Pro Lifers, what exactly do you think would happen if abortion was banned?

Dayum...all I did was ask for clarification.

Do you often act this nasty, or is it just when discussing your money and abortion?

 

Even in those extreme cases where the woman's life is threatened, if she cares anything for her unborn child, she can spin the roulette wheel and hope for the best...

But what about the woman's life is "threatened" and it's only a 1% chance of mortality ?
If we look at it analytically, is the woman's life worth 100 times more than the life within her ?

 

Do you think that's a wise choice if she has other children? Are you saying that society should not support her choice to abort, financially or otherwise? Basically, you ARE saying that it's not a big deal if she dies.

It's impossible to put numbers on a person's worth. Since the zef is NOT a person, we don't have to be concerned about it. To society as a whole, a zef is worth nothing until it has spent years learning and growing, all at tremendous cost to parents and to society, whereas a woman has already been trained and grown and is currently a contributing member of society.

 

I always thought it was funny how conservatives hate contributing to society through taxes but have no problem using everything that taxes pay for.

- - - Updated - - -

 

That's very utilitarian of you.

You would say that.

 

Of course I would.........any intelligent person would. All human beings should be able to decide if they should risk death or not.

I know you probably think you should decide for all the women in that situation but that isn't going to happen...it's another CHOICE that Anti-Choicers want to take away from women...

 

And not just atheist taxpayers, but all pro-choice taxpayers are forced to subsidize churches and "crisis pregnancy centers" that proselytize against abortion.

 

All human beings should be able to decide if they should die or not.
A mother who chooses abortion isn't being a very good steward of her little child.

And yet, just like it was with slavery, the "choice" demanded by one group is actually all about taking away the choice of another...

 

.......in YOUR OPINION!

 

You believe in taking away the choice of others......so you shouldn't object to slavery, it's what you advocate for pregnant women.


A fetus is not a "child", not another person.

 

how dumb can you get. So you think a woman getting raped was her choice do you .. that is just absurd.

Yes of course she is she is choosing to be raped, choosing for her rapists sperm to fertilize one of her ovum, she is choosing to spend nine months with the rapists fetus growing inside of her .. ANY human being that thinks it is OK to deny a raped woman an abortion is a very, very sick person.

Yeah right

you have absolutely no idea about what I do or do not do, so the only turd here is you for spewing (*)(*)(*)(*) that you no nothing about.

Obvious to any person with any that you are devoid of anything coming close to it.

 

Remember, AH has gone beyond that......he's endorsed a totalitarian Gestapo-state with border ultrasounds and bio-chip monitoring of all women to enforce an abortion ban.

Something even the slaves didn't face in the 19th Century.

 

How dumb can you get. It isn't about how she got pregnant but the choice to abort. If she chooses the ABORTION, she pays regardless of how she got pregnant.

About six months ago some idiot backed into my car in the parking lot. It did more damage to my car than his car was worth. He left. Luckily, someone got a description of the car, the driver, and a tag number. The police tracked it then paid him a visit. Of course, he had no insurance which meant my uninsured motorists had to pay to have my car fixed although I didn't cause the problem. The sad part about it is that I had to pay a deductible. Since it wasn't my fault and I didn't choose to be hit, based on your reasoning, when you I expect you to reimburse me for the deductible? No? Same principle applies. I didn't choose to get hit but I ended up paying for my choice to have the car fixed. Someone getting raped and becoming pregnant may not have chosen for it to happen but they chose whether or not to "fix" the result.

 

Atheist don't pay for churches.

I'm not against birth control nor do I use my religious beliefs to say other shouldn't use them. Don't confuse me with Catholics. My point is that if you want birth control buy it yourself. Don't tell me what you do with your body is your business then expect me to fund your choice. Use all or as little as you want but you pay for it.

 

A true conservative picks the cheapest alternative. It's not an either/or, it's a neither. It's not my responsibility to fund someone else's contraceptives or support their children. For some reason you bleeding hearts can't grasp that.

I agree that those getting women pregnant should have half the cost since the woman that allowed him to do what it took for her to get pregnant has the other half. The person that isn't in that equation is me.

- - - Updated - - -

At least you see it as my money and not someone leech that made a choice and now can't afford it.

- - - Updated - - -

Your position, and it's not a valid one, is that the person making the decision should be left totally alone yet when they can't afford that decision, it's OK to demand those they said leave them alone pay for it. If that's what you defend, you aren't defending much.

- - - Updated - - -

Your position, and it's not a valid one, is that the person making the decision should be left totally alone yet when they can't afford that decision, it's OK to demand those they said leave them alone pay for it. If that's what you defend, you aren't defending much.

- - - Updated - - -

Perhaps you should tell me what I am sucking off other taxpayers.

 

Everyone pays for what churches use because they are tax exempt......somebody else pays for what they use......takes up the slack no matter if they are religious or not.

 

Freeways, roads, infrastructure, courts, commons, public buildings, parks, police , fire......YOU have no problem using those things even if you didn't pay for them yourself....taxpayers paid for them.

 

I have no problem using each and every one because I pay the taxes that fund each and every one of them. Any more foolish statements you'd like to make?

 

Did you know that people who don't pay taxes also use them ?


And this is quite boring, your WAHHHHH, I don't want a penny of my money going to...blah blah blah...
You made your point.....


Want to try the TOPIC ?

 

Tell me how much slack they are taking up. You can't say slack if being taken up when you aren't talking about real dollars. If you want to talk about slack, let's talk about the half in this country that pay no income taxes and even get back more than they had taken out through leech programs like the Earned Income Credit. I can put a dollar amount of that.

 

Over a month old OP and no sensible answers from Anti-Choicers yet......

 

Talk to them.

While you're at it, talk to the half in this country that don't pay income taxes yet use programs which income taxes fund. Those on food stamps don't pay the taxes that fund food stamps. Those using Medicaid don't pay the taxes that fund Medicaid. You won't bring that up because you believe those people deserve what they get although you rail against other situations where people don't pay yet benefit. At least consistent if you want to be respected.

 

"""""""""""that don't pay income taxes yet use programs which income taxes fund. Those on food stamps don't pay the taxes that fund food stamps. Those using Medicaid don't pay the taxes that fund Medicaid. You won't bring that up because you believe those people deserve what they get although you rail against other situations where people don't pay yet benefit. """"""""""""""


Even if it were true ...GOOD


Have anything on the topic........???

 

The problem is you don't like the answers. That doesn't mean they aren't sensible unless you consider sensible being the same as you agreeing with it.

It's not my job to make sure someone else's baby has all they need. It's the person that has the child. Currently, abortion is legal yet people still choose to have babies they can't afford. Since they have a choice not to, if they do, it doesn't mean someone else should be forced to fund it. Saying taxpayers should be forced to fund the kids someone else has when they, as it stands now, have a choice to abort, invalidates your argument. If they can abort but choose to have the child they know they can't afford, it doesn't mean, by default, someone else gets the bill.

 

Are you saying someone on food stamps pays the taxes that fund food stamps?

"Even if it were true . . .GOOD". That's hypocritical. You rant and rave about people not paying the taxes that fund things they use yet think it's good when people get social welfare handouts although they don't pay the taxes that fund them. Which one is it?

The topic you brought up is that you have a problem with people using things for which they don't pay taxes yet you support people using social welfare even when they don't pay the taxes that fund it. Face it, you're a socialist whether you call yourself one or not.