Liberal, Conservative, Republican, Democrat....blah blah blah. When are Americans going to finalkly realize that the only reason these words are in existence is so that Americans will constantly be arguing with each other while those who run this country fatten their bank accounts while completely ignoring all of this country's problems?
Accepting for the sake of discussion 'innocent lives' term you could start by reducing the causes of why people feel they need to abortions in the first place. I already listed several, (sex ed, contraception, pre-natal care, post natal care) If you just rely on a ban I doubt you will see a significant drop in abortions just like with banning alcohol there were still alcoholics. And you don't vote and/or speak out about candidates regarding abortion?
This is the biggest problem I have with your position. While you are arguing against the abortion you offer up no solutions to addressing the causes of why people feel the need for abortions. You essentially abdicate all responsibility truly reducing abortion except trying to change the law. Your argument is pretty much the same as advocating for prohibition without addressing alcoholism.
I'll agree on this. ^ I tend to favor one side over the other, but they're all pretty much beholden to lobbyists, special interest groups, and b.s.
Oh, if we just banned the words and nobody argued over politcal issues, then there would be no one running the country and fattening their bank accounts? sounds pleasant, but Hughh???
No, I had an answer; you just didn't like it. It's their child. It's their duty first and foremost-- not yours, not mine, not society's. They can arrange a private adoption or they can give the baby up to the state and then it is, in fact, our problem. Opting into adoption takes the parent off the hook, doesn't it? In your hysteria, you don't see this?
It's a stupid answer. You don't advocate personal responsibility, you advocate your brand of personal responsibility. Abortion is taking personal responsibility for your actions. You just don't like it because all life is precious until it's born, then it's your baby and your problem. You want two sets of rules, the pre-birth rules where you will tell a woman what to do with her body and the post-birth rules where you're on your own woman you should have known better. How do you account for taking care of the 50 million aborted fetuses/children that would have been born in your desired scenario?
How is asking the parents to take care of their own creation not advocating personal responsibility? It's not a brand. It's not a version. It's the bottom line. Not sure how, where or why you leap to the conclusion that life is only precious up until it is born. I've never said that. I never said that anyone is on their own. I did say it is the primary responsibility of the parents to take care of their creation-- be it first-hand or given up for adoption. There are safety nets in place through faith organizations and through the government but the first line of "offense" should be the parents themselves. Most of those fetuses should/would/could have remained in their birth family. Some given up for adoption. I've answered this before; you just refuse to accept the answer. It is the parents' responsibility, not society's. Adults shouldn't be allowed to solve their problems by killing the children that they view as the problem.
Because its none of your damn business. Your religious beliefs shouldn't trump her rights to her body, her fetus, her life, and the manner in which she takes responsibility for it. I don't like your answer because it's stupid. What's in place now doesnt work but it's going to work with 50 million more children? Of course it's not. The point stands. You're far more interested in babies being born and the implications of abortion on the value of life than babies being raised and those implications on the value of life.
Do you know what the first vote any Congressmen makes is? Hint: It is arguably the most important vote. Dem/Rep does matter.
Saw this in a Fark.com thread: Serious Black (don't know if it's our Serious Black) vernonFL: The first is that the Brookings study cannot be trusted because its authors are biased. (Romney adviser Eric Fehrnstrom called the study a "joke.") The Weekly Standard pushes this line, Really? The Brookings Institution? Add it to The List You got it! List of People Conspiring Against the GOP, and therefore, America (LOPCATGOPATA for short): Liberals Democrats Socialists Community Organizers Geologists Biologists Meteorologists Climatologists Atheists Muslims Jews Satan ABC NBC CNN CBS PBS All of cable news except FNC The New York Times The LA Times The Washington Post The Associated Press Reuters BBC The Guardian Black People Mexicans Human Rights Activists SCOTUS Europe Movie Industry Television Industry Environmentalists ACLU The United Nations Labor Unions Colleges Teachers Professors ACORN National Endowment for the Arts Gays Judges NPR Paleontologists Astrophysicists Museums (*except Creationism Museum) WHO WTO Inflated tires The Honolulu Advertiser The Star Bulletin Teletubbies Sponge Bob and Patrick Nobel Prize Committee US Census Bureau NOAA Sesame Street Comic Books Little Green Footballs Video Games The Bible CBO Bruce Springsteen Pennies The Theory of Relativity Comedy Central Young People whatever the hell a Justin Beiber is Small Business Owners Math CPAC Navy SEALs The Economist The Muppets Iowa Republicans Low-Flow Toilets Penguins Rainbows United States Secret Service Nuns Jeff Bezos Breast Cancer Screenings Chrysler Clint Eastwood Robert Deniro Tom Hanks Glenn Frey Bono Bono Impersonators Former Republican Senator Alan Simpson Norman Rockwell James Cameron Dr. Seuss The Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center
I like! But you're going to have to explain a few of these, please: Sponge Bob and Patrick Comic Books Pennies whatever the hell a Justin Beiber is Small Business Owners Iowa Republicans Navy SEALs Clint Eastwood Robert Deniro Tom Hanks ...and especially Glenn Frey You know, just the serious ones.
Saving innocent lives is the business of all of us. Do you just not read? I've held this position for my entire adult life before any significant flirtation with faith around 1991. I don't like your answer because it is selfish and cruel and irresponsible. If abortion wasn't so casual, maybe there wouldn't be so many. At any rate, if people would assume the primary responsibility for their creations, much of the problem would be solved. I don't care how many babies are conceived; I care how many are killed in the aftermath of unplanned or unwanted pregnancy. Humane adults should not solve their family planning challenges by killing the little one. Damn, I forgot to quote scripture!!
