We all know they pretend to care about the poor. Aren't they sick.
2007-12-31 11:40:47 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yeah. Similar to Hitler killing everything that he didn't like or want.
Although, they are killing themselves off. Between Gay marriage and abortion, population control should start to work here too.
2007-12-31 11:44:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
is this all you have this issue is something that men should not even get a chance to vote on this is something that should be between a women and her doctor her body that's it i sure hope we don't keep going down this road i see more and more stories in the paper on young mothers dumping there babies and i think that is a life and maybe if some of these young mothers could of had a better class on birth control other than just abstinence this would not happen i cant say i agree with abortion but I'm not a women either
2008-01-02 08:37:11 · answer #2 · answered by furface 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, Keep teaching abstinence and I am sure you holy rolers will all save us.
Are you justified in trowing the 1st stone.
FYI abortion happens whether or not it is legal, Roe vs Wade just regulates who it is safe for. This law protects the poor and ensures they will receive safe medical treatment. The rich do not have to worry because they will just go to one of the rest of the countries in the civilized world and receive theirs. So legal abortion saves lives. Research it, it is true.
2008-01-02 04:42:04 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The welfare reform bill passed by the Republican congress and signed by Clinton in the 90's produced a sharp drop in the birth rate and an increase it the abortion rate for poor women, especially poor black women. Since more Republican politicians and their supporters favor such policies than democrats, blaming democrats is passing the buck.
Most women who favor legal abortion want to control their own fertility, not other peoples, but there seems to be a lot of men in both parties, who worry about supporting other peoples children and even more that want to control the fertility of women.
2007-12-31 12:57:47 · answer #4 · answered by meg 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is sort of a hateful question.People who are pro-choice don't want women to have abortions. No one likes them. You miss the whole point, who should choose? You or your government? For people who are suppose to believe in less government, where are you here? Since this is an issue of beliefs, let people make their own choice.I think those who call themselves pro-life should be called anti-choice. What happened to freedom?
2007-12-31 12:03:58 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
The poor have been used as pawns in the fight on poverty for years. There is nothing new here. Some of these forgotten people want to be poor, some are victims of their circumstance and some are mentally unstable and don't know any better. Abortion is just another rhetorical method being used to further the political ends of some shameful partisan politicians.
2007-12-31 11:47:56 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Actually, that was a Republican cause back a few decades ago.
Ronald Reagan passed one of the friendliest abortion bills when he was governer of California. George Bush, sr. was also pro-abortion early in his political career. The thinking at the time within the Republican Party was that abortion helped keep single women off the welfare rolls. It was only when the right-wing realized that abortion could be used to split the left that they became united against abortion.
2007-12-31 11:45:47 · answer #7 · answered by Mencken 5 · 6⤊ 2⤋
Oh sorry, I can't hear you above the thunder of the rushing hordes of pro-lifers who are storming adoption centers for children offered up by minority unwed mothers.
Let's wait until the police arrive and execute some crowd control.
Then maybe after the dust settles, we can all attend a Republican Sex Education class. I think it starts out with all the parents taping their mouths shut.
After that, we can listen to a lecture on the highly effective nature of sexual abstinence by that champion of pro-life, Sen. Larry Craig.
2007-12-31 11:45:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
Eugenics is the name, feminism is the game. Look up the founder of liberal feminism Margret Sanger. The founder to the National Organization of Women.
2007-12-31 11:44:41 · answer #9 · answered by Mark B 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I never thought of that...........I'll bet you are correct!
The sad and very very sad thing is that many of these women regret it so much it leads them to drugs, alcohol, etc.
Politically correct murder!
2007-12-31 11:44:01 · answer #10 · answered by LandOfMisty 5 · 3⤊ 6⤋
You are correct it is their idea of thinning the herd.
2007-12-31 11:43:08 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 7⤋