The Conservative Cave
Current Events => General Discussion => Topic started by: Injenu on January 11, 2013, 11:47:17 AM
-
Planned Parenthood has always been a hot topic with regards to federal spending. Texas just passed a law that requires the state to fund "all women's health clinics with the exception of those that provide abortions". Long story short, women are no longer receiving any assistance for abortions through any organization including the federally funded Planned Parenthood.
The part that confuses me is that wouldn't conservatives who are concerned about government spending want abortions to be federally funded? Because in the long run, if women don't get abortions, and actually have the kids which they cannot support, won't they then receive much more in welfare i.e. federal entitlement spending? Not only just that, but if said woman goes to some back alley clinic that performs the abortion, and the uninsured woman goes to a hospital from the malpractice of some unlicensed doctor, doesn't this bill get paid for by the state?
There's just so many fiscal ramifications of preventing abortions that it seems counter intuitive to the most worthy and most popular among independents with regards to conservative platforms, which in my opinion is being fiscally conservative.
Thoughts?
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/11/us/texas-planned-parenthood/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
-
I don't support killing people, especially babies, in order to decrease spending.
-
Injenu, how do you feel about Ron Paul?
-
Not only just that, but if said woman goes to some back alley clinic that performs the abortion, and the uninsured woman goes to a hospital from the malpractice of some unlicensed doctor, doesn't this bill get paid for by the state?
Always the fallback argument.
:whatever:
-
I don't support killing people, especially babies, in order to decrease spending.
Or for any other reason!
-
It's also cheaper to kill old people instead of paying for social security so let's not only kill the unborn lets kill grandma too.
Seriously dude if you could even ask that question it means you do not understand our positions at all.
-
Planned Parenthood has always been a hot topic with regards to federal spending. Texas just passed a law that requires the state to fund "all women's health clinics with the exception of those that provide abortions". Long story short, women are no longer receiving any assistance for abortions through any organization including the federally funded Planned Parenthood.
The part that confuses me is that wouldn't conservatives who are concerned about government spending want abortions to be federally funded? Because in the long run, if women don't get abortions, and actually have the kids which they cannot support, won't they then receive much more in welfare i.e. federal entitlement spending? Not only just that, but if said woman goes to some back alley clinic that performs the abortion, and the uninsured woman goes to a hospital from the malpractice of some unlicensed doctor, doesn't this bill get paid for by the state?
There's just so many fiscal ramifications of preventing abortions that it seems counter intuitive to the most worthy and most popular among independents with regards to conservative platforms, which in my opinion is being fiscally conservative.
Thoughts?
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/11/us/texas-planned-parenthood/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
yeah, if you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em. Stop expecting me to pay for your problems.
take responsibility and quit ****ing guys without any form of protection. If you do get knocked up, take responsibility for the life you created thru your irresponsibility and make the changes in your life to raise and support the child. This means you will have to stop partying and spreading your legs for any Tom, Dick, or Harry that turns you on. This means you will have to get a J.O.B. to support your young'in and not hang out at the clubs with the "cool people". This means you have to have to adopt the "boring life" your parents did when they had you.
And if you can't do that, then carry the child to term and give it up for adoption. There are hundreds of couples who can't have children due to medical issues that would be happy to adopt the child that is an inconvienence to you.
-
The part that confuses me is that wouldn't conservatives who are concerned about government spending want abortions to be federally funded?
Thoughts?
I figured you for a dumbass, but... wow.
Go kill babies on your own dime if it brings you that much joy. I want no part of it.
-
The part that confuses me is that wouldn't conservatives who are concerned about government spending want abortions to be federally funded?
:drink:
Let's see, money - life, money - life..........money over life ? Seriously ? :thatsright:
Here's a thought, "people being responsible for their own actions"..............wow what a concept.
.
-
I support abortion because only liberals have them.
-
Planned Parenthood has always been a hot topic with regards to federal spending. Texas just passed a law that requires the state to fund "all women's health clinics with the exception of those that provide abortions". Long story short, women are no longer receiving any assistance for abortions through any organization including the federally funded Planned Parenthood.
The part that confuses me is that wouldn't conservatives who are concerned about government spending want abortions to be federally funded? Because in the long run, if women don't get abortions, and actually have the kids which they cannot support, won't they then receive much more in welfare i.e. federal entitlement spending? Not only just that, but if said woman goes to some back alley clinic that performs the abortion, and the uninsured woman goes to a hospital from the malpractice of some unlicensed doctor, doesn't this bill get paid for by the state?
There's just so many fiscal ramifications of preventing abortions that it seems counter intuitive to the most worthy and most popular among independents with regards to conservative platforms, which in my opinion is being fiscally conservative.
Thoughts?
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/11/us/texas-planned-parenthood/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
Only the Conservatives on TV are concerned solely about fiscal issues, to the exclusion of either liberty issues like the Second Amendment or values issues like abortion. Unless you awoke from 40 years or so of suspended animation this week, or acquired your entire knowledge of the Conservative movement from mass media, it is difficult to imagine that you have not had some sense of this matter before now.
-
Only the Conservatives on TV are concerned solely about fiscal issues, to the exclusion of either liberty issues like the Second Amendment or values issues like abortion. Unless you awoke from 40 years or so of suspended animation this week, or acquired your entire knowledge of the Conservative movement from mass media, it is difficult to imagine that you have not had some sense of this matter before now.
He's just another troll trying to dazzle us with his brilliance.
-
I don't support killing babies, or any humans for that matter. As a matter of fact, while I'm not planning on having any kids at the moment, if I were to get my wife pregnant, I would feel very selfish if we had an abortion. Unfortunately, as it regards society in general, not everyone is responsible enough to provide themselves with a healthy, productive environment, let alone that of another human being.
To give you an example, and probably the reasoning as to my original post.. I'm a speech pathologist, working for the Seminole Indian tribe in South Florida. Seminole Tribe owns Hardrock Casino, don't pay taxes, and members of their tribe receive nearly $10,000 per month between checks from the Hardrock, as well as payments from the Government. As a result, there's a huge drug epidemic amongst the youth of the reservation, and as a bi-product, a lot of unplanned pregnancies. Seminoles do not condone abortions so what you see are children born with a debilitating mental disorders, wrought from their mothers continuing their habits through pregnancy. This continues, as having a child also increases the amount these individuals receive. The parallel in this example as well as that of what is going on in Texas is that the system is limiting necessary option while enabling irresponsible behavior.
Out of wedlock births are most likely to cause people to require financial assistance from the government, and in 2012, there were more out of wedlock births than in any year that this statistic was kept. We're also spending a percentage of GDP that's the highest it has been since World War 2.
-
Or for any other reason!
Agreed. Inocent life is too precious, to ever have a reason to stop it. Those babies have done nothing wrong, abortion is plain murder.
-
If this guy has a point, it is elusive.
First: Know what you want to say.
Second: Say it in a way that can be understood by other people.
That is the essence of communication.
-
This has always confused me with regards to Abortions.
Start from the indisputable fact that abortions (like homosexual activities, btw) belong in a back alley and work from there. It should clear up most of the confusion about the subject.
-
I am completely against the killing of the unborn. But...
I do have a smidgeon of empathy for your point of view. There have been times over the years when dealing with severely handicapped people (early childhood and up) that I have wondered if it would have been more merciful for them to have been aborted than to suffer the life they do. Then...
I remember that there is suffering for each person here, and our responsibility to each other is to lessen it as much as humanly possible. And, I again see that my service to those I can help is an honor and very humbling.
Being Christian, I realize that my thoughts that I know better than God (regarding who's life is worthy, or that I would be more merciful) is nothing but temptation. I choose to not give in to that. Does that mean I just throw up my hands and say, "Oh well, there will always be parents who selfishly inflict lifelong harm on the children through their use of drugs?" No. I work against drug use and alcohol abuse of all kinds.
I SEE, just as you SEE, the effects drugs and booze has on society. Long, long term bad and sad effects on the individual and the community.
-
Seminole Tribe owns Hardrock Casino, don't pay taxes, and members of their tribe receive nearly $10,000 per month between checks from the Hardrock, as well as payments from the Government. As a result, there's a huge drug epidemic amongst the youth of the reservation, and as a bi-product, a lot of unplanned pregnancies. Seminoles do not condone abortions so what you see are children born with a debilitating mental disorders, wrought from their mothers continuing their habits through pregnancy. This continues, as having a child also increases the amount these individuals receive.
Sounds like bad parenting skills and a lack of leadership from the tribal elders.
-
I am completely against the killing of the unborn. But...
I do have a smidgeon of empathy for your point of view. There have been times over the years when dealing with severely handicapped people (early childhood and up) that I have wondered if it would have been more merciful for them to have been aborted than to suffer the life they do. Then...
I remember that there is suffering for each person here, and our responsibility to each other is to lessen it as much as humanly possible. And, I again see that my service to those I can help is an honor and very humbling.
Being Christian, I realize that my thoughts that I know better than God (regarding who's life is worthy, or that I would be more merciful) is nothing but temptation. I choose to not give in to that. Does that mean I just throw up my hands and say, "Oh well, there will always be parents who selfishly inflict lifelong harm on the children through their use of drugs?" No. I work against drug use and alcohol abuse of all kinds.
I SEE, just as you SEE, the effects drugs and booze has on society. Long, long term bad and sad effects on the individual and the community.
People being irresponsible in their lives, such as having babies out of wed lock or abortions makes one wonder why........
I ran across a quote that makes a lot of sense to me; "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened".
My daughter is a therapist to brain damaged children and has been for quite a number of years. She loves the work she does and it's something I personally could not do no matter the circumstance.
When she was in her second pregnancy the doctor told her she would almost certainly have a baby with downs. My daughter and her husband decided they would continue and love the baby no matter what happened. Unfortunately it was dead in the sixth month. They decided to give the baby a name and bury her.
So the quote above, "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened", makes sense to me.
The government and many on the left seem all too eager to "help" people to forget God and IMO promote people being irresponsible in their lives.
.
-
To give you an example, and probably the reasoning as to my original post.. I'm a speech pathologist, working for the Seminole Indian tribe in South Florida. Seminole Tribe owns Hardrock Casino, don't pay taxes, and members of their tribe receive nearly $10,000 per month between checks from the Hardrock, as well as payments from the Government. As a result, there's a huge drug epidemic amongst the youth of the reservation, and as a bi-product, a lot of unplanned pregnancies. Seminoles do not condone abortions so what you see are children born with a debilitating mental disorders, wrought from their mothers continuing their habits through pregnancy. This continues, as having a child also increases the amount these individuals receive. The parallel in this example as well as that of what is going on in Texas is that the system is limiting necessary option while enabling irresponsible behavior.
My tax money that I pay is not meant for keeping whores on their backs and continued subsidization of their moral failures nor is it meant to be used as a benchmark for attaching a value to any life. That is not the government's role.
What you are describing is a Seminole Nation problem; a failure in their culture that has plagued the Black families for decades. Why is it I am obliged to pay for the killing of children while I bust my ass to take care of my own? I stood tall and did what was right, why should I have to pay for someone else's moral failings, just to have them run off and do it again?
What you are saying is very backwards. You are asking why we don't support federal funding to kill the unborn to relieve the economic pressure of having to dole out more entitlements. End the subsidizing of failure and there will be no need to spend my money killing unborn children. Get to the root of the problem before trying to throw more money at the symptom.
That clear it up for you?
-
I don't support killing babies, or any humans for that matter.
Yes you do, Liar. Its a sacred plank in your platform. Killing babies is part of being a democrat/liberal/socialist/Commie/progressive/whatever you are.
You love the idea of killing babies. You would wallow in the gore, swim in the blood if you could.
State Sponsored Murder is part of who you are. admit it and embrace it proudly.
-
Sounds like bad parenting skills and a lack of leadership from the tribal elders.
Indian tribes/reservations have a hundred years on LBJ's dream of controlled urban ghettos. It all comes down to control, whether it comes from HUD, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, or the tribe "leaders" themselves.
-
I don't support killing babies, or any humans for that matter. As a matter of fact, while I'm not planning on having any kids at the moment, if I were to get my wife pregnant, I would feel very selfish if we had an abortion. Unfortunately, as it regards society in general, not everyone is responsible enough to provide themselves with a healthy, productive environment, let alone that of another human being.
To give you an example, and probably the reasoning as to my original post.. I'm a speech pathologist, working for the Seminole Indian tribe in South Florida. Seminole Tribe owns Hardrock Casino, don't pay taxes, and members of their tribe receive nearly $10,000 per month between checks from the Hardrock, as well as payments from the Government. As a result, there's a huge drug epidemic amongst the youth of the reservation, and as a bi-product, a lot of unplanned pregnancies. Seminoles do not condone abortions so what you see are children born with a debilitating mental disorders, wrought from their mothers continuing their habits through pregnancy. This continues, as having a child also increases the amount these individuals receive. The parallel in this example as well as that of what is going on in Texas is that the system is limiting necessary option while enabling irresponsible behavior.
Out of wedlock births are most likely to cause people to require financial assistance from the government, and in 2012, there were more out of wedlock births than in any year that this statistic was kept. We're also spending a percentage of GDP that's the highest it has been since World War 2.
So you're saying that the "crimes" of the parents are good reason to kill the children? To be "merciful" we should just kill off anyone that "doesn't deserve to live, drains on society in general?"
If parents can't afford to support their children, adoption is an excellent answer.
Another wonderful answer would be for our society to stop telling kids that fathers are only needed for money. Children need to be taught that marriage comes before sex, not that condoms fix everything. Fix marriage, and you'll fix children.
-
Injenu, how do you feel about Ron Paul?
Ron Paul wants to defund abortions by getting the Feds out of the business of doing so and leaving it up to the states to decide for themselves just how they want to legislate that by the vote of the people in their own states... Who would disagree with that? I'm all for the Feds butting out of our personal business.
-
Planned Parenthood has always been a hot topic with regards to federal spending. Texas just passed a law that requires the state to fund "all women's health clinics with the exception of those that provide abortions". Long story short, women are no longer receiving any assistance for abortions through any organization including the federally funded Planned Parenthood.
The part that confuses me is that wouldn't conservatives who are concerned about government spending want abortions to be federally funded? Because in the long run, if women don't get abortions, and actually have the kids which they cannot support, won't they then receive much more in welfare i.e. federal entitlement spending? Not only just that, but if said woman goes to some back alley clinic that performs the abortion, and the uninsured woman goes to a hospital from the malpractice of some unlicensed doctor, doesn't this bill get paid for by the state?
There's just so many fiscal ramifications of preventing abortions that it seems counter intuitive to the most worthy and most popular among independents with regards to conservative platforms, which in my opinion is being fiscally conservative.
Thoughts?
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/11/us/texas-planned-parenthood/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
Fact is that because some woman decides that for any reason she wants to abort her unborn child, shouldn't be the burden of the taxpayer anyway, shape or form. This shouldn't be regulated on federal level at all. It should be left up to the states to legislate this so if for any reason women want to murder their unborn children, they can vote with their feet. Why make it easy for women to kill their children.
Fact is that we're not going eradicate legalized abortion, but we could certainly hold back some of these abortions simply by regulating it on a state level instead of a federal level.
-
So the quote above, "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened", makes sense to me.
The government and many on the left seem all too eager to "help" people to forget God and IMO promote people being irresponsible in their lives.
Completely agree with both those statements.
-
Planned Parenthood has always been a hot topic with regards to federal spending. Texas just passed a law that requires the state to fund "all women's health clinics with the exception of those that provide abortions". Long story short, women are no longer receiving any assistance for abortions through any organization including the federally funded Planned Parenthood.
The part that confuses me is that wouldn't conservatives who are concerned about government spending want abortions to be federally funded? Because in the long run, if women don't get abortions, and actually have the kids which they cannot support, won't they then receive much more in welfare i.e. federal entitlement spending? Not only just that, but if said woman goes to some back alley clinic that performs the abortion, and the uninsured woman goes to a hospital from the malpractice of some unlicensed doctor, doesn't this bill get paid for by the state?
There's just so many fiscal ramifications of preventing abortions that it seems counter intuitive to the most worthy and most popular among independents with regards to conservative platforms, which in my opinion is being fiscally conservative.
Thoughts?
http://www.CNN.com/2013/01/11/us//index.HTML?hpt=hp_t3
I understand where you Injenu are coming from.
What to do with a wife that is Christian that adheres to the Bible to be in obedience to her husband. He wants sex, what choice does she have,? She is committing a sin to not allow her husbands wishes.
She and family are too poor to buy the PILL so she has to except what her husband wishes. Even if told by medical hospitals that another child will kill her, she cannot abort or at any time prevent herself from becoming pregnant as long as the husband refuses to use condoms, also against church teachings.
This is a problem for woman world wide and has been for eons, to submit to a husband or find a way around HIS lust to stay alive and be able to care for the children now born.?
-
I understand where you Injenu are coming from.
What to do with a wife that is Christian that adheres to the Bible to be in obedience to her husband. He wants sex, what choice does she have,? She is committing a sin to not allow her husbands wishes.
She and family are too poor to buy the PILL so she has to except what her husband wishes. Even if told by medical hospitals that another child will kill her, she cannot abort or at any time prevent herself from becoming pregnant as long as the husband refuses to use condoms, also against church teachings.
This is a problem for woman world wide and has been for eons, to submit to a husband or find a way around HIS lust to stay alive and be able to care for the children now born.?
Trojan Enz Lubricated w/Spermicide (Box of 12)
Was $8.99 ON SALE NOW $7.59!
http://www.safesense.com/condoms-trojan.shtml
Here's a look at some numbers that factor into the cost of contraception:
$9
Monthly cost of some generic versions of the birth control pill ($108 a year)
...
$55
Monthly cost of vaginal ring or birth-control patch ($660 a year)
$60
Annual cost of using a diaphragm and spermicide, including mandatory doctor's exam
$150
Annual cost of using condoms, twice a week
$220-$460
Annual cost of getting a birth control shot (Depo-Provera)
$600-$1,000
One-time cost of getting an intrauterine device (IUD) implanted (effective for up to 12 years)
http://theweek.com/article/index/225451/the-cost-of-birth-control-by-the-numbers
Cost of giving your baby up for adoption?
There are no financial costs involved with relinquishing a child for adoption.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Cost_of_giving_your_baby_up_for_adoption
Get real, vesta. If she doesn't want more kids, she has all kinds of inexpensive options. ::)
-
Trojan Enz Lubricated w/Spermicide (Box of 12)
Was $8.99 ON SALE NOW $7.59!
http://www.safesense.com/condoms-trojan.shtml
Get real, vesta. If she doesn't want more kids, she has all kinds of inexpensive options. ::)
True unless the faith she follows tells her she is a sinner if she uses these methods.
One way to get around this is for the Male to be cut, quick and easy, in and out procedure, less invasive then a procedure done on a woman for any medical problems or just to make pregnancy impossible for her.
Quick story about the thinking of some doctors back in the 80's. Hubby and I were at the O club on base and the table we were at had a couple of doctors and wives. Topic of conversation was birth control. This ran about the table as the Implants were giving woman all kinds of problems. These new things would travel at times and cause major problems for the woman.
One woman became pregnant taking the pill, another said she became pregnant even with an IUD. Life will find a way.
One Doctor was very much against men getting a vasectomy, really strange Doctor who felt the burden of birth control fell to the woman as a male that had a vasectomy was to loose his manhood. He never answered anyones questions about this would make a man less then any man that had low sperm count, however he did get quite agitated and dragged his wife home.
Birth control comes from both areas, a woman raped or not wanting more children and the men that want no children. A male can in pregnant hundreds of woman in a short time, so why if not wanting a pregnancy do these men not get a reversable vasectomy for the time when they wish children.??
We have this upside down, it is the Male that spreads his seed to the wind, not the female.
BTW why are men who impregnate 7 woman get an atta-boy and one woman becomes pregnant considered a slut ???
-
Any woman can get the pill free today at clinics all over the place and like someone just said...there's all kinds of inexpensive ways not to get pregnant. This should not be the burden of the taxpayer at all. This abortion agenda is a power play for the left...they use it and it's working for them. And it's sad to see so many rightwingers selling out to this agenda in order to get votes.
-
The fiscal argument is a non starter for me. Women today don't have kids because they can't afford an abortion or birth control. They "choose" to have the kids when they can't afford them to get on welfare or they want to hang on to a relationship.
-
I have read through these responses. The OP is trying to equate Abortion with fiscal responsibility which is a failed straw-man argument. If we were to apply that argument to everything then old people should be euthanized if you can not afford to put grandpa in a home. What the OP fails to take into account that no where in the Constitution does it say that others have a responsibility to pay for another persons lack of responsibility.
Personal responsibility is a pretty simple concept that the left has vested interest to work against. Without the freebies and the what is in it for me attitude the left has no voting block.
If you can not afford something do not participate in the behavior that may cause it. I can not afford to lose money so even though I like to play blackjack; I don't. I do not want to pay for the insurance cost so I do not have a 200MPH car. I take responsibility for the cost I incur and do not expect others to pay it for me. If you do not want the cost or inconvenience of a child do not spread your legs for every Tom, Harry and Dick. IF you do not have the will power or self worth to keep your legs closed there are plenty of families that would love to raise the child as their own.
-
I have read through these responses. The OP is trying to equate Abortion with fiscal responsibility which is a failed straw-man argument. If we were to apply that argument to everything then old people should be euthanized if you can not afford to put grandpa in a home. What the OP fails to take into account that no where in the Constitution does it say that others have a responsibility to pay for another persons lack of responsibility.
Personal responsibility is a pretty simple concept that the left has vested interest to work against. Without the freebies and the what is in it for me attitude the left has no voting block.
If you can not afford something do not participate in the behavior that may cause it. I can not afford to lose money so even though I like to play blackjack; I don't. I do not want to pay for the insurance cost so I do not have a 200MPH car. I take responsibility for the cost I incur and do not expect others to pay it for me. If you do not want the cost or inconvenience of a child do not spread your legs for every Tom, Harry and Dick. IF you do not have the will power or self worth to keep your legs closed there are plenty of families that would love to raise the child as their own.
That last line is what the left does not seem to acknowledge. There are thousands of MARRIED people who want but cannot have children and want to adopt. Two sets of my relatives have attempted to adopt from foreign countries, one tried to adopt from Korea but failed, one did adopt from Russia. A very expensive proposition, in fact one couple (B-I-L) said it was almost as if they were being taken advantage by the Russians.
.
-
I don't support killing babies, or any humans for that matter. As a matter of fact, while I'm not planning on having any kids at the moment, if I were to get my wife pregnant, I would feel very selfish if we had an abortion. Unfortunately, as it regards society in general, not everyone is responsible enough to provide themselves with a healthy, productive environment, let alone that of another human being.
You would just feel selfish? You wouldn't feel like a piece of shit or guilty in the least? Really? Just selfish? :( I feel selfish when I eat the last Oreo. I would never be so nonchalant with the life of a baby created by me and someone else. Very sad.
-
The part that confuses me is that wouldn't conservatives who are concerned about government spending want abortions to be federally funded? Because in the long run, if women don't get abortions, and actually have the kids which they cannot support, won't they then receive much more in welfare i.e. federal entitlement spending?
I'd rather abort liberals and save a ton more.
-
I have read through these responses. The OP is trying to equate Abortion with fiscal responsibility which is a failed straw-man argument. If we were to apply that argument to everything then old people should be euthanized if you can not afford to put grandpa in a home. What the OP fails to take into account that no where in the Constitution does it say that others have a responsibility to pay for another persons lack of responsibility.
Personal responsibility is a pretty simple concept that the left has vested interest to work against. Without the freebies and the what is in it for me attitude the left has no voting block.
If you can not afford something do not participate in the behavior that may cause it. I can not afford to lose money so even though I like to play blackjack; I don't. I do not want to pay for the insurance cost so I do not have a 200MPH car. I take responsibility for the cost I incur and do not expect others to pay it for me. If you do not want the cost or inconvenience of a child do not spread your legs for every Tom, Harry and Dick. IF you do not have the will power or self worth to keep your legs closed there are plenty of families that would love to raise the child as their own.
I take responsibility for the cost I incur and do not expect others to pay it for me. If you do not want the cost or inconvenience of a child do not spread your legs for every Tom, Harry and Dick. IF you do not have the will power or self worth to keep your legs closed there are plenty of families that would love to raise the child as their own. [unquote]
Men, oh how some of you can get all justified when one speaks about contraception. You don't want kids, get a reversable cut don't expect the woman to either flood her body with drugs or ---give YOUR baby away to strangers. Sorry fella but a woman can kill or give away your only son, now if you had not wanted her to "spread her legs" for your lust none of this would of happend.
Pisses me off, you Men, say you marry a good woman that does not want children, how long will you stay with her if she does not" spread her legs for you" ?? A sexless Marriage is not workable unless some handicap in one partner causes it, both know about the problem , then some marriages are based on love not sex.
You seem to equate sex, lust and love with enjoying playing cards or buying a hot car. NUTS. One can not control lust or love in either sex, it just is, thanks to the Lord. One cannot control hunger or thirst with will power, nor can they control lust.
I get tired of hearing woman's problems with the Pill, the IUD, being gutted all to prevent pregnancy. I champion the vasectomy that is reversable for men, takes about 20 minutes and in case of divorce or death of a wife can be reversed in case he want children down the line.
You Males are the sex driven horny bastads by far more then woman. Woman do not rape men, go out prowling looking for strange stuff, gather in groups to to talk about how to get a bit of nookie.
It is the men that go to the strip clubs drooling over the boobzies--few woman go to male strip bars to drool over the performers package.
Give me a break, if men want sex with no consequences need to get snipped, not expect the female to defend her body with drugs or foreign objects for your enjoyment.
Dacabeti, may I introduce myself, I am VESTA, welcome to our home where you never know what kind of Conservative you will run into-------Get ready to debate. Never take anything personally, some of your ideas may be attacked but never you yourself.
-
Men, oh how some of you can get all justified when one speaks about contraception. You don't want kids, get a reversable cut don't expect the woman to either flood her body with drugs or ---give YOUR baby away to strangers. Sorry fella but a woman can kill or give away your only son, now if you had not wanted her to "spread her legs" for your lust none of this would of happend.
Pisses me off, you Men, say you marry a good woman that does not want children, how long will you stay with her if she does not" spread her legs for you" ?? A sexless Marriage is not workable unless some handicap in one partner causes it, both know about the problem , then some marriages are based on love not sex.
You seem to equate sex, lust and love with enjoying playing cards or buying a hot car. NUTS. One can not control lust or love in either sex, it just is, thanks to the Lord. One cannot control hunger or thirst with will power, nor can they control lust.
I get tired of hearing woman's problems with the Pill, the IUD, being gutted all to prevent pregnancy. I champion the vasectomy that is reversable for men, takes about 20 minutes and in case of divorce or death of a wife can be reversed in case he want children down the line.
You Males are the sex driven horny bastads by far more then woman. Woman do not rape men, go out prowling looking for strange stuff, gather in groups to to talk about how to get a bit of nookie.
Um, yeah, we do...
It is the men that go to the strip clubs drooling over the boobzies--few woman go to male strip bars to drool over the performers package.
Um, yeah, we do...
Give me a break, if men want sex with no consequences need to get snipped, not expect the female to defend her body with drugs or foreign objects for your enjoyment.
Vesta, seriously, women are NOT helpless victims of men's raging hormones!! We are fully adult, fully functioning humans with the ability to say, "NO!" Or to protect ourselves from pregnancy. Or to take the responsibility when we become pregnant. This is NOT the Middle Ages. ::) ::)
And a lot of us DO go looking for men, DO go to drool over male dancers, DO thoroughly and completely enjoy a full and active sex life. Really! :-)
-
Men, oh how some of you can get all justified when one speaks about contraception. You don't want kids, get a reversable cut don't expect the woman to either flood her body with drugs or ---give YOUR baby away to strangers. Sorry fella but a woman can kill or give away your only son, now if you had not wanted her to "spread her legs" for your lust none of this would of happend.
I have never had a child out of wedlock, got a woman pregnant and abandoned them, or sired a bastard so your self righteous tirade is of no effect and not warranted.
Pisses me off, you Men, say you marry a good woman that does not want children, how long will you stay with her if she does not" spread her legs for you" ?? A sexless Marriage is not workable unless some handicap in one partner causes it, both know about the problem , then some marriages are based on love not sex.
Straw-man. Why would any person marry anyone they are not compatible with? If one wants children and the other does not neither vetted the other very well. You can have sex without love, and even love without sex, but they are not mutually exclusive. How can you have love without intimacy? Why would you want love without intimacy; unless you're some frigged tease.
You seem to equate sex, lust and love with enjoying playing cards or buying a hot car. NUTS. One can not control lust or love in either sex, it just is, thanks to the Lord. One cannot control hunger or thirst with will power, nor can they control lust.
I get tired of hearing woman's problems with the Pill, the IUD, being gutted all to prevent pregnancy. I champion the vasectomy that is reversable for men, takes about 20 minutes and in case of divorce or death of a wife can be reversed in case he want children down the line.
I guess I equate women in lust a little higher than animals. Saying things like women "can not control lust' (your words) puts them on the same level as a dog in heat. Sorry, but that is the same argument gays and pedophiles make; I don't believe it when when they use it either.
I can see that point went right over your head. I did not equate sex, love or lust with cars, playing cards or anything else. I equated gambling and buying a car with responsibility or lack of. You know that thing the left lacks and does not want its base to understand.
You Males are the sex driven horny bastads by far more then woman. Woman do not rape men, go out prowling looking for strange stuff, gather in groups to to talk about how to get a bit of nookie.
It is the men that go to the strip clubs drooling over the boobzies--few woman go to male strip bars to drool over the performers package.
That is complete bullshit. I know and have known plenty of women that are worse than guys when it comes to these things. Women have raped men, it actually happens far more often than you think. Women do not go out prowling? Yeah, men go to clubs looking for women because there is absolutely no chance their will be any females looking to hook up. I know of no man that ever went to a club, met some girl and played 4 rounds of hide the sausage before the sun came up. It never happens.
Give me a break, if men want sex with no consequences need to get snipped, not expect the female to defend her body with drugs or foreign objects for your enjoyment.
Give me a break and read what I wrote. RESPONSIBILITY. Where did I say it was solely on the woman to be responsible? The argument for or against abortion rest with the woman; as far as I know (let me know what Supreme Court case disputes this) a man can not get an abortion nor force an abortion on a woman.
Dacabeti, may I introduce myself, I am VESTA, welcome to our home where you never know what kind of Conservative you will run into-------Get ready to debate. Never take anything personally, some of your ideas may be attacked but never you yourself.
Hi Vesta, I don't mind a good debate, I actually like them. Just be prepared I am straight forward and frank. Leave my family alone and I wont take it personal, other than that I'll give it back just as well as I get it.
-
I take responsibility for the cost I incur and do not expect others to pay it for me. If you do not want the cost or inconvenience of a child do not spread your legs for every Tom, Harry and Dick. IF you do not have the will power or self worth to keep your legs closed there are plenty of families that would love to raise the child as their own. [unquote]
Men, oh how some of you can get all justified when one speaks about contraception. You don't want kids, get a reversable cut don't expect the woman to either flood her body with drugs or ---give YOUR baby away to strangers. Sorry fella but a woman can kill or give away your only son, no you had not wanted her to "spread her legs" for your lust none of this would of happend.
Pisses me off, you Men, say you marry a good woman that does not want children, how long will you stay with her if she does not" spread her legs for you" ?? A sexless Marriage is not workable unless some handicap in one partner causes it, both know about the problem , then some marriages are based on love not sex.
You seem to equate sex, lust and love with enjoying playing cards or buying a hot car. NUTS. One can not control lust or love in either sex, it just is, thanks to the Lord. One cannot control hunger or thirst with will power, nor can they control lust.
I get tired of hearing woman's problems with the Pill, the IUD, being gutted all to prevent pregnancy. I champion the vasectomy that is reversable for men, takes about 20 minutes and in case of divorce or death of a wife can be reversed in case he want children down the line.
You Males are the sex driven horny bastads by far more then woman. Woman do not rape men, go out prowling looking for strange stuff, gather in groups to to talk about how to get a bit of nookie.
It is the men that go to the strip clubs drooling over the boobzies--few woman go to male strip bars to drool over the performers package.
Give me a break, if men want sex with no consequences need to get snipped, not expect the female to defend her body with drugs or foreign objects for your enjoyment.
Dacabeti, may I introduce myself, I am VESTA, welcome to our home where you never know what kind of Conservative you will run into-------Get ready to debate. Never take anything personally, some of your ideas may be attacked but never you yourself.
Let me think Vesta... Where have I heard all this about uncontrollable lust before... Sounds familiar.... Oh! That's right!! It was from the Imams in Ar-Ramadi! Everything you have said is exactly why women are so repressed in Islamic society because according to the prophet, they can't control themselves and need to be guarded. Way to project some muslim fundamentalist intolerance.
And by the way. Vasectomys are a VERY permanent solution to the problem. They take a scorched earth approach and cut out tubing and sear it. A Vasectomy can be reversed, but usually it is an OPTIMAL 60% chance you will be able to have a kid naturally. Which could mean more pain for the woman with IVF treatments. Kind of like plugging the barrel on an abrams tank and expecting a DU round to go out of it with no problems. It WILL blow up in your face when you least expect it.
Long and the short of it, the pill or IUD, or even condoms are the way to go. And BOTH parties need to be responsible. If you want to remove yourself from the gene pool, go right ahead.
Sorry for the Vesta-like rant. The staff duty drone is kicking in, I've got 6 more hours on my 24 hour shift and time is becoming very relative.
-
Yeah, I have some thoughts. If you are this "confused" about abortion, it is abundantly clear that you are lacking a moral center, and are not a person I'd like to associate with. Kill kids to save money? WTF is WRONG with you?
Thoughts?
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/11/us/texas-planned-parenthood/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
-
I have never had a child out of wedlock, got a woman pregnant and abandoned them, or sired a bastard so your self righteous tirade is of no effect and not warranted.
Straw-man. Why would any person marry anyone they are not compatible with? If one wants children and the other does not neither vetted the other very well. You can have sex without love, and even love without sex, but they are not mutually exclusive. How can you have love without intimacy? Why would you want love without intimacy; unless you're some frigged tease.
I guess I equate women in lust a little higher than animals. Saying things like women "can not control lust' (your words) puts them on the same level as a dog in heat. Sorry, but that is the same argument gays and pedophiles make; I don't believe it when when they use it either.
I can see that point went right over your head. I did not equate sex, love or lust with cars, playing cards or anything else. I equated gambling and buying a car with responsibility or lack of. You know that thing the left lacks and does not want its base to understand.
That is complete bullshit. I know and have known plenty of women that are worse than guys when it comes to these things. Women have raped men, it actually happens far more often than you think. Women do not go out prowling? Yeah, men go to clubs looking for women because there is absolutely no chance their will be any females looking to hook up. I know of no man that ever went to a club, met some girl and played 4 rounds of hide the sausage before the sun came up. It never happens.
Give me a break and read what I wrote. RESPONSIBILITY. Where did I say it was solely on the woman to be responsible? The argument for or against abortion rest with the woman; as far as I know (let me know what Supreme Court case disputes this) a man can not get an abortion nor force an abortion on a woman.
Hi Vesta, I don't mind a good debate, I actually like them. Just be prepared I am straight forward and frank. Leave my family alone and I wont take it personal, other than that I'll give it back just as well as I get it.
Got you going now didn't I.
I am thinking about the Muslim leader in Australia that a few years ago complained about the non Muslim girls that tempted the good youth of his comunity with their short skirts and sleeveless blouses. His comment about if you throw fresh meat into the yard and a cat comes around and eats it, who can blame the cat ????
American Courts of law from its inception would until lately ask a rape victim what she was wearing at the time, where she was at the time and her past sexual history. In the last couple months a law maker came out to say that a woman's body would shut down to prevent a pregnancy when raped.
The defence has to make it look like somehow it is the females fault, left a door unlocked or was out after dark unescorted.
Even Judge Judy left me in wondering about how she came to the conclusion that a woman who had children left them with a baby sitter to go to a club and was in the line of fire when a fight broke out and she was injured. To my horror Judge Judy went after the woman injured by asking all today's no-no's of the victim. Why she left her kids to go bar hopping etc. It was the same old song and dance, the victim asked for it.
As old as ditch dirt I am, I remember being told to fight off an attacker as if one gave in that was consent. Today females are told that to fight can cause their death, give in or die.
Today family's are putting little girls on the pill because of the violent society we live in. I wonder what as puberty is becoming lower each year what the hormones etc. are going to do to a child's body when they are still growing for another 8-9 years. What happens to bone growth, their teeth and their reproductive organs ?
Lot's and lot's to consider here. The in the news about a couple highschool football players raped and filmed the rape of a classmate, yes she was dead drunk at the time, she was young and made a grave mistake in drinking. Females make many mistakes in life as they mature, so do males, but rape of the unknowings is a dastardly crime, if the 16 year old is pregnant, then with DNA the father also 16 has the duty to support her and child for years ahead.
As a grandparent I worry about all the pitfalls the children will or could fall into. Both the males and females.
-
Most of my comments are sarcastic, because I am finding it hard to take your reply serious. Especially since you didn't reply to anything I actually said, you just used more straw-men.
Got you going now didn't I.
No, not in the least bit, unless by "got you going" you mean you got me to respond, if that is the case; yes you got a response out of me. Good job using a political forum for it's intended purpose.
I am thinking about the Muslim leader in Australia that a few years ago complained about the non Muslim girls that tempted the good youth of his comunity with their short skirts and sleeveless blouses. His comment about if you throw fresh meat into the yard and a cat comes around and eats it, who can blame the cat ????
Well there you have it. Some uneducated savage pedophile follower makes a ridiculous statement, so it has to be true to the rest of the civilized world. I know every time I see a woman in shorts I just have to rip them off of her, I just can not control myself. Damn you Daisey Duke; Damn you.
American Courts of law from its inception would until lately ask a rape victim what she was wearing at the time, where she was at the time and her past sexual history. In the last couple months a law maker came out to say that a woman's body would shut down to prevent a pregnancy when raped.
It's a good thing courts have never had dumb laws like: In San Francisco it is illegal to clean a windshield with soiled underwear. In Colorado it is illegal for a man to kiss a woman while she is asleep. In Connecticut it is illegal to educate a dog. In Florida unmarried women who parachute on Sundays may be jailed.
Actually that is not what he said. Nice Liberal misquote. What he said was that woman's bodies have a way of dealing with rape. Meaning like with many traumatic experiences the brain will sometimes protect itself; to which the AMA and API concurred.
The defence has to make it look like somehow it is the females fault, left a door unlocked or was out after dark unescorted.
They also try and make a victim of every other crime look at fault and try to get their clients off. Who would of thunk it.
Even Judge Judy left me in wondering about how she came to the conclusion that a woman who had children left them with a baby sitter to go to a club and was in the line of fire when a fight broke out and she was injured. To my horror Judge Judy went after the woman injured by asking all today's no-no's of the victim. Why she left her kids to go bar hopping etc. It was the same old song and dance, the victim asked for it.
I agree with you, EVERYONE should get thier legal advice from Judge Judy. She is obviously a wise choice for sound legal advice.
As old as ditch dirt I am, I remember being told to fight off an attacker as if one gave in that was consent. Today females are told that to fight can cause their death, give in or die.
That is more bullshit. I teach Krava Maga self defense to women. I have for years and not one time EVER have I ever heard any self defense advocate say not to fight. The exact opposite is true. Fight, scream, deny, yell, pull hair, bite, scratch, do WHATEVER it takes.
Today family's are putting little girls on the pill because of the violent society we live in. I wonder what as puberty is becoming lower each year what the hormones etc. are going to do to a child's body when they are still growing for another 8-9 years. What happens to bone growth, their teeth and their reproductive organs ?
Medical studies show that girls are reaching puberty at lower ages because of the hormones the FDA requires be put into Milk Pasteurization process. That is more of a Federal overreach issue than a society issue.
Lot's and lot's to consider here.
No just conjecture, straw-men and slight of hand.
The in the news about a couple highschool football players raped and filmed the rape of a classmate, yes she was dead drunk at the time, she was young and made a grave mistake in drinking. Females make many mistakes in life as they mature, so do males, but rape of the unknowings is a dastardly crime, if the 16 year old is pregnant, then with DNA the father also 16 has the duty to support her and child for years ahead.
This is a horrible situation and these boys should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If this poor girl is pregnant adoption is a viable option.
As a grandparent I worry about all the pitfalls the children will or could fall into. Both the males and females.
As a parent so do I, the difference is I do not worry control my life. I control my worry.
None of this had anything to do with a argument for or against abortion.
-
Most of my comments are sarcastic, because I am finding it hard to take your reply serious.
None of this had anything to do with a argument for or against abortion.
Ah, I see you have now been properly introduced to the Cave's crazy aunt that lives in the attic.
-
Ah, I see you have now been properly introduced to the Cave's crazy aunt that lives in the attic.
Well that explains a lot. I thought I was having an aneurism or stroke it was so hard to comprehend.
-
Ah, I see you have now been properly introduced to the Cave's crazy aunt that lives in the attic.
Wasp69 beat me to it, Dacabeti.
vestanumbers is like an old upholstered chair. Just when you have all the cigarette burns and the spilled beer locations figured out, one of those springs breaks and drops you another inch or two toward the floor.
(http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i317/Eupher6/caitlin_after_before.jpg)
-
Well that explains a lot. I thought I was having an aneurism or stroke it was so hard to comprehend.
Nope, just our own little daily dose of crazy.
-
Ah, I see you have now been properly introduced to the Cave's crazy aunt that lives in the attic.
Suffice it to say she is our version of Nadin.
-
Well that explains a lot. I thought I was having an aneurism or stroke it was so hard to comprehend.
:lmao: Yup!
-
Thoughts?
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/11/us/texas-planned-parenthood/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
I don't like my tax dollars allowing you to escape the ramifications of your whorish behavior.
How's that for a thought?
If you don't want a kid...don't have unprotected sex. Or better yet abstain all together until you're ready to handle the responsibility.
But you have no right to expect...much less demand that tax dollars that could be better spent on other more important things...should be diverted to help you engage in what is essentially a murder for hire scheme.
-
I don't like my tax dollars allowing you to escape the ramifications of your whorish behavior.
How's that for a thought?
If you don't want a kid...don't have unprotected sex. Or better yet abstain all together until you're ready to handle the responsibility.
But you have no right to expect...much less demand that tax dollars that could be better spent on other more important things...should be diverted to help you engage in what is essentially a murder for hire scheme.
To the Idiotic Evil Left sex is on the same list as food, water, and air.