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

I just came across this individual and needed to share it somewhere. Here seems as good a place as any.

Anyway, this individual is on her 6th abortion as we speak. The most recent pregnancy, the one to be aborted, was intentional. She assumed if she got pregnant the guy boning here would stay. He didnt.

She has two kids.

Almost enough to make me go pro-life but then I dont want her procreating.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


We need to find a way to legally punish selfish, irresponsible idiots like her. She should do time for having 6 of her own children taken out. People like her are what is wrong with this country. Dumb and Selfish.

but don't you guys see?

the kind of person who WOULD kill their own offspring is the exact type our gene pool could do without.

so,no they don't have a 'right' to it per se,but we should take one for the team and just pony up for it.

reply to post by the_grand_pooh-bah


I'll probably get flamed for saying this, but oh well. One of the primary reasons for limiting reproduction is, in essence, a way to push "survival of the fittest." I'm not saying someone born into poverty can't rise up and make something of themselves, but where I live it is the norm for women in these situations to have as many kids as possible in order to increase the amount of federal & state aid they receive. Wrong, wrong, wrong. But, this is how they were taught and what the community deems as normal.

If we limit reproduction and require some measure that ensures that the child will start off on the right foot, then perhaps the number of people having children solely to benefit THEMSELVES would start to decrease, resulting in a decrease in the types of communities where this group think is the norm. This also puts more burden on parents to do all that they can for their children so that they will have the opportunity to make the most out of their lives and, thus, ensure that they will carry on their lineage.

reply to post by Freenrgy2


Nobody is profiting from having extra kids while on welfare. You get about two thousand per kid a year. That's barely enough to take care of a kid in itself. Your delusional if you think so called welfare queens exist. Sure people find a way to take advantage of every system but it's a lot harder to take advantage of welfare than you think. You don't just pop out kids and suddenly your are living a comfortable life. Those few that do take advantage are certainly not the norm, they are the minority.

Originally posted by The TranshumanistYou get about two thousand per kid a year. That's barely enough to take care of a kid in itself. Your delusional if you think so called welfare queens exist.

I know several personally. A couple of them are actually family. The first thing you do is not get married but still have several trashy guys play "baby daddy" with you. The second thing you do is not take care of the kids. It's pretty easy to have a 52" television and a BMW with a spoiler on it parked on the street when you kid is living off of school lunches and what he can steal/borrow from around the neighborhood.

Pretending they dont exist is ridiculous.

Originally posted by The Transhumanist
Nobody is profiting from having extra kids while on welfare.

Really? Happens all the time where I live.

You get about two thousand per kid a year. That's barely enough to take care of a kid in itself. Your delusional if you think so called welfare queens exist.

Call me delusional then, because they do exist.

Sure people find a way to take advantage of every system but it's a lot harder to take advantage of welfare than you think. You don't just pop out kids and suddenly your are living a comfortable life. Those few that do take advantage are certainly not the norm, they are the minority.

Yes, they do take advantage of the system, because the system is setup that way and that is how they were taught. Poverty breeds poverty, corruption breeds corruption, crime breeds crime. See the picture?

Unless some mitigating factors are introduced then the circles above will never be broken nor shrunk. In some ways we need to think more like a species instead of as individuals.

If you're the one spreading your legs, then you must pay.

I'm not exactly sure but I think an abortion costs roughly $300 in Australia.

No one should have to pay for idiotic decisions.


Although exceptions must be made for rape victims.

reply to post by Freenrgy2


Let's see some proof of a family with a 52' tv and a bmw that lives solely on welfare and doesn't have any kind of legitimate income other than drug dealers.

Until then I will continue to call you delusional because that's what you are.

Unless some mitigating factors are introduced then the circles above will never be broken nor shrunk. In some ways we need to think more like a species instead of as individuals.

Like what? Let's talk specifics captain solution.

Originally posted by The Transhumanist
Let's see some proof of a family with a 52' tv and a bmw that lives solely on welfare and doesn't have any kind of legitimate income other than drug dealers.

Until then I will continue to call you delusional because that's what you are.

Next time I have to go to a family reunion I'll send you an invite. A sucker like you will do them real good when they start in with the panhandling.

Originally posted by The Transhumanist
Like what? Let's talk specifics captain solution.

Seriously?

You need to go and read my previous posts. It should be glaringly obvious, even to you.

reply to post by Freenrgy2


Insulting my intelligence. Classy. The only thing that was glaringly obvious about your post was that you are a proponent of eugenics and social Darwinism. Where I come from, we tend to call those people nazis although that might pass for morality where you live. Either that or I confused you with some other conservative. It's hard to keep track after 20 pages.

Originally posted by The Transhumanist
reply to post by Freenrgy2

 

Insulting my intelligence. Classy. The only thing that was glaringly obvious about your post was that you are a proponent of eugenics and social Darwinism. Where I come from, we tend to call those people nazis although that might pass for morality where you live. Either that or I confused you with some other conservative. It's hard to keep track after 20 pages.

Bit touchy, are we? Not insulting your intelligence by any means. You asked for my solutions and I directed you to reread previous posts which made it very clear. I thought you would have picked up on that.

The nazis turned eugenics into genocide. Not at all what I am suggesting.

Are you also suggesting that conservatives are nazis?

And did you also know that eugenics programs used abortions as one means of improving the genepool, while the nazis outlawed abortions by women able to conceive.

I am ascertaining that eugenicists are nazis. How exactly would stopping poor people from reproducing lead to improvements in the gene pool? Are you saying that poverty is a genetic flaw?

reply to post by The Transhumanist


Progressives are Eugenicists so are you calling them Nazi's? The whole pro-choice agenda is just a sub-strategy of Eugenics. So anyone who is in support of abortion at least supports a piece of the Eugenics movement.

[edit on 18-11-2009 by HotSauce]

That's not even remotely true. Having an abortion is not in itself participation in eugenics and yes as a matter of fact I am calling progressive eugenicists nazis as well. Sterelizing mentally retarded people is eugenics. Forcing abortions of children of mentally retarded people is eugenics. A woman having an abortion because she was raped is NOT eugenics.

reply to post by The Transhumanist


Let me show you.

The Boston Globe

Just google "eugenics abortion" and you will see that abortion was/is viewed as a means to stop "undesirables" like minorities and the poor from reproducing. It is one of the best kept secret in politics.

Only in the cases of rape and potential medical harm to the mother could it not be considered eugenics. Planned Parenthood is all about Eugenics. Why do you think most PP offices are in the middle of poor areas with lot of minorities? To make it as easy as possible for them to get an abortion.

You can read about the history of planed parenthood here.

Wikipedia

Now do you believe that abortion is not a form of Eugenics?

You can even donate money to PP to fund abortion for specific races. So if you hate a race you can fund their abortions more than the other races. Kind of unpleasant, isn't it. But it is all true.

Don't trust me though, do your own research.

Wow. These abortion threads really go round and round, don't they?

So much feigned concern from the religious zealots, about the children of minorities and the poor. Funny how that concern vanishes once they've been born. My personal opinion, is that the leaders of the churches just want to make sure they have a supply of 'fresh meat' to keep the priests happy, fresh meat without parents to report them to, who will probably be forced to engage in "survival sex" with them in order to obtain life's necessities. That's what this is really all about.

All of these "pro-lifers" are nothing but hypocritical little parrots, doing the bidding of very evil men that have hijacked religion and use them like the tools they are. What a joke, considering most of them support war, just look at some of their posts in threads about the deaths of already born, innocent people being "collateral damage". I'm not a pacifist or anything myself, but anybody that can't see how completely disingenuous these bible thumpers are, is an idiot.

Where's their concern for the lives of the countless children all around the world, suffering genocide, wars, and famine...all at the hands of the same evil men who control them and have convinced them to completely lose their minds over a few dividing cells in the uterus of a complete stranger? They must laugh at how easy it is.

[edit on 19-11-2009 by 27jd]

Originally posted by The Transhumanist
I am ascertaining that eugenicists are nazis. How exactly would stopping poor people from reproducing lead to improvements in the gene pool? Are you saying that poverty is a genetic flaw?

Nope, not saying that. And didn't say I was tying to improve gene pool.

My proposal was simply that adolescent males should receieve a vasectomy.

There is absolutely no good reason for people who either can't afford or are emotionally or mentally unstable to bring a child into this world. And since I'm not an advocate of abortion because people make mistakes, then something else can and must be done.

I'm not suggesting the genocide of poor people. I know of people who have been born into poverty and have overcome great odds to make something of themselves. However, statistics show that people born into poverty are likely to remain inpoverished for the duration of their lives. And allowing reproduction to continue under those circumstances is an injustice.

Instead of allowing people to reproduce at will, maybe such restrictions would cause people to really think about their lives and future. For those wanting to have children, then they would be more inclined to better themselves towards that goal, while others will remain unable to conceive. Ultimately, the numbers would go down.

And this does not mean that man forgoe showing compassion to the poor and meek. If anything, it would allow us to show more compassion to those who are less fortunate.

reply to post by the_grand_pooh-bah


To be honest, I'm tired of poneying up.

I do not want to pay for and should not be forced to pay for someone's 'choice' it's 'their' body after all; let 'them' pay.

I am tired of abortion being used as birth control. How many abortions are performed a year? Too many to be called anything else.
Maybe if it was pay your own way this would slow down.

Planned murderhood is gonna be ticked off and loose a lot of business unless it's taxpayer funded and I bet this playes a part in how some people vote.