Over 63 million abortions have occurred in the US since Roe v. Wade decision in 1973

Go eat a bald eagle egg and see what happens.

If you were to punch a pregnant woman in the stomach and kill the unborn child, what would you be charged with?

 

Only the anti-abortion activists are appealing to emotion by stating "it's murder," or "it's evil," or something similar. That is an emotional argument, not a statement of reality.

Statement of reality would be why a person is getting an abortion. Generally, it may be because of rape, incest, the life of the mother is threatened, or an economic reality of "I got pregnant so how can I care for this baby when my boyfriend abandoned me for another woman after finding out" argument. That is a statement of reality without the emotional appeal side.

 

It's more than that. Liberals admire others liberals who get abortions. It makes them brave, stunning, and intelligent!

 

It certainly is a statement of reality. You are literally snuffing out a life, no matter what fun words you use to make it hip and cool.

 

They're not sending their best.

 

Actually, I have. It was in China, Beijing.

I know it's illegal in the US, but in China, they are not exactly as protected as I want them to be.

 

But aren't we all are snuffing out life when we kill a deer, a moose, a bear, catch and retain a fish, etc? And if taking a life is murder, then isn't that the same with any animal?

 

Actually you can be prosecuted for breaking US laws while in foreign countries. I'll pass that along.

Nicely admitted to intent too. Well done.

 

From this link: https://www.americanprogress.org/ar...U.S. Census Bureau,or 21.4 million—were women.

 

I think they will cut the government welfare spending as well by implementing "drug tests" or "make them work" which would pretty much make them ineligible for any welfare benefit through unreasonable and unrealistic choices.

 

I was not the one killing the bald eagle and it was at a restaurant in China. Thus, what law was broken BTW?

BTW, only certain financial crimes from abroad, along with terrorism and a few others, in which you can be prosecuted here even though the crime may have occurred in Afghanistan or other places.

 

It doesn't matter. So much as possessing a feather you found on the ground is illegal.

You also admitted you knew it was a crime.

Dabble in anything else illegal while overseas?

 

They're strong independent women. They'll be fine.

 

Yeah that means half of the 14%. Let me guess, the other half of the poor are men.

 

I haven't read the link per se. But I think most are minor children who live with the identified poor women in the said statistic. Few would be men and they are probably disabled, and because of the disability unable to work and rely on government welfare all their life. The reason, that medical expenses are being paid by the government is what is keeping them alive is because their extended family do not have the financial resources to pay for that expense, and continuous medical care.

 

LOL where in that link does it say....."And over 60% are women living at or below the poverty line"? That's what he claimed. Man the left come up with some real doozies but this one may take the cake of lunacy.

 

Yea you didn't read the link, it's 2% more then men. Native Americans lead the way, followed by African American.

 

No, the sad statistic is that 70% of divorces are filed by women. Even higher among black women, hence the higher poverty rate.

 

He/she/whatever didn't understand that it was a percentage of a percentage.

 

Religion and law treat animals different from humans. No one gives a **** about it besides peta and people trying to justify baby killing.

 

Not to mention comparing it to things we eat.

 

That's right.

 

Then they will resort to crime. Its very predictable.

 

Why can't you just look up the stats as opposed to accusing others of making stuff up.

 

In the first paragraph, the second sentence, it says, "According to the US Census Bureau Data, of the 38.1 million people living in poverty, 56%--or 21.4 million--were women."

You asked where the numbers come from. I simply gave you a link for you to read it. Apparently, you didn't read it or you didn't understand it. Take your pick. But it is there.

I never gave in my response to you any indication of whether I agree or disagree with the number. And since this took 5 seconds of a Google search, I gave you the link for you to read. What you do with the link and the information contained therein is up to you.