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

2007-12-29 08:06:59 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

Pat K: Thumbs way up!!!!!!!!!

2007-12-29 08:18:49 · update #1

luciusclay: I noticed that too... Great point

2007-12-29 08:33:05 · update #2

18 answers

I am pro life because I believe that the unborn baby, as a HUMAN, has the right not to be killed. I would not support killing of a person who is already born because I think they will be a burden to society, just like I would not support the killing of an unborn person. People need to keep their knees closed until or unless they can afford all of the responsibilities that come with sex. That said, I would not be willing to assist the mother.

2007-12-29 08:21:23 · answer #1 · answered by the alchemist 2 · 0 2

How can anyone call himself or herself pro-life while fighting for someone to have a life of pain, abuse and misery? Where is the compassion? I’m not saying anyone on this earth should not have been born or should ever be murdered. Visit a state funded home; it’s a necessary hospital environment. Even Catholic nun volunteers cannot hold even just one 10-year-old mentally retarded child for just one hour every day. Some babies lives’ have been, for over 23 hours a day, has been spent lying alone in a metal crib (should I describe the tubes, needles, black bruises, some babies couldn’t even be held if someone was there to hold them for 10 minutes). The cribs come in different sizes from babies to pre-teens, adult body-sized ones come complete with restraints, now they legally have to just use drugs as restraints, and I’m told it keeps the noise down. I’ve always said at least these kids are warm, they don’t need clothes or an education, and are feed, even though its threw a tube they are only starving for affection. Now should I mention the babies of drug addicts or incest, even JUST poverty?

Abortion can not be used as birth-control, and anyone in a drug rehab program or on welfare should require mandatory birth-control. I’ve watched people thrive by working in medical, but these small sad lives of misery affect the people who deliver them, right down to their care-takers for the next few decades. I’ve seen some great caring successful people become numb, hard and ice cold because of what they see and can not fix at work, even some home health-care workers and child counselors. These once happy professionals affect the lives of their neighbors, families and all who they come in contact with. First get rid of the reasons’ that make some abortions necessary, make sure every baby and child is adopted, and then get rid of abortion. Until both sides of this issue can work rationally together for a solution, the same problems’ will remain and grow.

2007-12-29 08:45:49 · answer #2 · answered by pacer 5 · 1 1

Depending on the circumstances, I would willing to assist a mother to be during her pregnancy.and for a reasonable amount of time after the child was born. Also, the father of the baby has half the responsibility of supporting the baby for the next 18 years, not someone who had nothing to do with the pregnancy.

2007-12-29 08:43:24 · answer #3 · answered by susandiane311 5 · 0 1

Yes I would be willing to see the re-institution an orphanage system that would provide housing, nutritious meals, an education, and a safe environment for the children born to those to irresponsible to care for their own children. Under no circumstances would I want to see tax money go to the mother of that child. Paying teenage girls to have children and than expecting those children to have a good life is idiocy

2007-12-29 08:37:36 · answer #4 · answered by espreses@sbcglobal.net 6 · 0 0

I don't like abortion whatsoever. However, I think the decision should be up to a woman and her doctor.

Frankly, I'd rather be pragmatic about the whole thing -- why aren't we doing more to make birth control and real, rational, frank sex education available? We have seen time and again that the vast majority of young women who have access to these resources never require an abortion, and far more of them choose abstinence because they are informed and educated about their bodies.

Someone who is anti-choice needs to be pro-education and pro-birth-control. Otherwise, the position on this subject is unrealistic at best. "Abstinence-only" programs have been consistent failures in every situation. Restricting birth control merely results in more abortions.

If you find abortion horrifying (and who doesn't), then for God's sake, work on preventing it, rather than trying to drive it back underground by making it illegal. How is that going to solve anything?!?

2007-12-29 08:33:00 · answer #5 · answered by Brandon F 3 · 0 1

Responsibility is absent in American society. People want freedom but are incapable of accepting the FACT that freedom comes with responsibility.
If you don't accept responsibility for your actions, you must limit your freedom, or the Government will take your freedom from you.
FACTS:
If people behave in such a way as to require care because the want the freedom to do as they please without paying the "price". The government will pay but will do so by limiting your POWER by taking your money to pay the costs you incurred. Then they will limit benefits and your freedom to choose your sources or types of care.....
Make you own examples.
If you are free to act immorally, you pay your own price. If you murder your baby, I'm not going to pay for the abortion.
I'll let GOD seek justice in HIS own time. That's not MY job.
I'm against abortion, but then I never got a woman pregnant out of wedlock.

2007-12-29 09:17:35 · answer #6 · answered by Philip H 7 · 1 1

I am against abortion. This is legalized murder, thanks, I think, to our Supreme Court. Supreme in name only, certainly far from superior. The people who created this child are, and should be responsible, not someone else. Assistance can be obtained through various government services as well as family and friends. But it's time America, to wake up to the choices you are making.

2007-12-29 08:48:58 · answer #7 · answered by robbie 6 · 1 1

what does this mother need? you have to be more accurate - she needs warmth, food and care. We all could help.

Pat K makes an interesting point - how many homes have empty rooms for these 'destitute middle class girls' and remember one native baby is one less immigrant as well.

our world now has more abortions per year than marriages, that is a messed up world.

2007-12-29 08:13:11 · answer #8 · answered by j_emmans 6 · 0 1

how about.. give the baby to a loving family. i can not have kids, but i also can not afford to adopt. if people who do not want to abort have a loving family/ or like me a single person in line to raise the baby, that would be what i would like to see.

2007-12-29 08:34:24 · answer #9 · answered by grumpy girl 6 · 1 0

Adoption is an option. There are so many couples in America struggling with infertility who would love to care for a baby who's mother isn't capable of caring for the child herself.

2007-12-29 08:15:05 · answer #10 · answered by Puff 5 · 3 2

fedest.com, questions and answers