Obama baby boom?

Search

New member
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
7,373
Tokens
I am pro-choice....within reason (not late term unless the womans life is in danger). But....my question for you is....which of the three choices is Ron Paul?...he is against abortion. I understand the opposing viewpoint on abortion and don't think those people are stupid.

Heres a question....

Are you guys in the same ilk that is against abortion? Im extremely fiscally conservative and extremely socially liberal, so my stance on abortion is the more the merrier. Now if you say yes, you against abortion....then either you are:

1> Just a dumb partisan fucking hack, who doesnt have a clue about cause and effect

2> Just a fucking redneck who doesnt have a clue about cause and effect

3> Just like to bitch and moan, because you have nothing better to do.


What is it going to be? Because you cant have it both ways.
 

New member
Joined
Oct 22, 2006
Messages
2,123
Tokens
Ok, lets say you spade these poor woman... then what? Ill tell you what, look for AIDs to make a giant resurgence. Let me ask you this, whats more expensive, a baby or a mother with HIV? A birth costs what? 7K. Based on your data what does a mother on welfare with kids cost? Ill tell you because my GF works for the DOPW of Pennsylvania. Its about $500-600 a month. What is that 8,000 max a year? The lifetime cost of treating an HIV-positive person exceeds $400,000 and can run as high as $648,000 without discounts on antiretroviral drugs and that isnt even talking a potential transforming into AIDS, witch would cost more. Because if you "fix" these same people who dont understand the vicious cycle of unprotected sex in poverty, they will surly have even more unprotected sex and that opens a potential whole new Pandora's box. Nothing is black and white. Simply "fixing" the poor is never going to work.

I understand your point but he people who are smart enough and are NOW wearing condoms and thus not having kids are not the people I am talking about "fixing." So I don't see how there would be an increase in aids transmission. The people who are having the kids now are already the ones at high risk.

I was going off figures from someone else who posted here. I would be interested in that link because I don't have the numbers. My perspective may be skewed from a few families I know that lived in nicer apartments (due to subsidized housing)than some of my working TAX PAYING friends.

In parting, "Spade" these poor women?" lol. I know you meant "spayed" or sterilized, but I am not even suggesting that...I'm just saying people need to be be smarter and wear a freakin' condom if they are poor and opposed to abortion. But guess that's a winless battle. And I do think if you are taking public funds to supplement your income, you should be a mandatory birth CONTROL...(not sterilization)....here's your check. Here's your IUD. I
 

New member
Joined
Oct 20, 2005
Messages
9,282
Tokens
I am pro-choice....within reason (not late term unless the womans life is in danger). But....my question for you is....which of the three choices is Ron Paul?...he is against abortion. I understand the opposing viewpoint on abortion and don't think those people are stupid.


Ron Paul is an OBGYN. I think he almost has to take a moral stance on the issue IMO, but even with that said....that is one of the few policies i disagree with the man on. Ron Paul also understands that being poor is more to do then being lazy. He understands that the FED through inflation keeps pockets of poor people down just like it does to all of us to some extent. He wouldnt be making the gross exaggerations and stereotypes that was said earlier in this thread, so i think Paul gets a pass. Abortion, whether people like to admit it or not, makes things that much more sustainable here in the US. Life is for the living... those congregated cells aren't part of that until they are out of the womb. I understand your in agreement, so that comment is for the other guys in here without a clue.
 

New member
Joined
Oct 20, 2005
Messages
9,282
Tokens
I am pro-choice....within reason (not late term unless the womans life is in danger). But....my question for you is....which of the three choices is Ron Paul?...he is against abortion. I understand the opposing viewpoint on abortion and don't think those people are stupid.


My post was regarding not pro life people, it was pro life people that bitch about tax dollars getting wasted on poor people and then bitching about abortions. You see, no matter what its an endless cycle and its piling on. If you abort, they dont like it....if you have them and cant afford them, they dont like it. You dig?
 

New member
Joined
Oct 22, 2006
Messages
2,123
Tokens
My post was regarding not pro life people, it was pro life people that bitch about tax dollars getting wasted on poor people and then bitching about abortions. You see, no matter what its an endless cycle and its piling on. If you abort, they dont like it....if you have them and cant afford them, they dont like it. You dig?


Exactly and people confuse the issue. You can't be all pro BABY and act as if abortion is a tragedy and then try to cut the programs that allow the young mothers to care for the kids they would be forced to have.

***Again, FLECHISHSM (and myself) just pointing out a contradiction...****. I don't want to want to pay for people's kids, so I HAVE to be pro choice, anything else is hypocrisy******
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,809
Messages
13,573,442
Members
100,871
Latest member
Legend813
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com