This has always confused me with regards to Abortions.

[Injenu]

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

[Celtic Rose]

 I don't support killing people, especially babies, in order to decrease spending. 

[Bad Dog]

Injenu, how do you feel about Ron Paul?

[Wineslob]

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.


 

[catsmtrods]

I don't support killing people, especially babies, in order to decrease spending. 

Or for any other reason!

[Freeper]

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.

[DLR Pyro]

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.

[Chris_]

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. 

[J P Sousa]

 The part that confuses me is that wouldn't conservatives who are concerned about government spending want abortions to be federally funded?  

Let's see, money - life, money - life..........money over life ?   Seriously ?  


Here's a thought, "people being responsible for their own actions"..............wow what a concept.
.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

I support abortion because only liberals have them.

[DumbAss Tanker]

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.

[Freeper]

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.

[Injenu]

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.

[liana]

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.

[Duke Nukum]

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.

[Undies]

    

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.

[longview]

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.

[DLR Pyro]

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.

[J P Sousa]

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.
.

[wasp69]

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?

[Mr Mannn]

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.

[Chris_]

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.

[MrsSmith]

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.

[Teri]

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.

[Teri]

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.