Is that humane?
2007-02-23 05:32:32 · 21 answers · asked by Sean 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Because they are insincere.
I read all this talk about "responsibility". Well, we don't live in a perfect world, do we?
Being pro-life, as I am, is about the welfare of both the mother and the child but mainly it's about the child. Being pro-social welfare, as I am, is about the welfare of both the mother and the child but mainly it's about the child.
So you are against the child being killed in the womb. Very good, so am I. But you don't care if that very same child goes hungry, is without adequate medical care or does not have all the other basic necessities of life? Where does all your Christian compassion go? Yelling at the mother about responsibility is not going to improve the situation. The baby is alive and needs help to live a healthy, happy life.
We are not talking about cash, like regular welfare, which I am against. We are talking about some sort of voucher system, for things like food and medicine only. And even if the mother/parent (s) can already afford all of these things, which on a minimum wage job is impossible in most any big city, who is going to watch the child when they are at work.
Being truly pro-life does not end at birth, plain and simple.
2007-02-23 06:16:06 · answer #1 · answered by Raindog 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Just another example of how extreme conservatives are all about ideals, instead of what's realistic. I think we can all agree it would be great if there were no unplanned pregnancies, if all children in this world were welcomed into loving homes with responsible, prepared, healthy parents, and everyone always had a job that provided them with all the necessary benefits and enough pay to support them and their families. However, those of us who know that the world is not a fairy tale and that the world is never going to be so perfect are able to see how things like abortion and welfare are sometimes necessary if we're going to continue to have a society that is humanitarian and works for people of ALL faiths or lack thereof.
2016-05-24 02:48:57 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am against abortion but am also against changing the law.
I am for social welfare programs especially family planning and food for the truly needy.
More education and free or low cost birth control will go further to reduce abortion than making a law against it and walking around with a sign.Get real people. Familiy should take care of family.
2007-02-23 05:43:21 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
I think that there are many people like me who are not against abortion per se, we are against the state paying for someone not being responsible. I support social welfare programs for people who really need it, but do not support paying for able bodied persons to lie around and do nothing. Many would also argue that neither is humane.
2007-02-23 05:56:36 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Just because you feel free to make statements like that, it doesn't make it true. Most conservatives I know including myself have no problem at all helping people that truly need and deserve the help. However it is completely irresponsible to just keep giving money to people who will make no effort of there own. Just continuing to dump tax dollars on people that won't work for themselves does not help the situation. Their lives will not get better until they make an effort to be a productive part of society, and they are not likely to do that if we keep giving them a check and enabling them to stay home on their butt. Typically its the liberal democrats that want these people to stay on welfare so they will be dependent on the Government for their check so that every time a big election comes up they can try to put the fear of God in them by telling them that the nasty Republicans want to take it from them. Funny they also seem very fond of creating as many taxes as they can to take the money from the hard working people that earned it.
As for "Brian I", that is nuts, there is no way you could afford to properly support a child on minimum wage. You should not even be thinking about having children if you are on minimum wage. Minimum wage was never intended to be someones permanent salary, just a protection to keep businesses from abusing highschool students and other people that are new to the work force. If you have been working for several years and are still on minimum wage you need to stop and examine your life because its not your bosses fault, it your fault for making no effort to improve yourself.
2007-02-23 05:57:36 · answer #5 · answered by p_doell 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Being against abortion and social welfare programs, go hand in hand. It is an implied threat to women, that, if they have a child without having a husband to provide for them, they will have to face up to the consequences. On one hand, they are trying to maintain a stable family society, on the other hand, they ignore the statistics of underage girls who need these services. Most of the anti people, are older men and post menopausal women, who are long past the time of reproducing. If you aren't in favor of abortion....then don't do it. If you are, go ahead. We have too many people now for the available supplies.
2007-02-23 05:47:02 · answer #6 · answered by tylernmi 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Substitute the word "infanticide" or "euthanasia" and tell me why it's different.
I'm talking about a viable fetus, that could be taken out alive.
Maybe you oppose late-term abortion also - take it out alive, without killing it first. Maybe we agree!
I don't have a problem with a social safety net, but even FDR said welfare programs have a "narcotic effect."
PS Respectful disagreement is healthy. All the best!
2007-02-23 09:11:54 · answer #7 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Anti-Abortion
Anti-Welfare
Pro-Responsibility/being an adult.
That's me. I know it's a novel concept, this "responsibility".... If you have a kid, you NEED to grow up and stop behaving like a child. There is honestly no reason that you can't support a child with a minimum wage job. (And if you are stuck with a minimum wage job, you shouldn't be reproducing to start with. In this economy, you should be able to find SOMETHING, whether or not you are willing to do it is a matter of choice....) It might mean that you can't have cable, internet, and a $75 a month cell phone, but guess what, it's called responsibility...
2007-02-23 05:42:49 · answer #8 · answered by Brian I 3 · 5⤊ 3⤋
Not against both, but the abuse of both. There is a difference. How can people be for equality, yet one person earns their money and the other takes their money from the govenment.
2007-02-23 05:48:49 · answer #9 · answered by mbush40 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
the same way they advocate killing the mentally challenged and tell people who are pro choice that they wish their mother had an abortion. I believe some of them call themselves Christian as well. I am just glad that they hide behind their computers and never have the courage to open their mouths in oublic...because I never met anyone who talks as much trash as some people on here!
2007-02-23 05:41:17 · answer #10 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 2⤊ 4⤋