Abortions aren't free at Planned Parenthood. You have to pay for them. What is free there is sex counseling,STD counseling, and also family planning, hence the name "Planned Parenthood". You're not eliminating abortions, a service that costs the same at Planned Parenthood as it does at any other clinic. You're increasing STDs.
[jquote]The next step is to stop federal funding that goes to raising children. And I for one wholeheartedly support taking that next step.
Quit confusing the debate. This is about whether I should be forced to pay for someone else's mistake.
So Perham, let's just kill all the inmates too. That'd save a whole lot of money. You OK with that? BTW can you possibly be more pompous?
Uhhh....mcbrett, read his post perham1 said, quote, "I won't pay for your cancer if you smoked". He did equate smoking and abortion.....wise up.
Not saying smoking is right but smokers do pay partially for their habit. A pack of cigs is almost all tax which go to the government coffers. Five dollar tax everytime you buy a pack, multiply that by 365 x 50yrs plus interest and you might have some money. Having unprotected sex does not make the gov money. I wonder if they know that?
I'm just curious if anyone has stats on the average number of offspring in homes that receive entitlements versus the average number of offspring in homes that do not. Or perhaps simply broken down by those who pay taxes versus those who do not pay taxes. I'm trying to prove any points, just curious to be honest.
McBrett, I tend to agree with your rationale. It's a difficult topic - very difficult. Additionally, there is very little "gray" area. You either believe one way or the other. Last, very few will be convinced differently once their mind is made up. Thus, it's an un-winnable argument. Simply respecting the other's opinion is the only way to be civil (despite disagreement).
I'm left to wonder how civilly this discussion would be conducted if Roe v. Wade were to be overturned... Just curious.
It's a fair point- look at it this way. Pretend you only have two options- Roe v Wade or a complete outlaw of all abortions. We have two camps of people- the supporters and those who oppose abortion. __________________________________________________ I'm for the repeal of roe v. wade because all it would do is allow states to decide for themselves whether to allow abortions. most states would probably still allow them.
Perham, I did a little poking around on the web, and I can only find anti abortion sources who are stated that their research is about 95 to 96% of abortions are performed as a means of birth control. 15 years ago, when I was more politically invoved was the last time I saw a statistic from Planned Parenthood themselves on this matter. They were the lowest I have seen on this and it was 92%. That was 15 years ago, so things might have changed tremendously. Still, I think the argument could be made that while not ALL abortions are performed as a means of birth control, the vast majority are. While I am not pro abortion at all, in fact I am anti abortion and pro life. (known here to be very opposed to the death penalty and abortions, among other non traditionally paired views). I do know that Planned Parenthood does positive work with women's reproductive health. And I don't know about how this funding in NJ was allocated? Was it to abortions? Was it to Planned Parenthood as a whole? No idea. I do know that I agree with anyone who says what we need to do is reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies.
Lots of interesting thinking on here, especially from my old pal Mcbrett. First, abortion clinics charge on a sliding scale. In virtually every city in America of at least small to medium size, an abortion can be had for as little as $40. This whole cost argument is bogus. I refuse to believe that women don't get abortions due to cost. They may say that to save face or something, but the reality is that abortions can be had for very little money. Further, it obviously takes 2 to tango here and the father, by law, will have to provide financial support for the baby if it is born that so far exceeds a $40 charge that it isn't even funny. As to the argument that there are just 2 choices, it is bogus again. There are waiting lists in America for adoptions right now. In many cases there will be an adoptive set of parents that will pay for the medical care of the mother and take the baby. This is usaully a fantastic outcome for all parties involved. Medicaid will also cover all pre-natal and birth costs for a woman giving up a child for adoption. RV and Mcbrett:
mcbrett....sometimes despite all of your proclamations that we should understand each other, you are really horrible at doing so. of course i think we can act civilly (which doesn't mean we can't show people the effects of their choice to kill an unborn kid but does mean we shouldn't have people killing abortion doctors (which is an exceedingly RARE occurrence despite how often it is invoked). however, and this is huge, you seem to miss the point particularly here:
mop- the reason you're incapable of being civil, and why you repeatedly bring out analogies to slavery and rape as if you have a point is your quote here: