B
buffalo
Guest
Why not go to a pro-life clinic that treats the whole person? Both of them.
- Status
R
Raskolnikov
Guest
If they stop providing providing abortions on demand, then they won’t be at risk of losing federal funding. The choice is theirs as well. And considering that, even if one thisnks abortion should be legal, it fits the category of commodity far better than necessity, and the same can be said of birth control, so public funding hardly seems warranted.
I doubt in 2012. Barack is still in the white house, and the democrats still control the senate, which means they’re still part of the status quo, and therefore will remain unpopular. In 2014, though, you’re probably right. I was astonished by how quickly the voters turned on the democrats. Just two years ago even some conservatives were wondering whether conservatism in America was not on its way out after the Bush years. Just two years later, everything is turning around again. If the GOP wins the presidency and the senate in 012, I see no reason why the same won’t happen in another 2-4 years. American voters have become remarkably fickle, it seems.
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
Exactly so. The public ought not have to pay for it, but I, though opposed to ABC, know that it’s not something that non-Catholics are against. Many people can and do agree on the evil of abortion, but some Protestant groups consider ABC as good stewardship. I’m certain they wouldn’t mind public funding of it, even as “for the prevention of disease.”
1
1234
Guest
They don’t pay for it in PP. All PP abortions are privately funded. PP uses federal monies for its other services, which do include contraception. Take a poll of the attitudes towards contraception of Roman Catholic lawmakers. Almost no one opposes it. Notice that the public spokesmen for the Roman Catholic church, such as the USCCB, don’t mention contraception in their official statements.
I strongly suspect that PP keeps its books very separate between what its private funding supports and what its federal funding supports.
Many have observed that the Roman Catholic church appears to focus very heavily on the ‘unborn’ rather than on the concerns of the ‘born’. The current congress is trying to dismantle fundamental services to those segments of society which used to concern Catholics and the Catholic bishops----the elderly, children and students. Apparently no more. Dismantling collective bargaining will also greatly weaken the working people and the middle class in this country, which is rapidly disappearing, as money, power and influence pour into hands of the very few at the top. This includes lawmakers, who are, increasingly, very wealthy. All of this did previously concern the Catholic bishops of the US and some of the greatest popes, including Leo XIII.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
Funding PP’s other activities just frees up the monies which can then be directed to promoting abortions.
Given their track record of lies and deception, I highly doubt this.
Source? Have you not heard of the Catholic Hospital system, Birthright, Catholic Charities? It’s time to put that canard to rest.
:yawn: see above
:crying:
The world is being taken over by rich people! :imsorry: :bighanky:
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
You’re a day late, Christine. They’ve already taken over!
(As of 2007, the top 1 percent of households held 34.6 percent of American wealth, and the next class (professionals and CEOs) held 50.5 percent. Together, the richest classes of American (20 percent of the population) held 85 percent of the nation’s wealth. This obviously leaves 15 percent of the nation’s wealth to be shared by the remaining 80 percent of Americans.)
I
iamrefreshed
Guest
Keeping separate books doesn’t make things equal. Federal money spent on ‘other services’ just allowed PP to spend more private money on abortions.
I
iamrefreshed
Guest
I’m in sales. We have a similar ratio. 20% of salespeople account for 80% of the sales.You’re a day late, Christine. They’ve already taken over!
(As of 2007, the top 1 percent of households held 34.6 percent of American wealth, and the next class (professionals and CEOs) held 50.5 percent. Together, the richest classes of American (20 percent of the population) held 85 percent of the nation’s wealth. This obviously leaves 15 percent of the nation’s wealth to be shared by the remaining 80 percent of Americans.)
It’s called initiative.
I suggest the slackers get some.
E
estesbob
Guest
And they pay 86% of all federal income tax. The lowest 43% pay NO Federal income tax.You’re a day late, Christine. They’ve already taken over!
(As of 2007, the top 1 percent of households held 34.6 percent of American wealth, and the next class (professionals and CEOs) held 50.5 percent. Together, the richest classes of American (20 percent of the population) held 85 percent of the nation’s wealth. This obviously leaves 15 percent of the nation’s wealth to be shared by the remaining 80 percent of Americans.)
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
Not quite the same in your line of work, which is entirely sales. It’s a difference between those holding the nation’s wealth statically and those with the initiative to earn some.
I
iamrefreshed
Guest
I see it as exactly the same. Those holding the wealth have/had initative. Those not want distribution of the wealth earned by others. Statically schmatically.
R
Rich_Olszewski
Guest
Not necessarily. There is inherited wealth.
Again, not necessarily. Not everyone who isn’t a card-carrying Republican is a card-carrying communist.
I
iamrefreshed
Guest
True. Good luck is nice. At least the earner decided who should receive his/her estate.
Don’t be silly, some of them are Socialists!
C
canadianguy1143
Guest
Does anyone know when the Senate will vote on this?
1
1234
Guest
Initiative and a lot of opportunity. The finest schools. Travel abroad. Nice vacations. Top notch medical care. Even matched for age and race, the wealthy live a lot longer than the poor.I see it as exactly the same. Those holding the wealth have/had initative. Those not want distribution of the wealth earned by others. Statically schmatically.
You have to support the bottom and give equal opportunities to all. A rising tide raises all boats. This idea is rapidly disappearing in this country, and, with the present congress, will weaken still more. The working/middle class is already weakened as jobs disappear abroad, factories close, medical coverage and pensions disappear, WIC, Head Start, senior centers and Pell Grants all lose their funding. When support for poor mothers and children disappears, what do you suppose will happen to abortion rates?
Also, the vast majority of women who have abortions pay for them themselves.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
Let me tell you - nothing. I volunteer at a homeless shelter (Catholic) for women with children and/or expecting. They are still having babies, and lots of them, while living on the street.
It’s a result of the disposable society. Having sex and getting pregnant with a new boyfriend while you have a baby in the next room is ok. No problem. Uncle Sam will take care of you. No moral distinctions.
People have settled for the least common denominator and are happy with it. They have their tattoos and cell phones, but no place to live.
At our shelter, we teach women to love their babies. We teach them life skills.
The pro-contraception pro-abortion agenda is a failure. Sex has consequences.
And we wonder why high school girls flush their babies down the toilet at the prom.
1
1234
Guest
Boy, are you angry. You would be the last person I would want to talk to at a shelter.
You want this country to become like Romania. Abortions *and *contraception illegal. Orphanages stuffed with unadoptable children. When that regime was toppled, its people hanged the dictator and his wife.
You want this country to become like Romania. Abortions *and *contraception illegal. Orphanages stuffed with unadoptable children. When that regime was toppled, its people hanged the dictator and his wife.
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
When God topples Satan’s regime here on Earth, things will be much better. Until then, not so much.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
Angry? You bet I’m angry. Abortion on demand, killing babies in their mothers’ wombs? I’m not angry at the women in the shelter. I’m angry with the culture that promotes death and irresponsibility. These women and children are victims of the culture of death.
Maybe you should try volunteering. It will give you a whole new perspective of what society has done to these throw-away people. Their lives are changed. They come in sultry, listless, passive. They learn to love their children. They learn respect for themselves. They learn they are lovable. I have never met a person there that hasn’t been kind to me. I have never met a child there that hasn’t loved to sing nursery rhymes with me. I have never met a woman there who isn’t worthy of my love and kindness. I have never met a child there with whom I wouldn’t want to sing, to hug and get hugged.
Abortion on demand and contraception hasn’t solved those problems. There are more homeless mothers today than in 1973. There are more children born to single mothers since 1973. Since Johnson’s “Great Society” there are more people living in poverty than ever.
Those are facts. I’m willing to personally work one by one to change lives. Government can’t do it.
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
Johnson imposed a governmental solution to a moral and spiritual problem. Its the Progressive mantra “I’m from the government and I’m here to solve all of your problems”.
- Status