Do women have a human right to taxpayer paid abortions? I don't think so!

reply to post by canadianmouse


So you think it is ok for any woman to have eight abortions. They should be sterilsed on the second one in my opinion.

For those who are religious I have a question for you:

If god intended women to never have abortions, then why do women see the need to abort their child. Why design creatures where particular women can get pregnant extemely easily, whilst some women can't get pregnant whatever they do?!

Originally posted by canadianmouse
Killing a live child is murder, that child is living and breathing. Abotion isn't murder because abortion is legal and not the murdering of life. Life is when the person can live and breathe on their own. In a mother's womb they can not.

**(Insert screaming here)***

WHAT?!?!?!? Just because a LAW makes it legal to abort, this negates a living breathing human being? So, when a dog is pregnant, those aren't puppies until they're born?

And it is LAWS which state the killing of a pregnant woman results in two counts of murder, manslaughter, etc..

Which do you prefer? Non-human for abortion puposes, human if the mother is killed?

reply to post by HotSauce


No, the man should be sterilized at the time of puberty and when an individual or partnership wants to conceive they should pass the requirements set forth to them by their all-knowing, cradle-to-grave, government.

reply to post by HotSauce


Well I meant you were being very civil to me

-Kyo

Originally posted by fishing
How much is it going to cost joe tax payer???Do the math eighteen or more years supporting a child no one wants.At joe tax payers cost...
No one wants to face the reality the system is broke.How many of you have adopted children???Is anyone willing to step up to the plate... Just what I thought pure BS as usual.Save the child as long as someone else pays for it.

We pay for aliens in this country,why not pay for abortions???All of you that are against abortion should then pay for raising these kids.

What is it with progressives and this idea that we are supposed to go all gah gah over this ill conceived false dichotomy and utterly and arbitrarily "pulled out of the air" forgone conclusions. NOT ONE has any idea how that life would have ended up because we never let them live long enough for any of you to make these bare assertions about having to pay for a kid his whole life.

The idea that most of you have about woman always being so helpless and so weak and pathetic that the ONLY scenario you seem to be able to conjure up, is one of a useless, mindless, aimless female relegated to welfare the rest of her life while she sits on her ass eating bon bons and drinking the malt liquor she bought trading sexual favors to add on to her food stamp bought grocery's, so she can feed the unwanted rug rat who will inevitably join the crips and be a thug.

It's a BAD argument guys ands gals. And one that is put forth as the only alternative for a life you, because of your prejudice predicated on impossible to quantify variables with a defeatist outlook for those whom we will never know how they would have turned out.

By the way, I have never met a person that lived their entire life in foster homes, ever tell me his life was less worthy of existing than all those who seem to think they are.

I guess since you think you can always imagine a worse case scenario and use the only alternative in a straw man argument where the only proof you can possibly substantiate your argument is with pure speculation. Taking these mothers you speak of, off the welfare rolls, isn't going to alter one of these feminists opinion about executing their own son or daughter that statistically, had they stuck it out and put off their plans to be a Corp executive for Victoria secret or a double diamond for Amway, the fact is they would have found out how much they love that child and how proud they are especially if they raise them to be a little more responsible and more selective about who they have as friends.

You ask who here is willing to adopt these kids and presumptuously say in a smug and snide retort, "didn't think so" as if not finding anyone in a thread full of people with the capacity to kill their offspring and those who can't imagine doing anything like that much less think it is our responsibility to adopt these kids or we don't have a right to have an opinion on the matter.

Here is a novel idea! How bout when we mess our bed, we don't make other people LIE in it.

For every one person that lifts their seem to be ten who will lean and lean on them is all they do until that 1% gets fed up with doing making the actual sacrifices one does to have a successful life later. When that 1% gets sick and tired of having to pay for all the low life’s who think happiness and success are a Government entitlement paid for by those of us that make our own bed and don't stay up nights worrying about who in the Government is going to take care of them, that the world owes you a living while they do nothing, but make demands on others willing to work for what they have and above board and honest enough to take responsibility for their own actions while they tell us it is OUR ignorance they are denying.

The welfare state is a progressive idea that is passionately defended yet when it comes to abortion, you then switch gears and use it in the most fallaciously construed straw man arguments that continue to be put forth, unaware of the position you argue from has not a leg to stand on much less the logic to support it.

Originally posted by OhZone
Well Hotsauce you believe in Slavery do you?

Forced Pregnancy is Slavery. And since you expect the Mother to care for the child that makes her an indentured servant for some 20 years.

Tell me why exactly do you care if the girl across town has an abortion?
How exactly does it impact your life?

And to those who suggest adoption like you think there are as many people willing and able to adopt as there are babies, I got news for you.

Those who want to adopt are folks who want White Babies.

Also among the babies who would be born instead of aborted are a lot of drug adicted babies.
Hotsauce, how many babies have you adopted?
Just wondering if you are willing to walk the talk.

Well we certainly don't want this, do we? Why don't we sterilize men and then let the government tell you when you can bring a child into the world.

That would resolve this drug baby, indentured servant issue that fuels your stance on abortion. BRAVO.

Originally posted by john124
Why I became an ‘abortion addict’

It took me close to a decade to write my book, Impossible Motherhood: Testimony of an Abortion Addict. I had been driven by the need to understand and explain my destructive actions. Though my story was a terrible one, I had broken the cycle and mended a torn self. I was a writer who had overcome a serious neurosis.

My neurotic behaviours were extreme, my pathology difficult to identify with, yet in the almost grotesque extent of my destructive actions as I forgot to take my Pill time after time to indulge in the fantasy of potential motherhood, I was convinced I had put my finger on something. Fifteen pregnancies, most of them in one romance gone sour while married to a college professor 34 years my senior, were 15 “highs” charting an imaginary path of control and empowerment that resulted in 15 despairing terminations.

This is an extreme case though probably involving mental health issues.

And this should be paid for by the government ???

Maybe if she had to carry and give birth to a child she would be more careful next time? I know some women who had babies that were unplanned, they had them anyway, and it's amazing how they increased their determination levels to not let it happen again.

[edit on 11-11-2009 by Blue_Jay33]

[edit on 11-11-2009 by Blue_Jay33]

The one thing I see on here from most of the "Pro-Choicers" is the thought that all women who get abortions are poor. This is far from the truth. According to the stats most women say it is because it will interrupt with their careers, or their education, or it is just inconvenient. That doesn't sound like a bunch of poor women to me, sound more like a bunch of Narcisisitic women to me. Well I guess that just applies to the 78% that have abortions for convenience.

reply to post by john124


dude, is this even an argument? if the fetus is a human life entitled to legal protection from death then it doesn't matter how fertile the woman is. what you're saying is like saying 'if god never wanted rape why'd he give some men more testosterone than others.' it doens't make any sense man.

Originally posted by canadianmouse
Killing a live child is murder, that child is living and breathing. Abotion isn't murder because abortion is legal and not the murdering of life. Life is when the person can live and breathe on their own. In a mother's womb they can not.

Here is another idea that progressives seem to think they deserve such a convenient double standard for. The idea that if a baby so young that it doesn't even have its baby teeth yet, that this somehow relegates this person to a corpse or perhaps benign tumor of sorts, I don’t know but what ever it is, it sure isn't alive! HA HA HA HA the lengths people will embarrass themselves to reach, in order to avoid facing the facts that this flesh being living inside the mothers womb, (or is it host to you?) that it has brain waves and a heart that is beating and pumping blood and has eyes just like you have, a brain just like you have, a heart and kidneys just like you have, it recoils in pain when poked and prodded just like you would. The only thing it lacks is the same common decency YOU were given when you were as much a rookie in the world as this baby.

The idea you even think this is a fair justification to make such an erroneous assertion while YOU have enjoyed the benefit of a moral standard that gave you the very shot you would take to judge the innocent, distancing yourself from the truth by imagining it isn't real.

The fact is you are wrong, the baby will survive on its own, all the mother has to do is maintain her regularly scheduled events and the human body has proven to manage the care of the life form she is accountable for, in the womb quite easily.

Babies out side of the womb, two to five years of age could not survive on their own either but I can assure you, they are alive as long as people like you don't assume they are already dead so lets just not feed em.

It's a BAD argument you have offered, plane and simple





[edit on 11-11-2009 by Kerry_Knight]

reply to post by Kerry_Knight


Yeah you are spot on. The thing that bothers me about their support of letting a mother choose to end the life of her unborn child is that most of them would lose their minds if someone rounded up some pregnant seals and a doctor aborted all the seal babies by sucking their brain fluid out while the poor baby seal kicked and fought for its life.

[edit on 11-11-2009 by HotSauce]

Originally posted by galatea
I would rather my taxes pay for an abortion than pay for that mother to be on welfare.

I agree.

And another thing some people pay taxes anyways. Your money will go where they want it to. Not much of a choice.

Originally posted by HotSauce
reply to post by Kerry_Knight

 

Yeah you are spot on. The thing that bothers me about their support of letting a mother choose to end the life of her unborn child is that most of them would lose their minds if someone rounded up some pregnant seals and a doctor aborted all the seal babies by sucking their brain fluid out while the poor baby seal kicked and fought for its life.

[edit on 11-11-2009 by HotSauce]

How can a seal kick for it's life?

reply to post by galatea


LMAO, how about wiggle around trying to get away. Is that more accurate for you. A little baby seal being brought to its death all in the name of Progress.

Originally posted by HotSauce
reply to post by galatea

 

LMAO, how about wiggle around trying to get away. Is that more accurate for you. A little baby seal being brought to its death all in the name of Progress.

That's better. hehe.

Originally posted by john124
I don't think you can justify a fetus as a equivalent to an innocent life.

Could you give a reason for your statement? Tell me why I can't justify a fetus as an innocent life.

reply to post by galatea


Thanks for keeping me anatomically correct as I pretend kill the baby seals..

reply to post by Rocketgirl


Because if you justify a fetus as an innocent life then it makes the vast majority of those people that have abortions selfish instead of poor victims of an evil society like the pro-choicers want you to believe.

[edit on 11-11-2009 by HotSauce]

Originally posted by HotSauce
reply to post by galatea

 

Thanks for keeping me anatomically correct as I pretend kill the baby seals..

you are welcome.. anytime.