6 out of every 1000 babies dies from avoidable issues in this country. Usually because an insurance providor wouldn't pay for a rcedure or an exra day in the hospital. A disgraceful statistic given our wealth.
2007-08-23 05:54:05 · 10 answers · asked by Incognito 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
nostradamus02012- condoms are like 50 cents each. how is that not affordable?
2007-08-23 06:02:49 · update #1
straightup- of course it's a little deceptive. this is the politics section isn't it.
2007-08-23 06:07:10 · update #2
Saving the living.
When we give the children already born a safe, loving environment abortion will have no purpose.
2007-08-23 06:02:56 · answer #1 · answered by Nurse Winchester 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
The question is a little deceptive. I think most people would agree the life of the mother who is having a baby is most important, and if the life of a mother is at risk, then the priority of saving the life of the unborn baby is secondary. If there is no issue of life or high risk health problems to the mother, then I'm not sure why the lives of a baby in the womb is less important than the live of a baby outside of the womb. They are both lives. Obviously, we should be concerned about the lives of those who are already born, whose chances are higher of living a full life, but it shouldn't be at the expense of the helpless baby in the womb.
Maybe your question deals more with insurance issues and the fact they are always trying to save money by cutting benefits, etc., which is a problem. We have some of the most advanced medical procedures and most qualified doctors in America, but the insurance industry at times ties the hands of the consumer and prevents them from access. Notwithstanding the problems, we should be proud in America of what we do have and the potential access to amazing medical breakthroughs and skills. We just need to make sure they are available to everyone.
2007-08-23 13:06:17 · answer #2 · answered by straightup 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Both are major problems!
Insurance issues should be handled by our governtment instead of spending the majority of our wealth on military uses (newton's law: cause=we build them result=the rest build them and the cycle will never stop)
But
How can society accept aborting at least 5% (on record) of a generation 1960-2000?
If I were to have to choose. I would make women go through the pregnancy in turn fix insurance issues by reducing military spending and require that the us population from 16-18 enroll military training like Israel.
2007-08-23 13:07:02 · answer #3 · answered by exfootballgraduate 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Keeping already born babies alive
2007-08-23 13:22:58 · answer #4 · answered by angibabi113 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Keeping babies alive.
2007-08-23 13:02:58 · answer #5 · answered by ~Celtic~Saltire~ 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Keeping babies alive.
2007-08-23 13:02:31 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
ive got a better (and CRAZY) idea.
why not just educate everyone about birth control and make birth control easily available and so affordable that anyone could afford it.
i know i know - here in america we don't actually solve problems anymore.
the vast majority of abortions come from unwanted pregnancies.
am i the only one who is appalled that so many are having unwanted pregnancies in 2007?
2007-08-23 13:01:58 · answer #7 · answered by nostradamus02012 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Forcing women to be baby making machines.
2007-08-23 13:00:03 · answer #8 · answered by Holy Cow! 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
yes, lets save those babies by aborting them.
backward, backward, backward.
2007-08-23 13:06:34 · answer #9 · answered by karl k 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
False choices, and very stupid question.
2007-08-23 13:05:25 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋