Abortions and contraceptives, Welfare and medicare/medicaid____
JustBeingAtPeace
2012/12/13 19:05:19
|
|
|||||
|
11 votes
|
|
44% | |||
|
2 votes
|
|
8% | |||
|
7 votes
|
|
28% | |||
|
5 votes
|
|
20% | |||
How can it be "logically" explained to be not connected? How can people argue they are against abortions but against contraceptives yet say, Stay out of my wallet I am tired of giving you handouts, I'm not paying for your contraceptives but hey, I won't help you survive once your pregnant and you better not get an abortion! I am so confused by this. While I am completely pro-life, I am also Pro-choice. Please try to be civil if you answer this, I am "truely" confused =/
Top Opinion
-
Huki68 2012/12/13 20:22:13I think____



















It is all the exact same moral issues
The other thing is way to confusing and it has to do with religious extremist. If you don't take contraceptive and you pull out before you come isn't that the same, aren't you dismissing all those eggs? If a men jerk off, aren't he killing all those babies. I think some religion wants to see woman barefooted and pregnant. I don't believed in abortion but caramba! Provide all woman with contraceptives will you. Somebody has to support all those kids. I don't think the church is going to. I bet the pastor wife is take contraceptive, with the money from the collection plate.
I would say so. A person CANNOT be pro-life and "pro-choice" at the same time.
I'm assuming you are pro-life because you think abortion is the taking of human life. (Why else would you be pro-life?)
As such, you CANNOT support legislation that allows those human lives to be killed. Not if you are as pro-life as you say you are.
An analogy: You cannot claim to love all races, while at the same time supporting others' rights to discriminate against black people.
The "I'm personally opposed but don't want to impose" argument is commonly used with abortion. It's a totally lame argument. Nobody uses that argument with regard to slavery or segregation. Why, then, should it be used in a life-and-death matter such as abortion?
Save the "to each his/her own" thinking for non-lethal things, such as what color to paint a kitchen or what sorts of clothes to wear. That line of thinking does not cut it when it comes to protecting human life.
You're either all-in when it comes to protecting unborn life, or you aren't. There's no fence to sit on here.
One more thing: Your "I won't help you survive" argument is lame too. The biggest pro-life organization in the country, the Catho...
I would say so. A person CANNOT be pro-life and "pro-choice" at the same time.
I'm assuming you are pro-life because you think abortion is the taking of human life. (Why else would you be pro-life?)
As such, you CANNOT support legislation that allows those human lives to be killed. Not if you are as pro-life as you say you are.
An analogy: You cannot claim to love all races, while at the same time supporting others' rights to discriminate against black people.
The "I'm personally opposed but don't want to impose" argument is commonly used with abortion. It's a totally lame argument. Nobody uses that argument with regard to slavery or segregation. Why, then, should it be used in a life-and-death matter such as abortion?
Save the "to each his/her own" thinking for non-lethal things, such as what color to paint a kitchen or what sorts of clothes to wear. That line of thinking does not cut it when it comes to protecting human life.
You're either all-in when it comes to protecting unborn life, or you aren't. There's no fence to sit on here.
One more thing: Your "I won't help you survive" argument is lame too. The biggest pro-life organization in the country, the Catholic Church, also has the country's best programs when it comes to helping new moms and their babies after it's saved both of them from the evil of abortion.
Your claim that pro-lifers don't help after the babies are born is entirely false. That's not an opinion. It's a fact.
I'm confused why people who make the decision to have sex then are so dam surprised when they get pregnant.
I'm also confused as to why people think its a right to be able to have sex. If you can't afford the kid, or the contraception; don't have sex.
That's where I think the issue stems from; as per normal its always what people are 'entitled' to and never what they are responsible for based on their personal circumstances.
What you are talking about is essentially people paying tax so that those on welfare can have sex...
America's reliance on illegal immigration to support the labor pool is a perfect example here.
Essentially it starts small, but escalates quickly. And if you keep avoiding taking a step back and fixing it, even if it does cost more money for a while, is just going to result in an even bigger problem which maybe can't be fixed down the track.
In the case of illegal immigration, sending them back would result in a fairly sizable loss to the turnover of many small business' and product prices would increase; so instead we give millions welfare and amnesty and it just makes America even more reliant on an unstable labor pool. More come, then not enough jobs exist for all the illegals and all the non-skilled Americans. Then unemployment rises and more p...
America's reliance on illegal immigration to support the labor pool is a perfect example here.
Essentially it starts small, but escalates quickly. And if you keep avoiding taking a step back and fixing it, even if it does cost more money for a while, is just going to result in an even bigger problem which maybe can't be fixed down the track.
In the case of illegal immigration, sending them back would result in a fairly sizable loss to the turnover of many small business' and product prices would increase; so instead we give millions welfare and amnesty and it just makes America even more reliant on an unstable labor pool. More come, then not enough jobs exist for all the illegals and all the non-skilled Americans. Then unemployment rises and more people end up on benefits, then the illegals want benefits. Society increases benefits and then more illegals and non-skilled Americans go "hey I can not work and still get 80% of my current income through benefits"...while others from across the border go "wtf if I can make it to America i don't have to do anything at all and I can make 100 times what I earn here". And thus it balloons, fast.
So I think for allot of these issues which our society is experiencing for the first time in modern history; people need to be more willing to take a few hits to their pocket to fix some of the problems our need for change has created. That isn't the whole 'tax the rich more' argument; I think it needs to be a shared load as everyone contributed to the mistakes, so to should they fund the remedies.
I think Americans (and the rest of western society) have to accept that sometimes their own national welfare has to be put first; and that just because someone is in a worse situation doesn't mean America should be dragged down to support them. Its harsh, but its the only way to ensure sustainable security and economy.
The world is far from perfect.
Given a choice of higher taxes or dead babies, I guess I go with just allowing the low-life dregs of society to continue to kill their babies.
A police officer from Detroit made a public comment about when the kid drove towards the cop, "he graduated from joy-rider to attempted homicide…
& finished with …oh, and by the way, I'm black."
Dudley called HIM a racist, go figure