Pro-lifers cannot have it both ways

[Dragonlady]

Where are armed guards in our schools?

Every school shooting they make excuses for why the armed officers on site did nothing. See Parkland, Uvalde, and every other school shooting since Newtown.

Armed campus police do not prevent school shootings, research shows - Poynter

Multiple studies have found no association between the presence of armed officers in schools and the deterrence of violence.

www.poynter.org

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Every school shooting they make excuses for why the armed officers on site did nothing. See Parkland, Uvalde, and every other school shooting since Newtown.

Armed campus police do not prevent school shootings, research shows - Poynter

Multiple studies have found no association between the presence of armed officers in schools and the deterrence of violence.

www.poynter.org

You offer a lot of criticism but no solutions.

 

[Imnukingfutz]

They can’t tell an impoverished pregnant woman she has to carry the baby to term and then not have her kids receive any government benefits like SNAP after they are born.

Now the automatic response to this is always “well should have never gotten pregnant!”

Uh yeah no shit. Here’s the issue though: the kids exist. They exist right? Should they starve because of something their mom did? Probably not right? You guys get so caught up in shaming the woman that you forget why they get SNAP in the first place. The benefits they get is a small fraction of the full cost to raise a kid every year therefore it’s ridiculous to suggest the mom is profiting off of having kids.

Now some republicans’ fascist solution to this is to force the mom to put the kids up for adoption. Well that’s obviously a stupid idea. It’s not like people are lining up to adopt the kids huh? Meanwhile such a foster system would cost the government an astronomical amount of money per year. Far more than the cost of SNAP.

Do republicans realize how insane it is to suggest a ludicrous idea like this just so that mere PENNIES will not be taken out of their OWN paychecks to pay for this program?

Yeah really Christian of you guys! Jesus would be proud.

Abortion is legal, if she wanted to end the pregnancy, she could have. In as far as adoption, that is always an option. Choose the agency very carefully.
For the 1st year of the Childs life, if they are on assistance, the child's formula and nutritional needs would be covered under WIC (Women, infants and children) no need for SNAP yet for the child until 1 year.
In the mean time, the child, if on assistance, is covered by Medicaid, welfare, maybe even Sect. 8 housing.
And mere PENNIES in taxation may be the breaking point of some families who are struggling to make ends meet already.
I fail to see the need to double cover infants with redundant programs when 1 will suffice.

 

[Dragonlady]

You offer a lot of criticism but no solutions.

We posted the solution numerous times but you don't want to stop selling high capacity, high speed weapons to crazy people, criminals, or anyone really. You own 46% of all of the guns in the W0RLD, and your solution to daily mass shootings in the USA is M0RE GUNS.

 

[Dragonlady]

Abortion is legal, if she wanted to end the pregnancy, she could have. In as far as adoption, that is always an option. Choose the agency very carefully.
For the 1st year of the Childs life, if they are on assistance, the child's formula and nutritional needs would be covered under WIC (Women, infants and children) no need for SNAP yet for the child until 1 year.
In the mean time, the child, if on assistance, is covered by Medicaid, welfare, maybe even Sect. 8 housing.
And mere PENNIES in taxation may be the breaking point of some families who are struggling to make ends meet already.
I fail to see the need to double cover infants with redundant programs when 1 will suffice.

You assume that the woman realized that she was pregnant in time to get an abortion, or that she lives in a state where abortion is readily available. That she has the resources to obtain the mandatory tests and counselling, sit out the waiting periods, and time off work to get abortion.

Adoption is not "always an option". The woman can ill afford to lose her job if she already has children to provide for. 75% of all women who get abortions are poor or living just above the poverty line. They don't have medical insurance to cover the pregnancy or delivery expenses, so even carrying the baby to term is a problem. Last but not least, there are lots and lots of minority babies already waiting for "forever" homes, and few homes to place them.

No need for SNAP during the first year of life???? What's the mother supposed to eat??? Her nutritional needs INCREASE in order to produce a healthy supply of milk.

You see no need to increase assistance to women after you force them to have a child. You have no interest in the quality of the "life" you've forced on both of them simply by your insistence that this child has more of a right to a decent life than it's mother or other siblings.

That's just how stupid right wingers really are about abortion. Better the child be born into poverty, instability and squallor, than to give this woman and her children the opportunity to determine their own lives.

I can't imagine why you think any of this is good policy for the nation.

 

[Imnukingfutz]

You assume that the woman realized that she was pregnant in time to get an abortion, or that she lives in a state where abortion is readily available. That she has the resources to obtain the mandatory tests and counselling, sit out the waiting periods, and time off work to get abortion.

Adoption is not "always an option". The woman can ill afford to lose her job if she already has children to provide for. 75% of all women who get abortions are poor or living just above the poverty line. They don't have medical insurance to cover the pregnancy or delivery expenses, so even carrying the baby to term is a problem. Last but not least, there are lots and lots of minority babies already waiting for "forever" homes, and few homes to place them.

No need for SNAP during the first year of life???? What's the mother supposed to eat??? Her nutritional needs INCREASE in order to produce a healthy supply of milk.

You see no need to increase assistance to women after you force them to have a child. You have no interest in the quality of the "life" you've forced on both of them simply by your insistence that this child has more of a right to a decent life than it's mother or other siblings.

That's just how stupid right wingers really are about abortion. Better the child be born into poverty, instability and squallor, than to give this woman and her children the opportunity to determine their own lives.

I can't imagine why you think any of this is good policy for the nation.

You assume the woman doesnt know she is pregnant.
You assume she doesnt have the means.
You assume she lives in a state where abortion isnt legal.
You assume she doesnt have medical insurance.
A lot of assumptions to base your position.

I do not understand your point when you said "Adoption is not "always an option". The woman can ill afford to lose her job..." - I didnt know adoption gets people fired. Please clarify that.

W.I.C. stands for Women, Infants and Children. It covers the additional needs of the woman after childbirth including vitamins and supplements. If she is already on SNAP, this is in addition. If she is NOT already on SNAP, WIC is the supplement. And if the woman qualifies for SNAP, she should already be enrolled before the baby arrives anyway.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Bullshit, your party wants abortion up to conception.

Not bullshit in any way. Just the inconvenient facts you don’t want to hear.
A very small percentage of abortions are done late term and of those most are medically necessary.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Arm school teacher's.

Pay them double then for that additional skill and the associated risks.

 

[Dragonlady]

You assume the woman doesnt know she is pregnant.
You assume she doesnt have the means.
You assume she lives in a state where abortion isnt legal.
You assume she doesnt have medical insurance.
A lot of assumptions to base your position.

I do not understand your point when you said "Adoption is not "always an option". The woman can ill afford to lose her job..." - I didnt know adoption gets people fired. Please clarify that.

W.I.C. stands for Women, Infants and Children. It covers the additional needs of the woman after childbirth including vitamins and supplements. If she is already on SNAP, this is in addition. If she is NOT already on SNAP, WIC is the supplement. And if the woman qualifies for SNAP, she should already be enrolled before the baby arrives anyway.

I make no assumptions other than a woman who is pregnant has the right to choose what happens with that pregnancy, based on HER religious beliefs, HER family situation, and HER ability to carry this child to term, and having the resources to give him/her a decent life.

No one has the right ever mentions the fact that 20 years after Roe, the crime rate in the USA dropped by 10%, and continued to drop by 1% per year for the next 5 years. How many lives has that simple statistic saved?

None of your abortion policies make any sense at all. You keep saying that's its irresponsible to have more children than you can afford, but you can't have an abortion if you decide that you can't carry this pregnancy to term.

If you need financial help with feeding or housing this child you're forced to have, no fucking way. It's not our kid.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You assume that the woman realized that she was pregnant in time to get an abortion, or that she lives in a state where abortion is readily available. That she has the resources to obtain the mandatory tests and counselling, sit out the waiting periods, and time off work to get abortion.

Adoption is not "always an option". The woman can ill afford to lose her job if she already has children to provide for. 75% of all women who get abortions are poor or living just above the poverty line. They don't have medical insurance to cover the pregnancy or delivery expenses, so even carrying the baby to term is a problem. Last but not least, there are lots and lots of minority babies already waiting for "forever" homes, and few homes to place them.

No need for SNAP during the first year of life???? What's the mother supposed to eat??? Her nutritional needs INCREASE in order to produce a healthy supply of milk.

You see no need to increase assistance to women after you force them to have a child. You have no interest in the quality of the "life" you've forced on both of them simply by your insistence that this child has more of a right to a decent life than it's mother or other siblings.

That's just how stupid right wingers really are about abortion. Better the child be born into poverty, instability and squallor, than to give this woman and her children the opportunity to determine their own lives.

I can't imagine why you think any of this is good policy for the nation.

Better she keeps her legs closed or work for an hour or two at McDonald's for birth control pills. Nah, how could that ever work?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

We posted the solution numerous times but you don't want to stop selling high capacity, high speed weapons to crazy people, criminals, or anyone really. You own 46% of all of the guns in the W0RLD, and your solution to daily mass shootings in the USA is M0RE GUNS.

And again, what is your solution, do disarm the entire public? You're never going to be able to stop criminals from getting guns if they want them. That's what you commies don't understand. If you can tell us a way to do that, let us know because the bad guys are getting drugs in record numbers in this country and killing themselves or other people with them.

 

[Billy000]

Better she keeps her legs closed or work for an hour or two at McDonald's for birth control pills. Nah, how could that ever work?

What if the birth control pills fail because that is a thing that actually happens?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What if the birth control pills fail because that is a thing that actually happens?

Rarely, but that's not the case with most women that get abortions. It's simply being irresponsible.

 

[Billy000]

Rarely, but that's not the case with most women that get abortions. It's simply being irresponsible.

Most women huh? That’s based on what exactly?

 

[Unkotare]

.....

No one has the right ever mentions the fact that 20 years after Roe, the crime rate in the USA dropped by 10%, and continued to drop by 1% per year for the next 5 years. How many lives has that simple statistic saved?
....

The far left's "solution" to everything: "KILL! KILL! KILL!"

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

What if the birth control pills fail because that is a thing that actually happens?

Who gives a shit? No contraception is fool proof, none is 100% effective all the time.

Unless you are sterile, exclusively homosexual, or abstinent / asexual, you might make kids and you know that and choose to have sex anyway. Congrats, mom. Now take care of your kid.

 

[Unkotare]

Who gives a shit? No contraception is fool proof, none is 100% effective all the time.

...

One is.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

I make no assumptions other than a woman who is pregnant has the right to choose what happens with that pregnancy

Bad assumption, as there is no possibility that is the case.

based on HER religious beliefs

If a religion tells you that it is okay to attack helpless innocents and kill them in cold blood, fuck your religion. Fuck it to death.

HER family situation

That’s something to consider before having intercourse, then isn’t it.

and HER ability

See above.

having the resources to give him/her a decent life

Oh fuck this: “Son, you might be poor. Can’t have that. Time to die, trash!”

No one has the right ever mentions the fact that 20 years after Roe, the crime rate in the USA dropped by 10%, and continued to drop by 1% per year for the next 5 years. How many lives has that simple statistic saved?

Not mentioned because it’s ghastly. No ends - none - justify your means.

None of your abortion policies make any sense at all.

Banning needless violence against innocent human beings makes sense to rational decent human beings.

It makes sense you’d be confused.

You keep saying that's its irresponsible to have more children than you can afford, but you can't have an abortion if you decide that you can't carry this pregnancy to term.

It would be better for someone impoverished to not make kids they can’t afford, sure, but that could never and would never justify killing the fucking kids, you deranged monster.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

One is.

Total hysterectomies?

Male “to female” “bottom surgery?” The organs in question for reproduction are just gone.

Those are 100% effective, I guess.

Vasectomies do fail. Tubal ligations can fail.

 

[Billy000]

Who gives a shit? No contraception is fool proof, none is 100% effective all the time.

Unless you are sterile, exclusively homosexual, or abstinent / asexual, you might make kids and you know that and choose to have sex anyway. Congrats, mom. Now take care of your kid.

I love how you just absolve the guy of all responsibility. You come across like a total juvenile lol