"Pro-Lifers are Hypocrites"

[1cthlctrth]

Correct. Those on the Left want to outlaw private, free-market health insurance.
Government-controlled healthcare decreases efficiency in treating illness, increases wait times, and decreases options and choice.

 

[HarryStotle]

This is along the right track but its more akin to freeing the slaves by tossing them over the ship halfway across the Atlantic.

This sounds perilously close to your advocacy for abortion. That would be freeing the woman “enslaved” to a pregnancy by throwing the unborn child overboard at some point on the journey to delivery.

Why don’t you lobby for a law that states every childless couple MUST adopt an unwanted baby from a pregnant woman? THEN make abortion illegal. Why not? In all seriousness, I could accept that rather than just making it illegal without any plan and support for the mothers.

The only reason this sounds halfway credible is that the liberal leftists have largely succeeded in throwing individual moral responsibility overboard.

To someone – such as yourself – who believes human beings are incapable of moral responsibility and that some other entity – government, society, charitable organizations, etc., – must necessarily pick up the pieces of the abdication of morality by otherwise competent and capable human beings, your argument has an aura of plausibility about it.

It is never the responsibility of an adult woman or man that their behaviour has led to the creation of a new human being. Where sex is concerned, adult human beings – according to liberal progressives – cannot be held accountable for the life they have created. Their so called free “choice” in that event was not theirs. However, after the conception, they suddenly have acquired the infinite capacity for making a free choice regarding killing the unborn.

So, the pair in question are completely incapable of a free moral choice in the creation of a child, but are suddenly endowed with the infinite capacity to freely choose the death of the child, after the fact. Sounds consistent, morally speaking [/sarc].

If they are INCAPABLE of being morally responsible regarding when and where to have sex, why are they suddenly granted full MORAL REIN to determine the fate of the unborn child in their choice to kill him/her?

Riddle me that?

Continued…

 

[HarryStotle]

I mean, how can you cut food stamps and make abortion illegal? I don’t get it.
This whole “Government shouldn’t do it” thing is, to be honest, an embarrassment. I really would like to see the people in this forum go hungry or lose their healthcare and then maintain how the government should still not help them.

I would be all in favour of the government using all of the funds (hundreds of millions of dollars) currently allocated to funding abortion, towards supporting pre- and post-natal care. And you?

The crux of the issue, however, goes back to how you and I view human nature differently. You appear to infantilize humans, morally speaking, by assuming moral choices are too difficult for human beings. Humans, according to you, ought to be alleviated of all moral responsibility and the government (or society) should take on the burden of all consequences resulting from the moral failures of individuals. Pregnancy and childbirth, as you see it, shouldn’t be a burden borne by human adults because such expectations are too much for individuals. Everyone else is to be held responsible for the failings of individuals, not the individuals themselves.

This is why you are anti-Republican and cannot comprehend the traditional conservative position, founded as it is on individual human responsibility.

The problem is that if we as individuals cannot be responsible for our actions, then neither can a collective made up of such incapable human beings?

The secondary aspect of your problem is that you want to hold pro-life individuals responsible for what they do but not hold pro-choice individuals responsible for what they do. In fact, you want to hold pro-life individuals responsible for what sexually active pro-choice individuals have brought about. Vicarious responsibility?

Bottom line: A unique human being is created at conception. The couple who were responsible for bringing that human being into existence bear a unique responsibility for that new individual human being. We will never have a properly functioning moral society until each of us understand that, and are willing to bear the moral responsibility for what we do as individual moral agents. Excusing moral failure, or pretending being morally responsible is beyond our capacities will only lead, in the long run, to a more compromised and dysfunctional society. That isn’t progressive in any sense of the word, although it is regressive

 

[openmind77]

would be all in favour of the government using all of the funds (hundreds of millions of dollars) currently allocated to funding abortion, towards supporting pre- and post-natal care. And you?

I don’t think hundreds of millions of government money is used to fund abortions. The Hyde amendment specifically prohibits federal money for abortion except to save the mother’s life or in cases of rape/incest.

 

[blackforest]

I believe @HarryStotle is Canadian - different situation there.

 

[openmind77]

I believe @HarryStotle is Canadian - different situation there.

In Canada they already fund food for the poor and children and pre- and post-natal care pretty well, so the question does not even arise there about moving any funds.

 

[Sbee0]

I believe @HarryStotle is Canadian - different situation there.

Sort of off topic - Canada is also different when it comes to the concept of liberty and freedom. In America there is the idea that one has intrinsic built in rights and liberties. In Canada it’s very different - you have no rights other than what government explicitly gives you through their Constitution, part of which is a document called their “Charter of Rights”.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

would be all in favour of the government using all of the funds (hundreds of millions of dollars) currently allocated to funding abortion, towards supporting pre- and post-natal care. And you?

I don’t think hundreds of millions of government money is used to fund abortions. The Hyde amendment specifically prohibits federal money for abortion except to save the mother’s life or in cases of rape/incest.

Planned Parenthood is funded to the tune of well over half a billion dollars per year by the federal government. PP’s main corporate goal is to provide abortions, and any supposed “health care” provided to women furthers that goal. I am speaking specifically about defunding PP and moving that money to organizations that support women giving birth and caring for themselves and their child, not killing the child under the deceptive euphemism of women’s health.

Let’s stop the pretense.

 

[openmind77]

openmind77:

HarryStotle:

would be all in favour of the government using all of the funds (hundreds of millions of dollars) currently allocated to funding abortion, towards supporting pre- and post-natal care. And you?

I don’t think hundreds of millions of government money is used to fund abortions. The Hyde amendment specifically prohibits federal money for abortion except to save the mother’s life or in cases of rape/incest.

Planned Parenthood is funded to the tune of well over half a billion dollars per year by the federal government. PP’s main corporate goal is to provide abortions, and any supposed “health care” provided to women furthers that goal. I am speaking specifically about defunding PP and moving that money to organizations that support women giving birth and caring for themselves and their child, not killing the child under the deceptive euphemism of women’s health.

Let’s stop the pretense.

PP is very careful not to use federal funds for abortion services. If someone thinks they don’t, then Trump’s DOJ should sue them (should be easy now that Mr. Barr is in charge).

 

[goout]

False.
Does PP receive federal funds?
Yes.
What is the predominant procedure offered by PP?
Abortion.
Could PP continue to exist and offer abortions without federal funds?
No.

It’s a shell game. I am surprised that you are in favor of corporate welfare. Seems unbecoming for someone with a well developed social conscience.

 

[Shasta-Rose]

Was posting a longer reply but our cable system went out temporarily. But basically I agree, mainly based on my own experience back many decades ago. When I once thought I was pregnant and had no place to go, I was panicked and suicidal. Keeping long story short, I found that I wasn’t pregnant. But I remember the terror like it was yesterday.

 

[blackforest]

Technically they’re a non-profit and not a corporation.

But it’s their entitlement complex that gets me. If they don’t get their taxpayer money, there’s a “war on women.”

I’ve worked in the non-profit sector and been turned down for federal grants. But I’m not wealthy and influential enough to run a PR campaign about a “war on the homeless.”

 

[goout]

Technically they’re a non-profit and not a corporation.

But it’s their entitlement complex that gets me. If they don’t get their taxpayer money, there’s a “war on women.”

I’ve worked in the non-profit sector and been turned down for federal grants. But I’m not wealthy and influential enough to run a PR campaign about a “war on the homeless.”

Planned Parenthood is a non-profit 501c3 corporation.
Non profit basically means the corporate structure does not realize profit from it’s operations. It’s much more complicated than that and it would take a cpa to really explain how the revenues are distributed in a non profit.

PP receives corporate welfare just like all the other corporations.
PP’s main business is abortion.

I’m not sure how PP supporters can justify PP receiving corporate welfare when people are starving and young people can’t afford college.
Seems like hypocrisy.

 

[blackforest]

Planned Parenthood is a non-profit 501c3 corporation .

Fair enough.

I’m not sure how PP supporters can justify PP receiving corporate welfare when people are starving and young people can’t afford college.
Seems like hypocrisy.

Easy. They’re killing them off first. In utero. (Insert tongue in cheek )

 

[goout]

goout:

Planned Parenthood is a non-profit 501c3 corporation .

Fair enough.

I’m not sure how PP supporters can justify PP receiving corporate welfare when people are starving and young people can’t afford college.
Seems like hypocrisy.

Easy. They’re killing them off first. In utero. (Insert tongue in cheek )

Yes, as if the solution to the problems of life is death.

The pro-abort philosophy is patently absurd.

 

[Shasta-Rose]

Maybe my experience isn’t as relevant anymore, since it was before abortion was legalized. I have never been pregnant, but once, back in that time, I thought I was and could have been. I was working in town, supporting myself, and I was so panicked. I would have lost my job. I didn’t have any relatives who would help me for the duration of a pregnancy. I didn’t have funds to keep myself the whole time. I couldn’t lose my apartment–I had no place else to go. (Trying to keep this story short.) This all was maybe a couple of months before abortion was legalized. My Dr. was a caring guy, and back then, they might help a girl out of a fix, if they thought there was evidence that she was unfit in some way to be a mother. I gave him some evidence along that line. I had nowhere to turn, no means, no options. . . . I was so terrified and panicked. . . . I wouldn’t put my worst enemy through what I went through then. Anticlimax–turns out I wasn’t pregnant, just very late.

So I can appreciate the absolute terror that some single women may go through. Course, we don’t have the stigma today of not being married. Still, I wouldn’t put anybody through what I went through.

 

[blackforest]

Maybe my experience isn’t as relevant anymore, since it was before abortion was legalized.

No, I think it’s still relevant. Women still face circumstances similar to yours.

So I can appreciate the absolute terror that some single women may go through. Course, we don’t have the stigma today of not being married. Still, I wouldn’t put anybody through what I went through.

I wouldn’t put any woman through an abortion, either. When society paints women into a corner, forcing them to choose between abortion and poverty, then it doesn’t treat women well.

I’ve never liked the whole “choice” framing for this reason. It reduces a horrible, painful situation into shallow, consumerist rhetoric. We’re not talking about choosing Coke or Pepsi. Abortion all too often is a circumstantially coerced choice, not a free one.

That’s why I’m a member of Feminists for Life; they do a great job at addressing this angle of the abortion issue.

 

[JanetF]

Just because some voters don’t want the government to run everything doesn’t mean they don’t support the above list. This is how liberals attack conservatives. They claim conservatives are against programs but never seem to realize there is more than one way to support a program.

THis!!! I don’t trust the government to tackle these problems with any sort of efficiency. Charitable organizations have much better track records.

 

[JanetF]

Maybe my experience isn’t as relevant anymore, since it was before abortion was legalized. I have never been pregnant, but once, back in that time, I thought I was and could have been. I was working in town, supporting myself, and I was so panicked. I would have lost my job. I didn’t have any relatives who would help me for the duration of a pregnancy. I didn’t have funds to keep myself the whole time. I couldn’t lose my apartment–I had no place else to go. (Trying to keep this story short.) This all was maybe a couple of months before abortion was legalized. My Dr. was a caring guy, and back then, they might help a girl out of a fix, if they thought there was evidence that she was unfit in some way to be a mother. I gave him some evidence along that line. I had nowhere to turn, no means, no options. . . . I was so terrified and panicked. . . . I wouldn’t put my worst enemy through what I went through then. Anticlimax–turns out I wasn’t pregnant, just very late.

I think your experience is still relevant. Many women are faced with unplanned pregnancy and simply don’t know where to turn. We need to educate people about the various resources available to young women who are faced with unplanned pregnancy (other than abortion). Doctors offices need to be littered with literature about free clinics, crisis pregnancy centers, catholic charities, etc. The resources are out there, one just has to be informed.

 

[Cirdan_XII]

PP receives corporate welfare just like all the other corporations.
PP’s main business is abortion.

yes, and PP was a major campiagn contributor for Hillary Clinton.

I would have thought that any organisation accepting corporate welfare should be politically neutral. to avoid, you know, laundering public money for campaign faunds.