever really even looked it up? Honestly, don't respond to me, but think to yourself, have you ever researched this topic?

Abstinence vs Comprehensive Sex Ed




The real point is, it is a boys will be boys situation. Effective teaching can and does lower the amount of sexual activity, but only to a certain extent. If you start to teach abstinence only, you'll still have a lot of sexual activity, but with less protection.

I would hate to add up all of the deaths
that are caused in the name of religion.

You mean the babies that are already being aborted are going to help other people who are severely ill? You make is sound as though women are going to be forced to have abortions just for the harvesting of babies. Plus, it's not murder, look at the definition: (emphasis mine)



Clearly, murder, is an illegal act. Abortion is not illegal and, thus, is not murder.


You can teach teenagers not to have sex all you like, that's never EVER going to stop them. It's much better to teach them what the implications ARE, telling them how to protect themselves, and making that protection readily available to them. I went to two high schools, the first one handed out condoms and we didn't have any pregnant students. The second one taught the kind of stuff you're talking about and we had pregnant FRESHMAN. Abstinence doesn't work.


Who's being murdered here? Nobody's going around killing kindergartners to "get back" at anyone.

Sex-ed HAS worked. The only flaws in the system lie in the part where the whole curriculum in each district can be written by a group of teachers, parents and "community leaders". They're allowed to make it so that condoms aren't even mentioned as a part of the curriculum and they make same-sex relationships look like something unheard of. I've seen this very action take place.

Duplicate thread...