12 minutes ago, NOTW said:

This is another terrible argument.  People today that are against abortion, what does that have to do with abortion happening in the Early Republic? There is not some "gotcha" here.  

 

Because conservative arguments always appeal to tradition, and traditionally, abortion was common in this country. At a time when people were way more religious, abortion was practiced with greater frequency. There isn't even anything in the Bible that specifically bars abortion or even claims that life begins at conception. There are passages, though, that intimate that life begins at breath. Even so, pro-lifers are using religious principles to make law. Keep your religion out of my government.

13 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

This is basic logic: If you are anti-abortion and also opposed to any and all social services that could ensure unwanted pregnancies don't lead to more children living in poverty and and abusive situations, then you really don't give a **** about these kids. You just care about imposing your religious doctrine on other people. It really is that simple.

 

Also, you do realize that it's not just people having unprotected sex who get pregnant, right? No birth control method is 100%

You have changed the argument from all conservatives who are against abortion don't care about babies (which is completely ridiculous and absurd) to those that oppose "any" social services for birth control, which is what I already noted in a previous post that yes there are some like that. 

9 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

Cue the AC Green abstinence video

Birth control you dolt.

5 minutes ago, NOTW said:

You have changed the argument from all conservatives who are against abortion don't care about babies (which is completely ridiculous and absurd) to those that oppose "any" social services for birth control, which is what I already noted in a previous post that yes there are some like that. 

 

No, I didn't change the argument at all. Each point is related, and I don't see the point in re-hashing what I already said. Self-righteous conservatives might like to pontificate about "the children," but if they don't want a dime going to the government for feeding, clothing, and educating kids born into bad circumstances, then they don't care about their lives. You also ignored the point that not all unwanted pregnancies are the result of unprotected sex.

12 minutes ago, PoconoDon said:

Birth control you dolt.

Uh huh

Planned Parenthood is the largest provider of contraception and reproductive/sexual health services in the US. Gotta stop demonizing them if you want to focus on prevention.

And also gotta stop demonizing religious people who don't believe in it.  They have a right to that opinion and it really isn't anyone's place to mock them for it.  Now if they try to force that decision on other people well, have at it.  But religious groups play a big role in adoption/foster/charity for children.  

3 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

 Now if they try to force that decision on other people 

If?

19 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

No, I didn't change the argument at all. Each point is related, and I don't see the point in re-hashing what I already said. Self-righteous conservatives might like to pontificate about "the children," but if they don't want a dime going to the government for feeding, clothing, and educating kids born into bad circumstances, then they don't care about their lives. You also ignored the point that not all unwanted pregnancies are the result of unprotected sex.

People who actually want to feed, clothe, and educate children do it themselves or give to charity directly, they dont need the govt as a middle man.   

This has nothing to do with abortion, youre just conflating a ton of other issues with it because you know you lost the moral high ground

24 minutes ago, Mike31mt said:

People who actually want to feed, clothe, and educate children do it themselves or give to charity directly, they dont need the govt as a middle man.   

This has nothing to do with abortion, youre just conflating a ton of other issues with it because you know you lost the moral high ground

 

You are ignoring reality. If abortion is illegal, it will not reduce unwantwd pregnancies. What will happen is millions more children will be born into poverty and abusive/neglectful homes. The increase in human suffering specifically among children would be immense.

43 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

You are ignoring reality. If abortion is illegal, it will not reduce unwantwd pregnancies. What will happen is millions more children will be born into poverty and abusive/neglectful homes. The increase in human suffering specifically among children would be immense.

I agree, which I said earlier about banning abortion won't work.

Your assertion that no pro-life people care about babies at all after they're born is absolutely ridiculous.

52 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

You are ignoring reality. If abortion is illegal, it will not reduce unwantwd pregnancies. What will happen is millions more children will be born into poverty and abusive/neglectful homes. The increase in human suffering specifically among children would be immense.

Oh so youre a population-control-by-abortion guy.....pretty sick

Prediction: There is no way in hell that they overturn R v W. 

1 hour ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

You are ignoring reality. If abortion is illegal, it will not reduce unwantwd pregnancies. What will happen is millions more children will be born into poverty and abusive/neglectful homes. The increase in human suffering specifically among children would be immense.

Do you think incentives and disincentives influence behavior?

5 hours ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

Seems like whataboutism to me. Most kids put up for adoption never find a settled home, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Most pro-life conservatives have no interest in adopting someone else's child providing for them after they are born, but they sure show a keen interest in using the power of the state to force indigent mothers to bring unwanted pregnancies to term. Carlin is 100% right here. These people are not pro-life. They're pro-birth.

"Most kids put up for adoption never find a settled home” Got anything to back that up there chief?

56 minutes ago, TEW said:

Do you think incentives and disincentives influence behavior?

 

In some cases, but definitely not in the case of sex.

42 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

"Most kids put up for adoption never find a settled home” Got anything to back that up there chief?

28% = "most" I guess. 

 

5 minutes ago, NOTW said:

28% = "most" I guess. 

 

Not that I'm picking sides here, but that 28.5% are the kids who can't be returned to their original family. Mom went through rehab, dad wins custody battle etc.

The fate of that 114.5k remainder is what y'all are arguing over. 

10 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

Not that I'm picking sides here, but that 28.5% are the kids who can't be returned to their original family. Mom went through rehab, dad wins custody battle etc.

The fate of that 114.5k remainder is what y'all are arguing over. 

There are differences between adoption and fostering.  His claim was that most adopted kids never find a settled home.  I called BS because, well...it is.

19 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

There are differences between adoption and fostering.  His claim was that most adopted kids never find a settled home.  I called BS because, well...it is.

I'm well aware.

He said most kids put up for adoption don't find a settled home.  And the 28% that NOTW quoted are kids that entered the foster system that couldn't return to their original family. Not kids who weren't adopted.

Again not taking sides here, but let's be accurate about what we're arguing about here.

4 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

I'm well aware.

He said most kids put up for adoption don't find a settled home.  And the 28% that NOTW quoted are kids that entered the foster system that couldn't return to their original family. Not kids who weren't adopted.

Again not taking sides here, but let's be accurate about what we're arguing about here.

Valid point.

5 hours ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

This is basic logic: If you are anti-abortion and also opposed to any and all social services that could ensure unwanted pregnancies don't lead to more children living in poverty and and abusive situations, then you really don't give a **** about these kids. You just care about imposing your religious doctrine on other people. It really is that simple.

 

Also, you do realize that it's not just people having unprotected sex who get pregnant, right? No birth control method is 100%

Or…you don’t think it is the role of government to protect people from the consequences of their poor choices. Unless you think people are complete sociopaths, they aren’t going to want to see their kids starve. Plus, this is a role for private charity. You can very reasonably believe that abortion is wrong and that the government shouldn’t be making welfare payments of any kind. 
 

For the record, while I believe abortion is murder and abhorrent, I am pro choice. Because I don’t believe in forcing my morals and values on others. Which is why I am also anti Welfare. I give to charity, but others are within their rights to be selfish a-holes. 

3 hours ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

In some cases, but definitely not in the case of sex.

If that were the case then no girl would bother to use the pill.

3 hours ago, vikas83 said:

Or…you don’t think it is the role of government to protect people from the consequences of their poor choices. Unless you think people are complete sociopaths, they aren’t going to want to see their kids starve. Plus, this is a role for private charity. You can very reasonably believe that abortion is wrong and that the government shouldn’t be making welfare payments of any kind. 
 

For the record, while I believe abortion is murder and abhorrent, I am pro choice. Because I don’t believe in forcing my morals and values on others. Which is why I am also anti Welfare. I give to charity, but others are within their rights to be selfish a-holes. 

Side bar: is abortion abhorrent and murder in the case of rape/incest?

6 hours ago, DEagle7 said:

I'm well aware.

He said most kids put up for adoption don't find a settled home.  And the 28% that NOTW quoted are kids that entered the foster system that couldn't return to their original family. Not kids who weren't adopted.

Again not taking sides here, but let's be accurate about what we're arguing about here.

Yeah I agree that is not accurate, especially when 20,000 per year age out of foster care. A majority of these kids end up homeless on the streets or in bad situations because they are poorly educated and have no family to fall back on.