Quantcast

Someone (on this site) who is supportive of the freedom to abortion asserts "abortion is none of the government's business". That SAME someone argues in support of taxpayer funding of abortion. Do these two opinions contradict each other?

Howler 2012/05/08 14:30:58
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • The Black Dagger 2012/05/08 14:46:11
    YES - the two opinions are DEFINITELY CONTRADICTORY to each other
    The Black Dagger
    +23
    It's definitely contradictory. If they don't want the government to tell them they can't have an abortion then they have no right to expect the government to force me to pay for the abortion.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • jumpboots 187th PIR 2012/05/14 19:37:26
    YES - the two opinions are DEFINITELY CONTRADICTORY to each other
    jumpboots 187th PIR
    +1
    No I do not want to pay for your abortion. I do support the death penalty for people that have killed for thier greed.
  • Red_Horse 2012/05/11 16:56:45
  • cynsity 2012/05/11 02:07:48
    YES - the two opinions are DEFINITELY CONTRADICTORY to each other
    cynsity
    +1
    I like to explain it this way....

    Remember when you were a kid and you would ask mom for money... mom would say "what's it for?" and you would say "So I can buy X" and mom would say "No you can not have money for that or yes you can have money for that" then you got a job and you got your own money so mon didn't have a say as to what you did with your money and if you were stupid with it then too bad....

    Its like taht with government. When you ask the tax payers to give you money you have to answer to them about what you will be spending it on teh same way you answered to mom...

    You have a choice, be dependant and be subject to having your life scretunized and dictated to you or be independant and don't ask "mom" for cash
  • RG 2012/05/10 00:17:11 (edited)
    YES - the two opinions are DEFINITELY CONTRADICTORY to each other
    RG
    +1
    It's Obama Speak.

    Obama says taxpayers should tighten their belts, yet he can jet and vacation all over the place at the expense of the skinny taxpayer.

    Ha, none of government's business, yet we the taxpayer should shell out. Why should taxpayers foot the bill for killing babies, anyhow?
    IT WAS ALIVE, TAXPAYERS FIXED THAT!
    BABY IN WOMB
    tightened belt
    tightened belt
    obama on vacation
  • teachaman~PWCM~JLA 2012/05/09 14:44:46
  • Brian Tristan MacQuillan 2012/05/09 09:05:10
    YES - the two opinions are DEFINITELY CONTRADICTORY to each other
    Brian Tristan MacQuillan
    +3
    If you accept public money, then by the very nature of public money you have surrendered some of your privacy. Mind you I am not saying it should be a press release for public consumption, but if insurance picks it up they know all about it, and if the government picks it up they also know all about it.
  • Simmering Frog - PHART 2012/05/09 07:08:57
    YES - the two opinions are DEFINITELY CONTRADICTORY to each other
    Simmering Frog - PHART
    +4
    Luberal hypocrite

    Liberals are full of hypocrisy they can't explain. Why can't they explain it? They aren't smart enough to realize their own contradictions.
  • Bob DiN 2012/05/09 06:32:45
    YES - the two opinions are DEFINITELY CONTRADICTORY to each other
    Bob DiN
    +2
    Let pay for their own abortions.
  • AL Bob DiN 2012/05/09 06:48:15 (edited)
    AL
    +2
    Why don't we just abort them, and save our wasted taxes that it takes to abort their innocent unwanted babies then
  • Bob DiN AL 2012/05/09 07:44:32
    Bob DiN
    +3
    Great Idea!
  • txDON'TMESSw/GOVRickPerry! 2012/05/09 06:08:38
    YES - the two opinions are DEFINITELY CONTRADICTORY to each other
    txDON'TMESSw/GOVRickPerry!
    +5
    How does "SOMEONE" defend that position?
  • Howler txDON'T... 2012/05/09 13:07:29 (edited)
    Howler
    +1
    The particular "someone" has me blocked, and he did not defend it to whom he was directing it possibly because he was not challenged specifically on it by the receiver of such opinions.

    However, on other issues this someone usually defends his opinions via his idea of his own level of "intellectualism" and deep thought.
  • txDON'T... Howler 2012/05/10 02:22:15
    txDON'TMESSw/GOVRickPerry!
    +1
    Uh oh Howler, sounds like 'one of them' - you know who.

    So what we have here, basically, is a self-anointed Rhodes Scholar, close? Rhodes Scholar

    I didn't know ole Kris Kristofferson was one - how cool is that? Bill Clinton was also.
  • Howler txDON'T... 2012/05/10 03:12:44 (edited)
    Howler
    +1
    Ole Kris might have a high IQ, and I liked some of his acting way back, but I never thought he could sing well enough to be recorded or perform..He sounded worse than Clinton playing his saxophone.

    mutley laughing gif
  • txDON'T... Howler 2012/05/10 05:23:56
    txDON'TMESSw/GOVRickPerry!
    +1
    I never cared for his singing either, but as a lyricist, he's hard to beat. He wrote songs for other artist to record for many years. Has a real poet's heart.

    Kris Kristofferson lyrics Kris Kristofferson lyrics
  • Howler txDON'T... 2012/05/10 12:55:35
    Howler
    +1
    I couldn't agree more.

    I surely wish he could find room in his heart for a little conservatism....Correction - a LOT of conservatism...lol
  • American BadAss! 2012/05/09 05:05:07
  • Howler America... 2012/05/09 13:34:38
    Howler
    The same SH with whom you have recently had a discussion as a result of another post of mine is the one who opines this...Remember him?..lol

    The storyteller?
  • America... Howler 2012/05/10 06:50:30
  • Howler America... 2012/05/10 13:01:15
    Howler
    +1
    Agreed.

    Periodically checking out their idiocy in their commentary does seem to give me some ideas for poll questions...lol
  • goatman112003 2012/05/09 04:05:56
    YES - the two opinions are DEFINITELY CONTRADICTORY to each other
    goatman112003
    +5
    Once you have government funding then you have regulations which means the government is involved.
  • Lily 2012/05/09 03:42:37
    NO - the two opinions are DEFINITELY NOT CONTRADICTORY to each other
    Lily
    Those against the dealth penalty still pay for the executions through taxes so no, it wouldn't be contradictory according to the U.S. Government.
  • Bob DiN Lily 2012/05/09 06:34:32
    Bob DiN
    +3
    You are mixing crminal activty with sexual habits.
  • Lily Bob DiN 2012/05/10 12:01:14
    Lily
    Actually, I'm not. It's a matter of opinion and that was my point. Some support the death penalty and some don't and yet taxes payers as a whole must provide for the service. So the government providing abortions via tax payers money isn't much of a stretch. There will always be those who oppose and those who don't but all will have to foot the bill.
  • Bob DiN Lily 2012/05/10 19:59:47
    Bob DiN
    +1
    You're mixing apples and oranges. The criminal justice/judicial system is mandated by the Constitution, abortions are not.
  • Lily Bob DiN 2012/05/11 02:40:30
    Lily
    The death penalty is not covered by the constitution and clearly my point is lost so nvm.
  • Bob DiN Lily 2012/05/11 06:29:16
    Bob DiN
    +1
    I didn't say it was, I said the crimnal justice/judicial system. The death penalty is not the law of the land. Most states don't have it.
  • Lily Bob DiN 2012/05/14 13:24:53
    Lily
    k'
  • Bob DiN Lily 2012/05/14 14:21:40
  • Howler Lily 2012/05/09 16:54:40
    Howler
    +1
    Can you point out to me where someone has stated that " the death penalty (which MUST be carried out by the government, otherwise it is a crime itself), is NONE of the government's business"?

    The government is responsible for administering LEGAL capital punishment for crime -- NO ONE else can do that without committing a crime of vigilante murder themselves.
  • Lily Howler 2012/05/10 12:01:43
    Lily
    -see above-
  • Howler Lily 2012/05/10 13:28:35
    Howler
    I did.

    There is a BIG difference in my opinion - still.

    Not only is it ONLY the government which can LEGALIZE - make lawful - the death penalty, it is also ONLY the government that can USE it on a human being who has been LEGALLY CONVICTED -- even if not ACTUALLY guilty -- of a crime that allows for such punishment.

    Government is the SOLE vehicle through which the death penalty can be LEGALLY carried out...NO EXCEPTIONS.

    It is a form of PUNISHMENT.

    Abortion has been legalized by the government to be performed by the PRIVATE SECTOR, thus with PRIVATE FUNDING.

    It is NOT administered as a form of PUNISHMENT.

    Sadly, it is a LEGAL, CONDITIONAL CHOICE most frequently made by the mother.

    If there were PRIVATE SECTOR OPTIONS to administering and FUNDING ANY PUNISHMENT for CRIME, then the comparison you are making would have some foundation to it.

    But, unless the government LEGALIZED punishment to be administered in the private sector, it would be a CRIME WITHIN ITSELF to even, jail someone -- much less KILL them.

    And, even if the government did legalize punishment to be administered in the private sector, the government would STILL have to FUND and ADMINISTER the COURT process that would convict and sentence the criminal.
  • Lily Howler 2012/05/11 02:42:27
    Lily
    again, my point has been missed.....
  • nightcrawler2005 2012/05/09 03:21:23
    NO - the two opinions are DEFINITELY NOT CONTRADICTORY to each other
    nightcrawler2005
    In Canada the Provincial Governments cover the cost of abortion if the woman wants it. Its part of basic medical coverage. The government doesn't tell you whether you can have an abortion or not its just covered if YOU want it. Basically those two opinions are not contradictory.
  • HAlex1972 2012/05/09 02:57:00
    YES - the two opinions are DEFINITELY CONTRADICTORY to each other
    HAlex1972
    +6
    If abortion is none of the government's business, then the government doesn't need to pay for it.
  • Ken 2012/05/09 02:19:15
    The two opinions are PROBABLY CONTRADICTORY to each other
    Ken
    +6
    Abortion is murder anyway.
  • Tink123 2012/05/09 01:24:02
    YES - the two opinions are DEFINITELY CONTRADICTORY to each other
    Tink123
    +7
    Subsidization is government intervention.
  • ruthannhausman 2012/05/09 01:18:03
    YES - the two opinions are DEFINITELY CONTRADICTORY to each other
    ruthannhausman
    +8
    Not arguing the morality or immorality of abortions at all, but it appears to me that if you say the government has no business meddling with the abortion issue, then it stands to reason that taxpayer dollars cannot be used to fund or support abortion in any way. Just arguing logic here.
  • Sofahead 2012/05/09 00:02:36
    YES - the two opinions are DEFINITELY CONTRADICTORY to each other
    Sofahead
    +4
    Taxpayers funding abortion that the government isn't allowed to have ANY input on is a most asinine expectation ever proposed.
  • wysiwis 2012/05/08 23:24:04
    YES - the two opinions are DEFINITELY CONTRADICTORY to each other
    wysiwis
    +5
    If it's "none of my business" if someone gets an abortion, then it should stand to reason that I shouldn't have to pay for it either. YOU want it, YOU pay for it, period!!!
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 8 Next » Last »

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/12/18 21:01:21

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals