Yet Another anti-abortion march on Washington.

[Ms Tree]

So when Sally and Billy bump nasties in the back seat and sally gets a bun in the oven, what happens to the child that neither want? Are you going to adopt it?

 

[SparrowHawk]

So when Sally and Billy bump nasties in the back seat and sally gets a bun in the oven, what happens to the child that neither want? Are you going to adopt it?

Nope! Individual Liberty means Individual Responsibility. In a truely free society Sally & Billy could sell their little bastard to the highest bidder. Why should you or I pay for the mistakes of another?

 

[Ms Tree]

Like I asked before., can we deal with the reality live in. The sale of humans will not be happening in the near future in the US. So when personal responsibility breaks down and SLy has a kid that she cannot or will not raise what do you want to do?

So far no one here has said anything. The GOP does not like sex ed because they think it encourages sex. Same for contraceptive. Never mind that we have the highest even pregnancy of any western nation and most nations have sex ed and actually deal with the issue.

So what have you got?

 

[SparrowHawk]

The fear of starvation and homelessness is a powerful motivator. Also the kid can be placed for adoption at any time. It can also be confiscated by the state and put up for adoption and the woman sent to prison for neglect.

 

[KCFlyer]

The fear of starvation and homelessness is a powerful motivator. Also the kid can be placed for adoption at any time. It can also be confiscated by the state and put up for adoption and the woman sent to prison for neglect.

How many teenage boys copping a feel of that garden of delight in dads back seat are going to be thinking starvation and homelessness? Get real.

 

[Ms Tree]

So you want the state to step in after the fact to try and care for the child instead of trying to prevent the birth in the first place?

 

[KCFlyer]

So you want the state to step in after the fact to try and care for the child instead of trying to prevent the birth in the first place?

No, a Libertarian would not want the state to provide birth control OR food assistance.

 

[SparrowHawk]

So you want the state to step in after the fact to try and care for the child instead of trying to prevent the birth in the first place?

Frankly in a case like this the state has to step in to an extent. The federal government should have no role beyond creating an environment where charitable giving is encouraged through bully pulpit and tax code.

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

Paulbots would not exist if were not for him feeding at the government trough for so many years. He brought home the pork to Galveston and his district better than many in a Texas.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Paulbots would not exist if were not for him feeding at the government trough for so many years. He brought home the pork to Galveston and his district better than many in a Texas.

You are absolutely correct. Ron Paul has been confronted on this several times that I'm aware of. He is one of few who will openly concede to going after pork projects. In fact he supports the concept to a point. He has pointed out that he feels it proper to ensure that he get as much money back in the way of projects as the people in his district pay in taxes.

I'm not crazy about his position but I do understand it.

 

[Ms Tree]

Frankly in a case like this the state has to step in to an extent. The federal government should have no role beyond creating an environment where charitable giving is encouraged through bully pulpit and tax code.

What's that mean in plain American?

Personally I would rather try and prevent the pregnancy in the first place. Being proactive is far more cost effective than reactive.

The cost will be far less to the tax payer to have sex ed in school and free contraception and even an abortion rather than have a bunch of kids rely on the tax payer for room, board and education.

 

[Ms Tree]

You are absolutely correct. Ron Paul has been confronted on this several times that I'm aware of. He is one of few who will openly concede to going after pork projects. In fact he supports the concept to a point. He has pointed out that he feels it proper to ensure that he get as much money back in the way of projects as the people in his district pay in taxes.

I'm not crazy about his position but I do understand it.

What is his position on other peoples pork (taxes)?

 

[KCFlyer]

That's easy tree.."Pork" and "Wasteful spending" are identiacal projects in a different state.

 

[Ms Tree]

That's the rub. Christy went off on some members of Congress who voted for aid for their own states and then changed their 'standards' when they were voting on aid for other states.

 

[SparrowHawk]

That's easy tree.."Pork" and "Wasteful spending" are identiacal projects in a different state.

It goes a whole lot deeper then that KC.

What Dr Paul has done is to NEVER vote in favor of a tax increase during his career. EVER. He also NEVER took Medicaid reimbursement as a Physician.