sneer at woman that did not get abortion but happen to need assistance from state.
then
Labelling them with all manner of uncomplementary terms.
It's kinda like....
yes have the baby but the baby has to go hungry.
And...any attempts at alleviating suffering of mom is considered to be LIBTARD Giveaway.
2007-09-20 18:54:49 · 14 answers · asked by zes2_zdk 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
pokerface....you pay taxes?
Aren't you special.
Got news for you...
everybody pays taxes.
The bum in the gutter pays taxes on his booze.
And the ten your old pays taxes on comic books and bubblegum.
"I'm a taxpayer and why should I pay for blah blah blah"
:):)
you sound like my pompous jerkoff conservatrive brother in ARIZONA
2007-09-20 19:18:58 · update #1
Yes - kind of a double standard - isn't it?
Take away a woman's right to abortion - but provide no real alternatives other than rhetoric.
Welcome to the world of the Christian Coalition - courtesy of Ronald Reagan.
2007-09-20 19:04:48 · answer #1 · answered by Wazoo 2 · 2⤊ 4⤋
I don't see that as the norm....
however the issue is........ it takes two to tango....
the issue is where is the father?
where is the dad? if a woman has a baby and can not take care of the baby, doesn't she have an OBLIGATION to see the baby will taken care off by adoption or a foster home until she has feet on the ground?
what we see is mom with three babies by age 19, no father for the babies, we would think that baby one would be enough of a lesson to prevent babies 2 and 3...
and as far as the states view should be " whats best for the babies...."
but the reality is "the rights of the birth mother are more important..."
keep your legs closed until you can accept the responsiblity...
funny how you don't see these issues in gangster -rap videos
maybe should blame MTV for the issues.....
2007-09-21 08:56:15 · answer #2 · answered by lymanspond 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's like one Republican said to me...."You breed 'em, you feed 'em!"
This heartwarming Christian attitude is typical of the way Republicans feel. They are not so delighted about the babies born, as they try to appear to be. If they were really Pro Life, they wouldn't support war! They are simply delighted at the opportunity to punish people for having sex, especially women.
In the Republican mind, a woman should know her place. That place seems to be a cross between a housemaid and a broodmare. Many of them oppose birth control, so....if you want to indulge in sex, you must pay the consequences. In this way, they ignore the leaps and bounds of modern science, where the birthrate can be controlled and a woman can have the children she wants to have, and they regress into medeival times, when women were little more than chattel.
Never mind that the world population is so large that children are dying of malnutrition daily, suffering from every condition that poverty and neglect brings about. The Republican crowd clings to their beliefs, because of some obscure Biblical phrases, forgetting the fact that proper Scientific birth control measures are sent by God just as any other gift of knowledge
They have opposed the Morning After pill for rape victims. They have opposed abortion for pregnant rape victims or victims of incest. They have opposed abortion even if a child of 12 or younger is pregnant by her father, brother or other relative. A life sentence of misery and self-hate is handed down to these victims by this so-called Christian crowd, because their main purpose in life is to watch everyone's sexual behavior but their own. You breed 'em, you feed 'em!
You had better believe these people take advantage of polio vaccine, antibiotics, painkillers and other Scientific discoveries. Many of them are in line for new kidneys, new livers, new hearts. Hypocrites, all, with their use of Selective Science!
But birth control? That's sinful, because you are preventing the birth of a child you might not want and might not be able to feed or nurture. Next, they'll be saying that women should not ignore the gleam in a potential Daddy's Eye...and they'll find a Biblical phrase to support this theory.
2007-09-27 19:17:05 · answer #3 · answered by Me, Too 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Biologically the act of having sex is intended for the purpose of having offspring. If you don't want or can't afford children then don't have sex. You imply the woman has no choice in the matter and yet the vast majority of women seeking abortions are not rape cases but rather people who had sex and got knocked up in a situation where they couldn't afford a child.
Perhaps our time, efforts and tax dollars would be better spent on programs desinged not to get them pregnant in the first place rather than allowing them to skate out of the responsibilities that come from their personal choice to have sex.
Additionally, there are many single mothers who support one or more children without relying on public assistance. They do this by getting a job and earning an income. It's also true that there are many who need assistance despite having one (or more) jobs. I have no problem helping people who choose to help themselves. It's those who choose to try and live the Peggy Bundy lifestyle because they have a child. I know many like this who put their children in daycare while they spend their time on the couch watching television. These people need to grow up and take responsibility for their actions.
This isn't an issue of helpless people being shunned it's an issue of responsibility. If they are adult enough to make the choice to have sex than they are adult enough to care for the child that comes from having sex including getting a job.
Where's the double standard with that?
2007-09-21 03:29:43 · answer #4 · answered by yn_tennison 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
You are asking a very interesting question. The answer brings to light that anyone who labels themselves as either conservative or liberal will always face contradictions. This is because there are no black-white rules... for example, most conservatives would oppose abortion yet support capital punishment. Even when shown that a court cannot be CERTAIN absolutely, they then argue that it is the deterrent... baloney!... so the mature way is to have a balanced view on all issues and be able to logically support one's position on each matter.
2007-09-21 02:45:03 · answer #5 · answered by David A M 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
1. An unborn baby is still just that, a baby!
To avoid having a baby, don't have sex! But if you do get pregnant and don't want the baby, contact an adoption agency. There are MANY people that will eagerly help you in pretty much every way. And they would LOVE to take your unwanted baby for their own.
2. Government assistance is charity. The government should not force people to give to any charity.
Giving to the poor and those in need should be an individual choice. It should not be the government's job to do my charitable giving for me. I should be allowed to decide where and to what cause my charitable donations go.
2007-09-21 03:22:22 · answer #6 · answered by Nat 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Some say that abortion has been provided so that the lust-driven among us can lay down and promote their sport. Sick!
What you don't ever think about is who is going to pay your way into retirement when there are no people to work.
Main reason: God hates sin and murder is a BIG sin.
2007-09-21 02:47:25 · answer #7 · answered by D.A. S 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Situation one: Pregnant woman decides that she does not want to carry a child to full term and give birth to a baby that she took a willing, consenting role in creating, makes a CONSCIOUS choice to go to a Planned Parenthhod office, talk to a doctor, and have the doctor take a PRE-MEDITATED action and abort the child, effectively ending its life. Lefties say "It's the woman's choice".
Situation two: Same woman, walking to the doctor's office, is shot by someone who just robbed a bank, needs a distraction to make his escape, and in commiting a PRE-MEDITATED act of pointing the gun at the woman, kills the child in her womb. Mom recovers, but baby is dead. State brings charges against shooter for murder of the baby. Civil rights activists (aka "LEFTIES") cry that the civil rights of the mother snd child were violated, and demand justice.
What is the difference? Same woman, same baby, same result....the baby is DEAD. Why is it okay to kill it when the mother decieds to have a doctor kill it with surgical precision, but punishable under Murder one whan the child is killed by a gunshot??
How about this: woman has sex, woman gets pregnant, woman grows up because she has engaged in an adult act that requires she take responsibility for her actions and begins to do adult things like get a job, support herself and her child, and take dad to task if he tries to bolt and shirk his responsibility? Drag dad's butt into court if necessary, do whatyever it takes to get him to stand up and be a man about it too; after all, it takes two to tango?
And I would recommend you get some help for your bitterness. Councelors are available on nearly every block.
2007-09-28 20:12:32 · answer #8 · answered by THE_Sparkchaser ATL 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
My daughter gave a little boy up for adoption l3 years ago. It was the best thing to do . abortion was never even considered we dont believe murder is the answer.
2007-09-28 08:04:20 · answer #9 · answered by Aloha_Ann 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Why not just keep you legs closed until you are married or at the very least financial able to support a child.
2007-09-21 02:07:36 · answer #10 · answered by Justa Angel 3 · 4⤊ 3⤋