1 in 4 women have abortions? Wow.

bacha29

Well-Known Member
All of them are trouble, and should be handled by people who don't have other kids. Yes.

Bringing in a troubled-youth into your home, with your own school-aged children, is a disaster waiting to happen. There will be abuse, stalking, molestation, experimentation, and all kinds of other things. That's what happens when troubled youth get put into regular homes. I've seen it plenty of times.

We are talking about babies. There is an infinite number of couples available who will take one. They will ALL get families.
I've been told that BS about more families wanting to adopt babies than there are available babies to adopt now for decades. If that was the case then today there would be no 12-17 year old's you've branded as criminals in foster care because they would have all been adopted.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
The scenario you describe? Well, there's going to be a whole lot more of it and how much more money are you going to contribute toward their care? No we can't spend public dollars to give little Suzie 14 and at the beginning of her life who was impregnated by a family a abortion but we can spend 100K+ in public funds to give you a 60 year old and at the backend of your life a heart operation so you can go on living.
Damn, your brain replacement is failing you again. Again, the vast majority in foster care aren't there because their mother didn't get an abortion. Absurd argument.
 

UnionStrong

Sorry, but I don’t care anymore.
No, they don't. The Democratic Party is more beholden to the far Left than Republicans are to evangelicals. But the religious Right does have an important say.
The Democrat party is the left. There are no moderates left. Only one that’s pro life is a congressman in Texas, Henry Cuellar. Period
 

wilberforce15

Well-Known Member
I've been told that BS about more families wanting to adopt babies than there are available babies to adopt now for decades. If that was the case then today there would be no 12-17 year old's you've branded as criminals in foster care because they would have all been adopted.
You don't even know what foster care is.
They go into the system, often for the first time, at 8 or 10 or 12 years old when mama goes to prison, daddy is dead, etc. They were never up for adoption as babies.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
I've been told that BS about more families wanting to adopt babies than there are available babies to adopt now for decades. If that was the case then today there would be no 12-17 year old's you've branded as criminals in foster care because they would have all been adopted.
My brother was a social worker in Tennessee for several years. He went all over the state monitoring children in foster care. Those kids were there because of very troubled backgrounds. He went to court on their behalf, he supervised time when they got to see their parents. Even wrestled a very strong 16 yr old black kid to the ground once who was giving the foster care parent all kinds of grief. These kind of situations aren't going to end with overturning Roe. If so then why did we have them while Roe was in force?
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
Correct, we can spend money to save life, but not to murder.

You're starting to get it.
Of course. it was YOUR life that was saved. Not surprising. You're a conservative alright because with you it's all about "me, me me" . And once again you're dodging the question of what amount of economic support are you willing to throw into the public coffers especially as newolddude wisely pointed out we have no mandatory maternity leave law and no universal healthcare. Something you so called conservatives have been fighting viciously ever since Harry Truman proposed it in 1948.
 

newolddude

Well-Known Member
Against abortion? Don't have one.

I bet you between himself and his sons Donald Trump has paid to have more than a dozen pregnancies terminated. Both Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal said Trump never wore a condom.
 

wilberforce15

Well-Known Member
Of course. it was YOUR life that was saved. Not surprising. You're a conservative alright because with you it's all about "me, me me" . And once again you're dodging the question of what amount of economic support are you willing to throw into the public coffers especially as newolddude wisely pointed out we have no mandatory maternity leave law and no universal healthcare. Something you so called conservatives have been fighting viciously ever since Harry Truman proposed it in 1948.
I'm about everyone.

Dodging the question? I'm offering unending lifetime full support and free, first class education to any baby at risk of being murdered by his mother. There are millions of people like me offering that. Way more than the number of babies up for adoption.
 

UnionStrong

Sorry, but I don’t care anymore.
My brother was a social worker in Tennessee for several years. He went all over the state monitoring children in foster care. Those kids were there because of very troubled backgrounds. He went to court on their behalf, he supervised time when they got to see their parents. Even wrestled a very strong 16 yr old black kid to the ground once who was giving the foster care parent all kinds of grief. These kind of situations aren't going to end with overturning Roe. If so then why did we have them while Roe was in force?
I just watched I program last night where a 17 year old girl was taken in by a family, she ended up screwing the father, a real pos, and murdered the wife. 2 small girls left as orphans. Foster kids are dangerous. Especially abused ones.
 

wilberforce15

Well-Known Member
He is just one of those beta males that stands in the back while the crazy girl goes crazy, then he's he gets to bang her after
No, I was a virgin who married a virgin and then had a dozen kids, naturally and by adoption.

You know, responsible living or normal life as it was once called.
 

zubenelgenubi

I'm a star
Volunteered or conscripted to fight a war for no other reason but to maintain access to foreign source oil
I agree that conscription is evil, and using our military that way will eventually backfire.


or to walk into a classroom with an assault rifle and kill dozen of little kids or walk into a church during services and gun down attendees just because they are of a different color or worship in a different manner....is that "self defense" and morally just in your opinion?
Nope, why would you even suggest that? That's pretty crazy. Also, sticking a submersion blender into a woman's uterus and making a baby milkshake, then vacuuming it out isn't self-defense either.

Certainly seems that way in your mind's eye.
You would have to be insane to think that anything I've ever said even implied such a thing.

Your political ideology decides to seal off a woman's right to choose but won't do a damn thing to try and stop this egregious carnage .

That's a lie. I am anti-war except in direct self-defense, not even pre-emptive self-defense. The whole mass shooting thing is a direct result of lunatics trying their damnedest to strip people of the right to defend themselves. It seems your ideology is the one that promotes carnage and murder. You're projecting.
 
Top