My definition of pro-life includes caring for the poor, funding education and after school programs to keep kids out of gangs, support for affordable housing, job training, treatment for substance abuse instead of jail, fund the social services so that there are enough social workers to investigate cases of child abuse and to make sure foster home situations aren’t abusive, in other words - an all out attack on poverty because if there is one thing that leads to death and destruction, it is poverty. You can’t just dump the child on the street the moment he/she is born. We have homeless kids in this country - they live on the streets. Yet the pro-live party cuts social programs at every opportunity - if it bothers to fund them at all. Some are going to say that this isn’t government’s role. We, these are kids. They can’t help themselves, so who’s going to do it? If it isn’t government’s place to help make sure they have the basic necessities then what makes you think it’s government’s place to make sure they are born? Please understand that I am speaking very generally when I use the term pro-life movement. I am not implying that no pro-life folks care about kids, that none work to help them - and I’m certainly not talking about anyone on this forum. I’m just telling you what I see as the realities about the overall pro-life movement and the Republican’s social policies. I would have a lot more sympathy with the pro-life folks if they spent half the energy on the welfare of the born children as they do the unborn.
Do what? I’m not gonna address each issue, but when has any govt agency kicked a child out on the street? Just bursted into a shelter or whatever, " Ok, get outta here, here’s a blanket, fend for youself," to some 6 year old? Where do the parents come into play? You make it sound like there are thousands of starving kids left to wither away. I don’t see it. Any child needing help, is going to get cared for if attention is brought to him/her. No govt agency is gonna allow that to happen. Everyday children are taken from worthless parents, and given proper care. What you are describing is just not true. If that happens it is NOT the govts fault, but the parents, all they had to do was tell someone.
NO American President, party, agency is gonna allow that to happen, or have any part of it. Call me optimistic, but that is what I believe.
You mention a all out attack on poverty. For crying out loud where ya been?, President Johnson already did that in the 1960s, declaring a “war on poverty” the likes the world has NEVER seen. Price tag on his “Great Society?” From this URL
political-resources.com/misc/welfare.htm
- a quote from the URL- "Between 1965 and 1997, welfare spending cost taxpayers $6.98 Trillion (in constant 1997 dollars). After adjusting for inflation, the cost of the War on Poverty has been more than twice the price tag for defeating Germany and Japan in World War II.
“The $6.98 Trillion cost of the War on Poverty nearly equals the entire cost of the private-sector industrial and business infrastructure of the U.S. For $6.98 Trillion one could purchase every factory and all the manufacturing equipment, with enough money left over to purchase every airline, railroad, trucking firm, the entire commercial maritime fleet, every telephone, television, and radio company, every power company, every hotel, and every retail and wholesale store in the nation”
Incidentally, $6.98 Trillion would be more than enough money to give every welfare family a cash payoff of a million bucks. It would have also paid 6,980,000 skilled trade union jobs for 25 years*.
Those figures are through 1997, you can add another 10 to the numbers. Bill Moyers is NOT gonna report
that.
But here is the biggest difference in our views. I don’t want to see anyone mistreated, you and I may have different views on how to help those in need, and I fully support, taking care of those in true need. We can debate how we do that all night.
But as Catholics there can be NO debate on abortion. We all agree it is murder, and despicable. I agree with you we need to feed the hungry etc. how we go about that is open for discussion, but the morality of abortion is not. Now I ask you, how do we defeat abortion, if you are NOT willingly to do it at the polls? How do you reverse abortion, at the same time embolding a party that wants unfettered, on demand abortions the rule of the land? If you got a better idea then voting OUT enablers, we’d like to hear it.
If you’re gonna argue we need to change the hearts of people, I’ll agree with ya, but to do that you HAVE TO HAVE credibility.
Basically what you’re telling us, you’re gonna vote for a pro choice guy, because he’s gonna put X number of dollars in the food stamp program instead C?
