New way to fight Abortion

  • Thread starter Thread starter she_he
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

she_he

Guest
Ok, you want abortions to be outlawed, use a new fight.

the reason lawmakers are not so inclined to outlaw abortion is they have no idea where the money to support a 3/4 of a million new Babies every year will come from, try what I have heard a pro choice person say you should be willing to do if you are so set on outlawing

every person whom is a registered pro life member will have to pay 15% of thier pay to support all these unwanted babies any that are adopted will be dropped from the support system…

anyone not on the prochoice member list does not have to pay
and anyone whom is on no list is also exempt.

would you be willing to put 15% of your pay towards this,

Be honest about it this is something that could become a reality
and they would use member lists from as of Today…
 
40.png
she_he:
the reason lawmakers are not so inclined to outlaw abortion is they have no idea where the money to support a 3/4 of a million new Babies every year will come from…
Click to expand...
How about some proof for this assertion?

– Mark L. Chance.
 
Proof on what that it could happen? or that congress dont want to part with Cash?

talk to some lobbyists for either answer…

I should have added that this is in assumtion that all ( which wouldnt happen) babies that would have been aborted are put up for adoption.
relize that just about any law that is going to pass has to have something in it for the lawmakers,esspecially when its such a huge topic as is abortion,if 90% of the people wanted pro life it would be a no brainer
self supporting laws are ones that get acted upon because it makes the lawmakers look as if they are fiscally responsible when the reelection comes up …

P.S. This thread was not started to cause an arguement,but possibly some extra ammo…

Peace
John
 
40.png
she_he:
Proof on what that it could happen? or that congress dont want to part with Cash?
Click to expand...
Proof of your assertion that “the reason lawmakers are not so inclined to outlaw abortion is they have no idea where the money to support a 3/4 of a million new Babies every year will come from.”
40.png
she_he:
talk to some lobbyists for either answer…
Click to expand...
So, IOW, you don’t have any proof for your assertion.

Next, even assuming that your unproven assertion is true, justify the deaths of 3000 unborn children every day simply because “lawmakers…have no idea where the money to support a 3/4 of a million new Babies every year will come from.”

– Mark L. Chance.
 
If we have to put a dollar sign in front of respecting all life, then so be it and I will pay the tax. How can a person say to another, your life means nothing to me…

All things we get from God and all things will be returned to God.
Yes. I will gladly pay for another’s life to be spared.
I already financially support several pro-life groups and will continue to do the same!
 
I don’t think that money is really the issue. It seems to me that the money argument is thrown around, because pro-choice liberals seem to think that we pro-lifers are anti-poor tightwads. So the argument is made to appeal to our stingy side, as an attempt to put a chink in our armor. It never works they end up looking like they are the ones who stress money over life. To answer your question though, I feel that we as a society should do whatever we legally can to end abortion. If this means paying a one-sided burdensome tax, then so be it. It’s easier to get tax reform anyway. This argument is moot though, because to pro-choice liberals it’s not about the money to take care of all the “unwanted” babies- it’s about an invented right.
 
the reason lawmakers are not so inclined to outlaw abortion is they have no idea where the money to support a 3/4 of a million new Babies every year will come from,
Click to expand...
Not buying it, she_he. Sounds like a cop-out from liberal lawmakers hoping that the weak minded will believe it. I’ve heard of no such nonsense and I’m a political junkie.

Nice try. If liberals are really so concerned about our 2 trillion dollar gov’t not getting enough money to satisfy their insatiable quest for power, then they may feel free to return their refunds this year. I’ve never heard of the feds turning it down; there are even some states that have set up accounts to receive funds from those who feel guilty about the amount of taxes they are paying. I, for one, am not one of those.

Abortion is legal because men (mankind, for those who have feminist difficulties with English) want it to be so. All the rest is just excuses for bad behavior.

Lisa
 
One of the reasons we are in this situation today is because of abortions and use of ABC there has been a steady drop in the birth rate from the mid 60’s. There are just not enough young people to pay for through their tax dollars to pay for services needed for the aging babyboomers who aborted or prevented the current work force from ever being born:hmmm: What will happen when the final baby boomers (born 1964) are retired??? Before “the pill” one parent (usually dad) worked, most families were not rich, but they got by. Now 2 parents work bring the household income up to high, they buy, buy, buy, Mom can’t think of taking to much time off so “when the time is right” they have their 1 or 2 (usually 1) child(ren) and this results in higher cost of living and sprialing upwards till we don’t know where to go. Young people think in order to have a child they must have “everything in place” otherwise abort till the time is right, can you blame them? this is what they were taught. That’s the problem.
 
I’m a survivor of Roe vs. Wade so I don’t recall what it was like before then, personally. However, I’ve never heard anything about there being millions of unwanted babies pilling up on everyone’s porches before Roe vs. Wade, or there having to be a 15% tax to support them. :hmmm: Sound like typical liberal fear mongering to me.
 
40.png
kaymart:
One of the reasons we are in this situation today is because of abortions and use of ABC there has been a steady drop in the birth rate from the mid 60’s. There are just not enough young people to pay for through their tax dollars to pay for services needed for the aging babyboomers who aborted or prevented the current work force from ever being born:hmmm: What will happen when the final baby boomers (born 1964) are retired??? Before “the pill” one parent (usually dad) worked, most families were not rich, but they got by. Now 2 parents work bring the household income up to high, they buy, buy, buy, Mom can’t think of taking to much time off so “when the time is right” they have their 1 or 2 (usually 1) child(ren) and this results in higher cost of living and sprialing upwards till we don’t know where to go. Young people think in order to have a child they must have “everything in place” otherwise abort till the time is right, can you blame them? this is what they were taught. That’s the problem.
Click to expand...
I can tell you what will happen when the baby boomers retire, euthanasia. Poetic justice I suppose. To get back on topic, there is no reason to believe that 3/4 or even a majority of the abortions that occur are due to lack of finances. To impose, what I will call, a virtue tax is absurd.
 
40.png
she_he:
Ok, you want abortions to be outlawed, use a new fight.

the reason lawmakers are not so inclined to outlaw abortion is they have no idea where the money to support a 3/4 of a million new Babies every year will come from, try what I have heard a pro choice person say you should be willing to do if you are so set on outlawing

every person whom is a registered pro life member will have to pay 15% of thier pay to support all these unwanted babies any that are adopted will be dropped from the support system…

anyone not on the prochoice member list does not have to pay
and anyone whom is on no list is also exempt.

would you be willing to put 15% of your pay towards this,

Be honest about it this is something that could become a reality
and they would use member lists from as of Today…
Click to expand...
First of all this will never happen…

Second of all, I would never support such a thing. NEVER.
 
Believe me I am 100% pro life, however I tend to resent what you said about young marrieds. I am 22 (23 next month) and hubby will be 25 in May. we have been married over a year and I really dont like it when people ask us when we are going to have babies, like I should have one and about to have another. just because we are married doesnt mean we are ready for babies yet. Yes when we got married we were ready and tried for a long time to conceive without any luck. Then my husband was laid off, and I went from salary to commission. So he opened his business and I went back to school hoping to get our lives set up for children. right now it would be unfair of us to try and get pregnant though we are open to life. We financially can not support a baby right now and with his lay off we lost our medical benefits. We are not waiting to get everything “In its place” so to speak, we are waiting until we feel we could be good parents and provide. right now he works 60 hours a week, and I work 40 hours a week and go to school 12 hours a week at night and we still get by by the skin of our teeth, sometimes we dont and go without things for a while and that would just not be fair to a baby. I know a lot of people say well if you werent ready for kids you shouldnt have gotten married, well our status changed after we got married and it doesnt make us selfish to put off having children, and in the mean time we shouldn’t mope and pout and feel incomplete as a couple because we don’t have kids. I love my time with my husband right now and I love that we can pick up and go when we need to, but I still am desperately looking forward to motherhood, but meanwhile I am enjoying my marriage. and it doenst make others selfish to only have one or two kids, if thats all they feel that they can lovingly support and care for. thats between them and God how many children they can have and provide for. they shouldn’t be made to feel ashamed of not having children. sometimes financial, or physical or emotional problems prevent couples from having more than the “shameful” 1 or 2 and they should not be judged by that. not all couples abort, God bless’s us with how many children he wants us to have in his own perfect timing wether its 1 or 1 dozen all life is precious and there should be no gold standard of Catholicism for the number of children a couple has. OK getting off of my soap box now. Sorry Kay this was not meant to be directed at you, just at the general sentiment I spoke of in my post.

Tara
40.png
kaymart:
One of the reasons we are in this situation today is because of abortions and use of ABC there has been a steady drop in the birth rate from the mid 60’s. There are just not enough young people to pay for through their tax dollars to pay for services needed for the aging babyboomers who aborted or prevented the current work force from ever being born:hmmm: What will happen when the final baby boomers (born 1964) are retired??? Before “the pill” one parent (usually dad) worked, most families were not rich, but they got by. Now 2 parents work bring the household income up to high, they buy, buy, buy, Mom can’t think of taking to much time off so “when the time is right” they have their 1 or 2 (usually 1) child(ren) and this results in higher cost of living and sprialing upwards till we don’t know where to go. Young people think in order to have a child they must have “everything in place” otherwise abort till the time is right, can you blame them? this is what they were taught. That’s the problem.
Click to expand...
 
Assuming the premise of 15% to be adequate, and assuming that all money went to help the children; I would honestly put forth 15% of my wages towards this.

My conscience would not allow me to turn down the opportunity to save so many lives, no matter the personnal costs.

However, it would nonetheless be very unfair. It is always the honest person who pays for the thieves, and in this case, the people who respect life will pay the burden of would-be murderers.
 
40.png
DreadVandal:
I can tell you what will happen when the baby boomers retire, euthanasia. Poetic justice I suppose.
Click to expand...
He who lives by the sword, shall die by the sword.
😉
 
Tara, Please, I was not refering to someone like yourself but a generaliaztion of MY generation (I’m almost 50) I myself, had to explain why “only 3 children” with large gaps born 1978,1984 and 1988 (lost several through miscarriage, including a daughter who was my 21 year old son’s twin in the late 5th month of pregnancy) I also been unable to concieve since 1988. (complications following birth of last child). What I describe I saw first hand to many times with a lot of people ages now 40-60. I saw a lot of selfishness in the 80’s I knew a woman who aborted her baby 4 months before her big Catholic Wedding because she would “show” in her stylish wedding gown. Another married couple because they wanted to travel and enjoy aborted a baby. Your situation sounds that you are being responsible, you are not trying to have a baby but are open to life. Please, again your situation is nothing like the type of people I was refering to. Sorry if I upset you, it was not my intent, Kay
 
40.png
kaymart:
I knew a woman who aborted her baby 4 months before her big Catholic Wedding because she would “show” in her stylish wedding gown.
Click to expand...
:confused: 😦 :nope:
 
First of all, the biased tax really would be more of to dissaude people from being pro life or admiting that they are pro life. Would a highschooler who was pro life and got a job be required to pay this extra tax when he only works part time and is not living on any income to support himself?

Second of all, I do believe we need reform in our adoption and foster care system. Putting more money in it won’t solve the problem. People already know you get a stipend of money from the government if you become a foster parent, but if you become attached to a child and desire to adopt the child, you are dissuaded because the government will no longer help you to be able to pay for the child.

Then we have the problem of way too high of standards for adopting children. The standards for being a foster parent are not as high for being an adoptive parent. If you can’t adopt a child you can still become a foster parent because the government recognizes the high need for them with all the children in the system. The problem is that everything about the system dissaudes from adoption and forces the government to spend more money on children who could be adopted. Our concern for abuse is hypocritical for natural children usually get out of abusive homes at a very slow rate. The system tolerates the abuse more because of the strain on the government to make the children wards of the state. But the standards for becoming an adoptive parent are so strict I’ve heard that in some states you have to sign a statement saying that you practically won’t even use any negative reinforcement punishment on a child. I mean its one thing to not want a child to be beaten by a drunkard, but its another to say a toddler can’t get a spanking for coloring on the wall or throwing an inappropriate tantrum.

Second of all, many women who have abortions are aware that their child may end up in foster care of which has a bad reputation. Giving birth to the child means raising the child themselves. Will that mother get a stipend for not having had an abortion? How would we know which children would have been aborted?

And then there is the case that pregnancy lasts nine months, during which other children aren’t going to be conceived but can be conceived if the mother miscarries or has an abortion.

I’m all for reforming the foster care system but its reform that doesn’t require more money. Second of all, abortion does get government funding and if abortion were made illegal, what about the money already in the system?

I’m going to support a bill that actually works, not one that just puts more empty dollars into a system that is not working.
 
materialism and individualism has taken too much of a hold with in this country for this to happen.

Sad isnt it. Some one spends $3,000.00 on an flat screen TV. WHen there are mothers with children homeless with in our own country. We eat like billy goats with out regards to our health and there are 46 million people with out healthcare.

We are rapidly destroying our environment whle our children are suffering from high levels of mercury and pollution related athesma.

We need to set all our priorities straight.
 
kaymart said:
[snip]
Your situation sounds that you are being responsible, you are not trying to have a baby but are open to life. Please, again your situation is nothing like the type of people I was refering to. Sorry if I upset you, it was not my intent, Kay
Click to expand...

I second that notion. She is being responsible; waiting for a proper time to have a child so that the child can have all he/she needs. I appluad you.

On the other hand, the people kaymart is refering to are people who say they respect life, but not at the expense of their intersts like “Looking good” or “Travelling” or whatever else…

I have three children, my wife unfortunately cannot have more because after three cesections she could no longer have any. We would have wanted more, but could not.

We have never travelled together out of the country, we don’t have a fancy car, we don’t even have cable! But our children have everything they need. They, our children, are our top priority.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top