English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

That's what Rudy Giulliani thinks...

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/04/05/2007-04-05_rudys_not_conservative_about_backing_abo.html

2007-04-05 08:13:38 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

20 answers

I already wasn't voting for him.

But your question has made me violently ill...

Excuse me....

2007-04-05 08:23:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The Constitution of the United States does not address the subject of abortion. The Supreme Court ruled that the states cannot prevent the practice, but there is no obligation under the Constitution or by reason of the Supreme Court ruling for taxpayers to pay for the procedure. Where the federal government and the states have chosen to pay for abortions, it has been a matter of legislation, not Constitutional rights.

2007-04-05 08:21:51 · answer #2 · answered by Suzianne 7 · 4 0

How much do you think it costs to have an abortion performed correctly? It can cost thousands of dollars to save someone that went to town with a coathanger.

Everything in life is connected. For example: If America's school system included good sex education and birth control (male and female hormone treatments) were readily available, there would be fewer unplanned births. You could also make the argument that better public schools in general would reduce the demand for prisons.

As a Pro-Choice American, I am a little offended that there isn't as substantial an effort for men's rights as well. I am furious that male hormone BC isn't available. The hormone binds to the tip of sperm and removes their ability to latch on to the egg (and thus dig in and fertilize) and in clinical trials in France has been almost 100% effective (they examine sperm samples and look for incidences of sperm that haven't received the hormone, I think they have yet to find a sperm that wasn't "blunted").

2007-04-05 08:25:49 · answer #3 · answered by Reformed Nice Guy 5 · 0 0

Taxpayers don't pay for abortions. The people getting the abortions pay for it themselves.
I think it's around $400 or so to have the procedure done in California, but that was the last I heard.

2007-04-05 08:28:37 · answer #4 · answered by Peach 2 · 0 0

Rudy's wrong. Here's how you tell a right from an entitlement. A right does not obligate anyone else to do anything for you to exercise that right. Any so-called "right" (medical care, affordable housing, etc.) that obligates one person to have his money taken to give to another is not a right. It's an entitlement. The level of ignorance in this very simple area is astounding, but it sure sells well politically when some worthless politician stands in front of a crowd of leeches and preaches to them about their "rights " to this and "rights" to that.

2007-04-05 08:19:18 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Abortion is not a constitutional right. And guess what you already do pay for it. Planned parenthood the nations largest abortion provider receives hundreds of millions of your tax dollars every year to pay for its murdering of innocent children. Guess what, some one is getting rich off your tax dollars and the murder of millions of innocent children. They are a business just like many other and they are driven by profit. They only care about the right to choose as long as they can make money killing people. Sign the petition to stop planned parent hood from using your tax money to kill babies.

2007-04-05 08:31:26 · answer #6 · answered by flyguy03 3 · 2 1

Just because of some judges ruling in Roe v Wade, that doesn't make it constitutional right. And no WE shouldn't ahve to pay for some trash's mistake, even though we will pay for it when the child is in rehab or jail late in life. Now that I think about it, what if we give all losers abortions or make them steril then we will save money in the long run?

2007-04-05 08:29:14 · answer #7 · answered by Geo Washington 3 · 0 2

Having the abortion is a constitutional right. Just because it's a constitutional right, though, that doesn't mean it should be federally (or, I guess, governmentally) funded.

Owning a gun is a constitutional right. Does that mean the government will supply a gun, free of charge, to anyone who wants one?

2007-04-05 08:18:27 · answer #8 · answered by CrazyChick 7 · 5 1

If you believe that life begins at conception, then Roe v. Wade is unconstitutional. "No person shall... be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.... nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law; nor deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."--the US Constitution.

I believe life begins at conception. I disagree with Rudy. He will not get my vote in 2008.

2007-04-05 13:46:25 · answer #9 · answered by Truth B. Told ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID 6 · 1 0

It's cheaper than what the taxpayers would need to pay for if there was no abortion. way way way cheaper.
this was a financial question... wasn't it?

As for Rudy-
I respect the guy for saying what he believes, rather than just saying what he needs to to capture a particular voting block of evangelical christians. It's rather refreshing to see this in a political candidate.

And for those of you who are saying that you don't want to pay for something you think is morally reprehensible... I don't want to pay for the war in Iraq any more.

2007-04-05 08:16:47 · answer #10 · answered by Morey000 7 · 5 3

There is nothing in the Constitution one way or the other. That is as it should be.

2007-04-05 08:22:26 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers