Do women have a human right to taxpayer paid abortions? I don't think so!

reply to post by OhZone


Well lets just see. If we shipped all of the illegals to the furthest end of Mexico from the border, then the irresponsible teenage parent could be forced to work all those job that "no americans want to do." Looks like a win-win to me. I believe both the male and female are equally expected to be responsible for raising their child.

[edit on 11-11-2009 by HotSauce]

It is curious how so many posts never mention the possibility of adoption isntead of welfare for those who don't even want the child. In Canada and the United States there are so many couples who can't have a baby on their own and adopting from another country is far too expensive. There are many childre in foster care, however are not being adopted out b.c they are being returned to their parents. I and I will assume others know of couples who have been placed on a waiting list to adopt-never to be called. Anyone have any thoughts on adoption? My parents fostered and adopted one of my siblings. My sister is thankful that adoption was the choice over her birthmothers other options (abortion). Many people who are adopted I have heard say the same thing.

[edit on 11-11-2009 by Zerra]

What bothers me about this thread is that it is based on views of your beliefs of abortions. If that is the case then those that are against blood transfusions shouldn't have that covered to the rest of the public either.

An abortion is a medical procedure. If you don't like it, don't get one. Otherwise let women decide for themselves. It is covered under health care in Canada and you know, truly I am happy with providing women another way to chose. Having an abortion isn't an easy thing for any woman to do. But you all make it sound like they are lining up the door while holding on to their 20 kids before getting their food stamps. Women decide it for a number of reasons, not just because they can't afford a child. There is rape, incest, failed birth control, problems during pregnancy. Some women can not carry children very well.

If you start forcing medical programs to pay because of beliefs of people out there then you will miss out on programs that are needed due to religious beliefs. Legal procedures have the right to be covered under health care.

reply to post by canadianmouse


1. IT is going to be based on my opinion because I created the thread.What do you expect?

2. I would be aganst blood transfusions too if there purpose was to the kill a baby because the mother found it to be inconvienient to her life at the moment.

reply to post by Kerry_Knight



Regardless of your viewpoint I have my own. A woman owns her body not a man, dare I say not even her husband. She is the one who carries the child. She takes the morning sickness. She bears down with the painful delivery. She deals with the post partum depression.

...

We brag about our new child

I've seen enough husbands to know that they don't go through near the same amount of suffering...JMHO of course...do with it what you will

-Kyo

reply to post by KyoZero


How do you feel about giving the father the right to have the fetus extracted from the woman if she wants to abort it and having it implanted in a surrogate mother until it comes to term?

Originally posted by HotSauce
reply to post by canadianmouse

 

1. IT is going to be based on my opinion because I created the thread.What do you expect?

2. I would be aganst blood transfusions too if there purpose was to the kill a baby because the mother found it to be inconvienient to her life at the moment.

You don't seem to be understanding where I am coming from, there are religions out there that do not believe in transfusions. If you are going to pick medical procedures based on beliefs and not legal medical laws then no one should be allowed blood transfusions to be covered. You should have to pay for that out of your own pocket.

You can't start picking and choosing what the health care system will allow because in the end not everyone is okay with every procedure.

Also having a abortion isn't killing a baby. A fetus isn't a baby.. The fetus depends on the mother to live. How do you know that it is only because she is being inconvienced is the reason for the abortion? There are many reasons for having an abortion. Being pregnant is a medical condition. Pregnancies are not that easy on the female body. Don't start judging women until you have been there in the room having an abortion. You are assuming you know what a woman is going through in there.

As long as joe taxpayer doesn't pay.Why don't you liberals adopt if your pro life???

reply to post by canadianmouse


This isn't about religion for me. It is about common sense. Obviously a human fetus is a human baby. Has one ever not grown into a baby barring complications or abortion? This is not a religious issue. It is a constitutional right to life issue that the supreme court screwed up on. Plus even if you agree it should be legal why should we have to pay for it. Are we going to pay for boob jobs through public healthcare.?

In most cases an aboriton is a want and not a a medical necessity. 78% of women surveyed said they got an abortion because it woud interfere with their life plans if they had a baby. I wsh I could kill everyone that became an inconvenience in my life.

Next you will start saying we should be able to kill kids born with defects because it is inconvenient for their parents to raise them and it is a burden.

EDIT TO ADD: By the way you are Candadian so you don't even pay US taxes, so waht is it to you . Canadians are always trying to give us Americans advice on how to be great like Canada. If opinions are like buttholes then Candians must have more than one.

[edit on 11-11-2009 by HotSauce]

Originally posted by HotSauce
reply to post by canadianmouse

 

This isn't about religion for me. It is about common sense. Obviously a human fetus is a human baby. Has one ever not grown into a baby barring complications or abortion? This is not a religious issue. It is a constitutional right to life issue that the supreme court screwed up on. Plus even if you agree it should be legal why should we have to pay for it. Are we going to pay for boob jobs through public healthcare.?

In most cases an aboriton is a want and not a a medical necessity. 78% of women surveyed said they got an abortion because it woud interfere with their life plans if they had a baby. I wsh I could kill everyone that became an inconvenience in my life.

Next you will start saying we should be able to kill kids born with defects because it is inconvenient for their parents to raise them and it is a burden.

[edit on 11-11-2009 by HotSauce]

Killing a live child is murder, that child is living and breathing. Abotion isn't murder because abortion is legal and not the murdering of life. Life is when the person can live and breathe on their own. In a mother's womb they can not.

Where are you getting your information of why women had an abortion? Because I can start pulling out records to that will prove you are wrong. And these records are unbiased unlike the ones you are probably looking at.

If your supreme court screwed up do to the right to life, well then I guess the death penalty is a big farce as well.

Also a breast implant is a cosmetic procedure, keep grasping straws when it comes to what we are talking about for those that are against blood transfusions and yet they still have to pay for it. Just like the Amish have to pay taxes yet do not use half of the services provided. And you don't hear them complaining like you are.

reply to post by canadianmouse

Killing a live child is murder, that child is living and breathing. Abotion isn't murder because abortion is legal and not the murdering of life. Life is when the person can live and breathe on their own. In a mother's womb they can not.

Where are you getting your information of why women had an abortion? Because I can start pulling out records to that will prove you are wrong. And these records are unbiased unlike the ones you are probably looking at.

Just because the government says killing an unborn child is legal does not mean it isn't murderl. Murder is legal in at least two other ways in this country. War and captal punishment. I actually support those two forms, though I am a tad squeemish about capital punishment.

According your logic then it would be ok to kill a child that needed to be put on a ventillator or hearth machine for life support right after it was born, even if there is 100% chance it would live given the right treatment.

Originally posted by lpowell0627
I'm certainly not in favor of abortion personally, but I am also not in favor of spending thousands and thousands of my tax dollars RAISING the "non-terminated" children as you call them.

Welfare, for SOME, has turned into a "every baby buys me more time" kind of program. Personally, I am sick of supporting people that blatantly take advantage of a situation. The system was not designed to be income, it was designed to prevent hunger and homelessness -- during SHORT periods of difficulty.

Looking at the numbers, I'd rather pay for someone's abortion than pay to take care of the child for the rest of his/her life. While I agree that people need to take more responsibility when they conceive a child, I think there are some people that would rather have the baby and collect government assistance, than spend their own $200 to have an abortion.

I am sorry to inform you of this, but such people wouldn't have the abortion, even if you paid for it....they want the baby....since the baby equates to a free ride, at least a little longer.

reply to post by galatea


classic anti-life qualificaiton of pof-life belief.

"if you're not against the killing of a murderer convicted by an impartial trial and a jury of his peers than you can't be against the unilateral decision of a mother to kill the fetus living inside her."

yea, that makes a lot of sense.

reply to post by KyoZero


this argument only makes sense if you completely de-humanize the child. not saying any man "owns your body." the idea that pro-life men are motivated by a desire to control women is hilarious at best. just saying that rights end at the point where they infringe on the rights of other human beings. the only correct starting point in the discussion over abortion is the status of the fetus as either human/inhuman, alive/not alive, worthy of legal protection/not worthy. everyone knows that women are human beings and have rights, thats not even a serious thing to debate and is a major red herring used by anti-life proponents. if the child is a living human entitled to legal protection, the debate is over.

reply to post by snusfanatic


Yeah the pro-baby murder movement have no problem with chopping up a fetus like a tomato in Ginsu commercial or slicing and dicing it like a Benihana (sp?) chef does to a lobster in mid air shooting a piece to each customer while they applaud.

Well Hotsauce you believe in Slavery do you?

Forced Pregnancy is Slavery. And since you expect the Mother to care for the child that makes her an indentured servant for some 20 years.

Tell me why exactly do you care if the girl across town has an abortion?
How exactly does it impact your life?

And to those who suggest adoption like you think there are as many people willing and able to adopt as there are babies, I got news for you.

Those who want to adopt are folks who want White Babies.

Also among the babies who would be born instead of aborted are a lot of drug adicted babies.
Hotsauce, how many babies have you adopted?
Just wondering if you are willing to walk the talk.

reply to post by OhZone

Forced Pregnancy is Slavery. And since you expect the Mother to care for the child that makes her an indentured servant for some 20 years.

You have got to be kidding. So now mothers are indentured servants. Hell I must be one two, because I have been raising two kids by myself the last 5 years.

Hotsauce, how many babies have you adopted?
Just wondering if you are willing to walk the talk.

Thanks for asking. I don't really like to brag, but since you brought it up I have adopted two beautiful children that I love more than anything in the world. They are trully a blessing to my life and I could not imagine life withut them.

Originally posted by endisnighe
reply to post by OhZone

 

None, forgot about the fourth choice didn't you.

Government needs to stay the frack out of our lives.

Have as many children as you like. Just do not ask me to help.

As a single person, I pay the fracking highest tax rate for people that make the same amount of money. This is another WELFARE redistribution technique.

Take care of your fracking self and your family and keep the FRACK out of my wallet. Get it?

[edit on 11/11/2009 by endisnighe]

You are the one who just doesn't get it.

Either you pay for the abortion or you pay WELFARE.

I think that paying for the abortion is a lot cheaper, don't you?

reply to post by HotSauce


i lol'd. but seriously, i say anti-life until feminist groups stop calling me anti-choice.

reply to post by snusfanatic


Lol, I hear you. I will call it pro-baby murder until pro-choice includes a choice for the baby. I would think it is safe to say the baby would always choose to live if it was given a choice in the pro-choice movement.

[edit on 11-11-2009 by HotSauce]