Americas ..10..BEST states for Quality of Life.....(C N B C )
- Thread starter NewHampshire Black Bears
- Start date
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,988
- 9,428
If we can help feed, house, and provide emergency room healthcare for the children of 11 million illegal aliens, countless working poor, and second/third/fourth generation career welfare recipients, then I think we can manage a couple thousand additional children -if- they're carried to term...
CBO has estimated that if HR1797 were passed, most of the current 11,000 late term abortions performed annually would be done earlier, and only perhaps 3,000 would wind up being carried to term against the mother's will.
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/hr1797.pdf
So... I've answered your questions and then some.
How do -you- justify infanticide? Or are you more comfortable saying termination of a pain-capable in utero life form?
Back to Glenn's comment... Arguably, this "side trip" has everything to do with the topic... Quality of Life.
CBO has estimated that if HR1797 were passed, most of the current 11,000 late term abortions performed annually would be done earlier, and only perhaps 3,000 would wind up being carried to term against the mother's will.
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/hr1797.pdf
So... I've answered your questions and then some.
How do -you- justify infanticide? Or are you more comfortable saying termination of a pain-capable in utero life form?
Back to Glenn's comment... Arguably, this "side trip" has everything to do with the topic... Quality of Life.
Ms Tree
Veteran
- Jul 13, 2010
- 9,731
- 9,025
You have not answered crap and you know it. You think providing aid to a family to help a child is the same as taking the child in as a ward of the state from birth to 23 or so? I always thought you were a bit smarter than that. By the way there are over 1 million abortions a year in the US. Would it not be cheaper to try and prevent the pregnancies in the first place? Nah. A conservative would never think that would would work.
So the bottom line is that you have no issue dictating what a woman may do with her own body but will do nothing to help prevent the unwanted pregnancies in the first place. You have latched on the the 20 week dead line as if it is some sort of magic number. Before the fetus is 20 weeks, OK, after 20 weeks... Not OK even though there is no agreed upon science that indicates 20 weeks is some sort of milestone.
You can call it 'murder of an unborn child' for all I care. I believe a woman must have absolute control over her body.
So the bottom line is that you have no issue dictating what a woman may do with her own body but will do nothing to help prevent the unwanted pregnancies in the first place. You have latched on the the 20 week dead line as if it is some sort of magic number. Before the fetus is 20 weeks, OK, after 20 weeks... Not OK even though there is no agreed upon science that indicates 20 weeks is some sort of milestone.
You can call it 'murder of an unborn child' for all I care. I believe a woman must have absolute control over her body.
delldude
Veteran
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,988
- 9,428
No, I've answered and you simply don't like the answer.
Agreed. Not worth arguing with a woman (or a liberal) when she's(they're) wrong. Done.
Ms Tree
Veteran
- Jul 13, 2010
- 9,731
- 9,025
You never answered the question of what ideas you have to prevent pregnancies in the first place. You have come up with have baked excuses and guess for some other things but the primary question remains unanswered. So you are going to cut and run yet again. Typical MO for you Eric.You bring up abortion in post #20 and then try and pin it on me? How exactly does that work?
delldude
Veteran
southwind
Veteran
Similar threads
