D
dvdjs
Guest
Do you mean more precise?
As to reliability: confidence intervals increase with the range embraced.
- Status
As to reliability: confidence intervals increase with the range embraced.
R
robertmidwest
Guest
Why the range in your article is 200,000 to 1,200,000. No you haven’t answered that. Do you think, given these numbers, this is a reliable source?
How did the come up with an estimate of 829,000 for the U.S. out of the numbers from one state?
Do you really take this article serious?
Last edited:
R
robertmidwest
Guest
So you justify killing 3000 people a day because that’s cheaper than providing their health, education and welfare?
A
abucs
Guest
This is exactly the race baiting of the Left, with its irrational emotional bullying which causes division.
Last edited:
R
robertmidwest
Guest
Again abortion kills minority babies at a much higher rate than white babies.
A wall is an inanimate object. It is concrete and steel. It will stop people regardless race, creed, religion, sexual orientation.
Abortion targets minorities and the disabled. You have no argument here
Last edited:
R
robertmidwest
Guest
Seriously, I have already done that. See posts 6 and 13.
We kill 3000 human babies a day in the U.S.
Minority babies die at a significantly higher rate than white babies. (It is arguable that that is by design.)
Legalized abortion is not acceptable.
R
robertmidwest
Guest
P
Peeps
Guest
So the poor should kill their children?
My mother came from a poor white trash family in the South (U.S.) who all picked cotton alongside African Americans to make a little money.
Mom had ten siblings. Her “father” was a drunk who beat his wife and children and did no work. He was so abusive that one night, the Ku Klux Klan knocked on their door and told him, a white man, to stop hurting his wife and children, or else…
When the boys in the family were old enough (older teenagers), they physically threw their father out of the house and threatened to kill him if he ever came back.
Would her family have been better off without eleven children? NO!
My mother and her brothers and sisters were close all of their lives, and my brother and I had the privilege of knowing some great aunts, uncles, and cousins. All of the boys in the family who were old enough served in WWII, and one of them was career Navy. ALL of these siblings were successful in life–not rich or famous, but employed, involved in church, non-addicted, and happy.
Last edited:
F
F_Marturana
Guest
Off topic on my part, but that story would make an interesting film or book. Overcoming an abusive and poor background would be an inspiring story.
R
robertmidwest
Guest
That seems to be the gist of the argument.
P
Peeps
Guest
I’m not saying that fj2020 has chosen to believe in evil, but it’s really super easy to go down that path when someone is willing to allow humanitarian-sounding exceptions for even one abortion.
ALL abortion is evil, all of it.
It’s also very likely that fj2020 intended to suggest that the poor use some kind of family planning. I can certainly agree with that, and the Catholic Church does allow for NFP to delay or space the conception of children for a grave reason (poverty, homelessness, etc.). But the comment was made in the context of a discussion about abortion.
Also, one of the dangers of handing the poor a box of condoms or a script for the Pill or an IUD is that if abortion is an allowable option, many women will use that option because “I was having safe, responsible sex and I wasn’t supposed to get pregnant, but the birth control failed!”
Interestingly, many poor do NOT choose abortion, at least, the statistics in the past demonstrated this. However, in recent years, it seems that many of these stats have changed as many foolish women in leadership roles, or who are show business celebrities, speak out about “a woman’s right to choose.” This phrase takes the “child” out of the discussion, and makes it strictly about women’s rights.
Just yesterday, one of our local newspaper columnists, a woman, wrote a column about the wonder and joy of finally having her baby. This same woman is also an activist for abortion rights. It’s unbelievable that she is blinded to her own hypocrisy. But again, once we make even one exception for abortion, we start down a dark path, and blindness to blatant evil is the result.
Last edited:
R
robertmidwest
Guest
Do you have some evidence they’re not? Do you mean government programs?
R
robertmidwest
Guest
So you are talking about govt programs.
P
Peeps
Guest
robertmidwest beat me to it by mentioning “government programs.”
Many of us who are pro-life and older have seen over the years the failure of government programs to help people escape from poverty.
Many of these government programs give out food that is starchy, sugary, and fatty–white flour, white sugar, cheese, etc One of the reasons why obesity among African Americans is so prevalent is that many of them have eaten this “government cheese” for years.
Also, many of the government programs cut back on the aid as soon as the recipient gets a job. This is sad, because people often don’t make enough money at job to pay for much food, so sometimes, it’s more sensible to NOT find a job so that you can continue to receive aid.
IMO, private organizations and individuals do the best job of helping the poor. Our local rescue mission doesn’t receive government monies, but it has a long string of success stories–people who have been raised out of poverty and addiction with the very practical and well-researched program of recovery available to them through the rescue mission.
Many women in our city belong to an organization that helps them to escape abusive situations, get an education and job training, find gainful employment, and live productive, happy lives. This organization receives donations from a wide range of churches and people; both liberal and conservative organizations and people feel comfortable giving money and volunteering their time there.
One amazing organization in our city was started by one woman who lived in a pretty tough neighborhood, and received visits from neighborhood children who hadn’t had any breakfast or supper because their parents are on drugs, or drunk, or just gone. This woman found herself feeding dozens of children and teenagers, and giving them blankets, clothing, and also helping them with homework, playing games with them, and just talking.
She eventually rented an empty storefront near the neighborhood so that she would have more space. People started hearing about her work and started donating food, McDonald’s gift cards (apparently many poor children consider a meal at McDonalds the ultimate treat!), blankets, games, etc. Every child or teen who comes to her shelter receives not only a hot supper, but also a packet of food and snacks so that the child will have a breakfast and lunch even if their parents are “not available.”
This year, the organization moved into an even bigger storefront , and a private benefactor paid the entire mortgage on the building (they asked not to be made public), so the lady no longer has to make fundraising appeals to pay rent, but can concentrate on the needs of the 200 children who come to her shelter every day.
cont. next post
Last edited:
P
Peeps
Guest
cont. from last post
And this summer, one woman and a friend started feeding “extreme homeless” people (the ones who refuse to go into a rescue mission for help) in her home. A neighbor complained that this was against city codes, and the case came to the City Council. Keep in mind that this neighborhood is one of the most dangerous and impoverished in our city, and “code” doesn’t really matter much. The public took the side of the woman, and eventually the city council awarded her a special permit to continue her charitable work. She is amazing–and other than the permit, receives no government aid.
These are just a few examples of how non-government organizations and individuals can do a lot more good than expensive government programs.
And this summer, one woman and a friend started feeding “extreme homeless” people (the ones who refuse to go into a rescue mission for help) in her home. A neighbor complained that this was against city codes, and the case came to the City Council. Keep in mind that this neighborhood is one of the most dangerous and impoverished in our city, and “code” doesn’t really matter much. The public took the side of the woman, and eventually the city council awarded her a special permit to continue her charitable work. She is amazing–and other than the permit, receives no government aid.
These are just a few examples of how non-government organizations and individuals can do a lot more good than expensive government programs.
Last edited:
R
robertmidwest
Guest
P
Peeps
Guest
Think about it this way–when the government “helps” people, the rest of us don’t have to help. We just send off our tax check and never see anyone in need, never have to give money, provide meals or shelter, care for children, volunteer to build a house, etc. The government does all that!
I don’t like that system. I think the CHURCHES and other charitable organizations should be doing the work of caring for the sick and elderly, educating children, providing safe shelter, feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting and befriending the prisoners, standing alongside the addicted who are trying to break free, etc.
I think the best way the government can help the poor and others in need would be to STOP TAKING OUR MONEY AWAY FROM US so that we don’t have to spend so much time working to earn enough money to have our basic needs met and have money and TIME left over to help others! I would like to see the government go back to doing what the Constitution says it should be doing.
I don’t like that system. I think the CHURCHES and other charitable organizations should be doing the work of caring for the sick and elderly, educating children, providing safe shelter, feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting and befriending the prisoners, standing alongside the addicted who are trying to break free, etc.
I think the best way the government can help the poor and others in need would be to STOP TAKING OUR MONEY AWAY FROM US so that we don’t have to spend so much time working to earn enough money to have our basic needs met and have money and TIME left over to help others! I would like to see the government go back to doing what the Constitution says it should be doing.
R
robertmidwest
Guest
- Status