Republicans offer a positive move on abortion

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: DAVID64

I was impressed that this only went towards the positive aspects and didn't poke the bear anymore. Who knows, this could be the beginning of a compromise that would benefit those who need it most.

I agree this is the right direction.

There are other arguments to abortion that Republicans don’t want to admit.
Sometimes it has nothing to do with not wanting a baby, sometimes it IS medically necessary.
Sometimes the baby has zero chance of survival. Don’t make it into a political thing for those poor women, it could be your wife, sister, daughter someday!

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: quintessentone

I like that non-answer.

You are against a measure that would help mothers. And your reason is politics. Disgusting.

when all you got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

I'm not alone in seeing this as a half measure, half assed attempt at what? Political positioning? If it even passes.

My God, the blindness you have is astounding. When the Dem's had control of everything, they did exactly jack sh!t about abortion, every time. Right now, this very minute, the R's are trying to offer something positive about this to turn the focus off of the SCOTUS ruling. So the point is, when it comes to politicians, yes, everything is political. The Dems could have fixed all this, but choose to keep it as a wedge issue, and it falls in with all the other wedge issues nobody wants to fix, as they serve much better as political cudgels. This is basic politics 101, you really need to learn a bit before you post much more.

Talking about reading more before you post, here ya go.

www.cbpp.org...

wouldn't low income or no income families already be getting Medicare, Medicaid, and SNAP benefits along with other benefits to the poor? If you gave me the option for a $2000 tax credit for free medical for everyone, I'd be all over the free medical. That sh!t's expensive. The one's getting it are getting a massive benefit. But if you feel they should continue getting more, suggest that, as this bill has only been proposed. it's not a law yet.

Yes, some programs but with these child poverty numbers, it sure looks like they don't get much or it doesn't make a dent.

Cash assistance, allowances, rental and housing support, SNAP/TANF benefits, unemployment, and other inclusive economic programs provide crucial reinforcements. As we advocate for these supports, we must also take a longer view to more deeply enact systemic and structural change that will allow our children to thrive.

Systemic racism ingrained into our American institutions has been a historical roadblock perpetuating child poverty. Current statistics indicate the ongoing effectiveness of the roadblocks in pushing the American Dream of economic mobility further out of reach, especially for Black and Brown children (see Table 2).

Among the 74 million children living in the United States, 11 million live in poverty.
One in six children under 5 (3 million children) were poor, the highest rate of any age group.
The pandemic forced children already in poverty even deeper into poverty. Almost half (47%) of all children living in poverty live in severe or extreme poverty, a number which rose from 4.5 million before the pandemic to 5.5 million in 2021.
The South, home to 47% of children in our country who live in poverty, experiences the highest child poverty rates with 1 in 5 children living in poverty.
9 million children faced hunger and food insecurity.
4 million children lived without health insurance.

www.childrensdefense.org...

wow, there is no hope at all. may as well kill them. relish the win! you earned it! the prize? dead babies. congrats.

Remember this?

" See, when you start with "all" it implies you aren't very good at thinking."

LOL, I don't think you understand this at all. (see, I used the word "all", but I don't think it means what you think it means) Let me know if I need to "mansplain" it to you. I'm good with that today.

I was going to reply with 'do more' for the win. But, if we realize what confusion Georgia is going through with the same tax exemption for fetuses (source below) then it leaves me with no hope in hell that this will work.

ca.news.yahoo.com...

I'm glad you aren't in public office. Seeing how fast you are ready to give up makes me feel sad for you and all you could have done.

a reply to: network dude

Bingo! Winner winner chicken-dinner! This wisdom should be spread throughout the land. ::bells ringing::

a reply to: network dude

Who pays for that?

a reply to: network dude

This might be a good thing. If people could collect even a social security amount of money for expenses for ninety days after the birth, that would really be some help. With all the dept people have gotten themselves tied to these days, it probably won't be enough for the majority of people. Personal debt of people in this country is at an all time high, all this available credit is not the right answer...it is hurting people in the long run. The vast majority of debt held by people is acquired by them buying things they want but do not really need...consumerism sucks. Even college loans, do people actually need to go to college to work in a factory, store, or restaurant. Do they need a degree to drive a truck delivering supplies to stores? Do they need a college diploma to go work construction or in a factory or to become a person working in the trades, like plumbers or electricians. Working their way up to a better job and pay means you earn money while you learn.

We have a fundamental problem with our society. Too many people have lived above their means for years.

It is at least a step in the right direction anyway, now if we could just get socialized medicine for essential things we need but not necessarily want, it would be a step in the right direction.

a reply to: quintessentone

Maybe the child poverty numbers estimate their families' income prior to receiving the free healthcare, SNAP, section 8? After it all adds up that child isn't in poverty anymore, considering the real value of this assistance!

How can you say it isn't doing much?

Because more and more people are drawing upon it?

Then lets look at the causes, like Kamala is supposed to be doing about the problems in South America.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: quintessentone

I like that non-answer.

You are against a measure that would help mothers. And your reason is politics. Disgusting.

when all you got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

I'm not alone in seeing this as a half measure, half assed attempt at what? Political positioning? If it even passes.

My God, the blindness you have is astounding. When the Dem's had control of everything, they did exactly jack sh!t about abortion, every time. Right now, this very minute, the R's are trying to offer something positive about this to turn the focus off of the SCOTUS ruling. So the point is, when it comes to politicians, yes, everything is political. The Dems could have fixed all this, but choose to keep it as a wedge issue, and it falls in with all the other wedge issues nobody wants to fix, as they serve much better as political cudgels. This is basic politics 101, you really need to learn a bit before you post much more.

Talking about reading more before you post, here ya go.

www.cbpp.org...

wouldn't low income or no income families already be getting Medicare, Medicaid, and SNAP benefits along with other benefits to the poor? If you gave me the option for a $2000 tax credit for free medical for everyone, I'd be all over the free medical. That sh!t's expensive. The one's getting it are getting a massive benefit. But if you feel they should continue getting more, suggest that, as this bill has only been proposed. it's not a law yet.

Yes, some programs but with these child poverty numbers, it sure looks like they don't get much or it doesn't make a dent.

Cash assistance, allowances, rental and housing support, SNAP/TANF benefits, unemployment, and other inclusive economic programs provide crucial reinforcements. As we advocate for these supports, we must also take a longer view to more deeply enact systemic and structural change that will allow our children to thrive.

Systemic racism ingrained into our American institutions has been a historical roadblock perpetuating child poverty. Current statistics indicate the ongoing effectiveness of the roadblocks in pushing the American Dream of economic mobility further out of reach, especially for Black and Brown children (see Table 2).

Among the 74 million children living in the United States, 11 million live in poverty.
One in six children under 5 (3 million children) were poor, the highest rate of any age group.
The pandemic forced children already in poverty even deeper into poverty. Almost half (47%) of all children living in poverty live in severe or extreme poverty, a number which rose from 4.5 million before the pandemic to 5.5 million in 2021.
The South, home to 47% of children in our country who live in poverty, experiences the highest child poverty rates with 1 in 5 children living in poverty.
9 million children faced hunger and food insecurity.
4 million children lived without health insurance.

www.childrensdefense.org...

wow, there is no hope at all. may as well kill them. relish the win! you earned it! the prize? dead babies. congrats.

Remember this?

" See, when you start with "all" it implies you aren't very good at thinking."

LOL, I don't think you understand this at all. (see, I used the word "all", but I don't think it means what you think it means) Let me know if I need to "mansplain" it to you. I'm good with that today.

I was going to reply with 'do more' for the win. But, if we realize what confusion Georgia is going through with the same tax exemption for fetuses (source below) then it leaves me with no hope in hell that this will work.

ca.news.yahoo.com...

I'm glad you aren't in public office. Seeing how fast you are ready to give up makes me feel sad for you and all you could have done.

Did you read my source, it's a shambles and everyone is left scratching their heads. I feel sad for the women that have to deal with this messed up government.

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: network dude

Who pays for that?

taxpayers. It's what I call socialism creep. Where small bits of socialism creep into the cracks and fill the voids, so they can be adopted as "normal". Eventually, you might get your way and we go full commie.

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: quintessentone

Maybe the child poverty numbers estimate their families' income prior to receiving the free healthcare, SNAP, section 8? After it all adds up that child isn't in poverty anymore, considering the real value of this assistance!

How can you say it isn't doing much?

Because more and more people are drawing upon it?

Then lets look at the causes, like Kamala is supposed to be doing about the problems in South America.

They are saying more needs to be done.

As we advocate for these supports, we must also take a longer view to more deeply enact systemic and structural change that will allow our children to thrive.

www.childrensdefense.org...

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: network dude
Three months leave is too short because babies should be breastfed exclusively during the first six months.

Actually, they should be breast fed for at least the first two years, or as long as Mom can produce milk, then you can switch to a good home-made formula, like one of the Weston Price versions. Our kids were bottle fed (Mom wanted to sooo badly, but simply couldn't breast feed), our first spent about 5 years on their raw milk formula, then our twins spent about 4 years on their liver based formula. They all thrived on them.

They just seem to hate spending any REAL amount of money on programs for women and children's health and welfare.

Mpy ay all... it is the dems who are in favor of all of the anti-business and anti-family policies that force both Mom and Dad to have to work, when t he Mom should be spending her time raising the children.

That is what nature intended, and there is no shame in it, regardless of how the feminists want to whine about it.

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: DAVID64

I was impressed that this only went towards the positive aspects and didn't poke the bear anymore. Who knows, this could be the beginning of a compromise that would benefit those who need it most.

I agree this is the right direction.

There are other arguments to abortion that Republicans don’t want to admit.
Sometimes it has nothing to do with not wanting a baby, sometimes it IS medically necessary.
Sometimes the baby has zero chance of survival. Don’t make it into a political thing for those poor women, it could be your wife, sister, daughter someday!

there are many different arguments about this, but today, this topic, this thread, this bill, is speaking of help for mothers who chose to have the baby. There is nothing in here limiting anyone from killing babies. When the other things are brought up, they take away from the topic at hand, likely on purpose.

originally posted by: DAVID64
a reply to: network dude
Women should get more time at home after giving birth and not feel pressured to go back to work so soon.

She can take as long as she wants... but are you suggesting that her employer should be forced tokeep her job open indefinitely? does that work exactly?

You would think hospitals would have more understanding and better policies, but nope. Push that kid out and get back to work !!

Why on earth would you think that a for-profit business that profits off of people's poor health choices to care about anything but their bottom line?

originally posted by: rickymouse
a reply to: network dude

This might be a good thing. If people could collect even a social security amount of money for expenses for ninety days after the birth, that would really be some help. With all the dept people have gotten themselves tied to these days, it probably won't be enough for the majority of people. Personal debt of people in this country is at an all time high, all this available credit is not the right answer...it is hurting people in the long run. The vast majority of debt held by people is acquired by them buying things they want but do not really need...consumerism sucks. Even college loans, do people actually need to go to college to work in a factory, store, or restaurant. Do they need a degree to drive a truck delivering supplies to stores? Do they need a college diploma to go work construction or in a factory or to become a person working in the trades, like plumbers or electricians. Working their way up to a better job and pay means you earn money while you learn.

We have a fundamental problem with our society. Too many people have lived above their means for years.

It is at least a step in the right direction anyway, now if we could just get socialized medicine for essential things we need but not necessarily want, it would be a step in the right direction.

I think it's a good starting point, and it shows that at least someone is thinking about the mom and baby beyond the womb. I realize that takes a talking point away from the left, but there are plenty of made up things they can holler about.

I just feel like this is something positive in a sea of negativity.

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: DAVID64
Read what women have to say about those programs and the barriers they encounter.

Barriers, hoops and red tape are part and parcel of any and all government programs.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: network dude
Three months leave is too short because babies should be breastfed exclusively during the first six months.

Actually, they should be breast fed for at least the first two years, or as long as Mom can produce milk, then you can switch to a good home-made formula, like one of the Weston Price versions. Our kids were bottle fed (Mom wanted to sooo badly, but simply couldn't breast feed), our first spent about 5 years on their raw milk formula, then our twins spent about 4 years on their liver based formula. They all thrived on them.

They just seem to hate spending any REAL amount of money on programs for women and children's health and welfare.

Mpy ay all... it is the dems who are in favor of all of the anti-business and anti-family policies that force both Mom and Dad to have to work, when t he Mom should be spending her time raising the children.

That is what nature intended, and there is no shame in it, regardless of how the feminists want to whine about it.

Inflation is what forces mom and dad out to work, because one paycheck doesn't cut it any more, it has nothing to do with feminism. It would be out of necessity.

Experts advise starting babies on adequate complementary foods at six months along with a supplement of breastmilk or formula for the next two years. Mom can express milk and give it to whoever the childcare provider is, while she can resume her work life, if desired. Keyword: desired (by mom).

To my original point, three months is not enough time and if you see what's happening with this same program in Georgia it's a confusing mess for everyone involved.

a reply to: network dude

It's only a positive if it is passed and if it will actually work, otherwise there is no knowing as to it's efficacy, but we can already see in Georgia it's a confusing mess.

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: network dude

We really need to demand that health care be a right.

Sorry, but no one has a Right to demand that someone else pay for their health care.

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: network dude

It's only a positive if it is passed and if it will actually work, otherwise there is no knowing as to it's efficacy, but we can already see in Georgia it's a confusing mess.

lol, this is what I mean. You are defeated before you even try.
I'll try this. I'll totally ignore you, and believe that this is a step in the right direction, and if it totally fails, they I'll know you were right. See, I feel better already.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: network dude
Three months leave is too short because babies should be breastfed exclusively during the first six months.

Actually, they should be breast fed for at least the first two years, or as long as Mom can produce milk, then you can switch to a good home-made formula, like one of the Weston Price versions. Our kids were bottle fed (Mom wanted to sooo badly, but simply couldn't breast feed), our first spent about 5 years on their raw milk formula, then our twins spent about 4 years on their liver based formula. They all thrived on them.

They just seem to hate spending any REAL amount of money on programs for women and children's health and welfare.

Mpy ay all... it is the dems who are in favor of all of the anti-business and anti-family policies that force both Mom and Dad to have to work, when t he Mom should be spending her time raising the children.

That is what nature intended, and there is no shame in it, regardless of how the feminists want to whine about it.

Inflation is what forces mom and dad out to work, because one paycheck doesn't cut it any more, it has nothing to do with feminism. It would be out of necessity.

Experts advise starting babies on adequate complementary foods at six months along with a supplement of breastmilk or formula for the next two years. Mom can express milk and give it to whoever the childcare provider is, while she can resume her work life, if desired. Keyword: desired (by mom).

To my original point, three months is not enough time and if you see what's happening with this same program in Georgia it's a confusing mess for everyone involved.

Thank the current admin for the current inflation. It seems spending trillions we don't have was a bad thing. And yes, it started under the last admin, but exploded under this one.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: DAVID64
Read what women have to say about those programs and the barriers they encounter.

Barriers, hoops and red tape are part and parcel of any and all government programs.

Which all end up with no access to the aid they need, so they say.