« First « Previous Comments 39 - 55 of 55 Search these comments
There are many problems with the whole abortion issue. Yes, abortion is
technically murder and it is coldblooded to believe otherwise. However, the
conservatives believe that we should teach people abstinence before marrage
which is rather naive. Additionally, however many babies were aborted after rowe
vs wade - we can clearly conclude that their parents didn't want them - what
kind of life would they have had to be born to such callous parents?
Come on, the majority of Conservatives are not against contraception. Some have issues in forcing Catholic hospitals to provide contraception with Obamacare or having taxpayers provide it for free, but you will be hard pressed to find many Republicans who only support abstinence.
And what is wrong with adoption? There are millions of US families looking to adopt young American babies. I personally know 3 different families who had to go to Eastern Europe and China to adopt a young child. Yes - I know there are older kids in foster care who no one wants, but young healthy infants get piced up quick and is a great alternative to abortion - IMO.
Sorry Leo - can't be bothered to troll through another thread to get an answer from you.
Seriously, can you help me out and answer these questions?
When you can't be bothered to answer my simple question from this thread?
I eagerly await your answer on how many embryos you would let die to save a living born person.
We already have determined that you don't put the same value on the life of an unborn child as you put on a born living "more advanced" -- as you put -- human.
OK, I will make it simpler for you...
What would you drag out of a fire; 9091 embryos or a -- living, breathing, eating, talking, pleading for help -- live human?
Come on, the majority of Conservatives are not against contraception.
True, they are just against the idea that hormone driven, horny teenagers are taught that contraception exists.
And what is wrong with adoption?
Nothing.
Well...*er* that depends...
There can be a lot wrong with adoptions. Especially this kind-->
I personally know 3 different families who had to go to Eastern Europe and China to adopt a young child.
You may want to do a little research on what happens when wealthy foreigners bring a $40k stack of cash into a country where people slave away to make dollars a day, and they announce that they want to spend their cash to buy a healthy baby. The supply never meets that demand. I know...I know...it is hard to believe, but even poor people want to keep their healthy babies.
I suggest you start your research in Guatemala, once the most popular adoption destination for Americans.
Anyway...
Yes - I know there are older kids in foster care who no one wants, but young healthy infants get piced up quick and is a great alternative to abortion - IMO.
Yeah, we agree that adoption is a great alternative to abortion. If more Americans had otherwise healthy but unwanted kids (how many people are standing in like to adopt the child of a drug addicted prostitute) then that would mean that fewer Americans are out buying kidnapped babies on the international market.
There are some great kids in our shitty foster system, and if I was going to adopt I would foster-to-adopt. You can even do that with infants. Yes, there are some fucked up kids in our foster system, but any more fucked up than a Romanian kid who has lived years without leaving a crib or being touched by an adult?
I do think though that carrying a baby to term is no simple task, and for a myriad of reasons woman should be able to make that decision for themselves.
When you can't be bothered to answer my simple question from this thread?
Dude - I already answered your goofy burning building hypothetical. I admit that 20 week old VIABLE baby should have more legal protections than frozen embroyos or whatever. A baby at that stage can already feel pain and has a greater chance of survial. In a perfect world, I would want to save all of them. It's a no brainer.
I'll throw the same hypothetical back at you. If you are a supreme leader of an island responsible for maintaining a population, work and security and you could only save one person from a burning building, would you save a physically fit 20 year old who could provide you labor to support the island or save 2 year old child who will be a drain on your resources?
You earlier claimed that you favor restrictions on abortion. I really wonder why?
Come on, the majority of Conservatives are not against contraception.
True, they are just against the idea that hormone driven, horny teenagers are taught that contraception exists.
Sex education, contraception and abortion are more available now than at any time in our country's history. Agree?
Yet the out of wedlock birth rate has skyrocketed just in the last 30 years. Over 90% of black babies are born to single mothers and a near guaranteed poverty and a life of crime. The Hispanic community is over 50%.
Is the solution just to abort more black and hispanic babies? Should we teach 2nd graders how to put on condoms? Should we provide the pills in vending machines?
Maybe, just maybe our culture and sex-ed classes should teach our young hormone driven kids to be more careful and try to abstain from sex in addition to contraception?
The statistics don't lie. Increasing the availability of abortion, contraception and sex-ed has not put a dent into the illegitimate birth rate and the poverty and social dysfunction that follows. If anything it has increased reckless behavior.
We can thank Libs from the last few decades telling our culture that a single mother with help from the State and extended family is every bit as good as a 2 parent home.
Dan, please watch this and respond. It is really long, but pretty cool.
The first 30 seconds of this video tell me all I need to know about it. Complete bullshit.
The first 30 seconds of this video tell me all I need to know about it. Complete bullshit.
I give it a lot more credence than the crap you linked.
I give it a lot more credence than the crap you linked.
Yes, I especially like the slide he puts up a slide with this line on it:
"reptilian entities here possess nefilim (?) bloodlines" (4:27)
He's definitely someone I'd follow.
Yes, I especially like the slide he puts up with this line on it:
"reptilian entities here possess nefilim (?) bloodlines" (4:27)
He's definitely someone I'd follow.
I know bat shit crazy right? Cept that is exactly how wars get started and endless other conflicts. You and your ilk against the monetarists, 2 sides of same coin.
The nefilim thing is another subject.
But compared to pedestrian BS that Dan8267 links it has more validity.
The first 30 seconds of this video tell me all I need to know about it. Complete bullshit.
I give it a lot more credence than the crap you linked.
Which says more about you than me.
Dan, please watch this and respond. It is really long, but pretty cool.
The first 30 seconds of this video tell me all I need to know about it. Complete bullshit.
oh, come on man, give it some time.
If you want me to sit through this dribble, you are going to have to tell me exactly what you want me to write about it.
If you want me to sit through this dribble, you are going to have to tell me exactly what you want me to write about it.
fair enough. The connection between world domination leaders, sodomy, and satanic ritual. He says Bush was one. It is near midway if I recall.
I dont follow this guy, I just found his dot-to-dot stuff interesting.
If you want me to sit through this dribble, you are going to have to tell me exactly what you want me to write about it.
Exactly what I asked you, but no answer.
The connection between world domination leaders, sodomy, and satanic ritual.
There is none. The connection between high government officials is one of nepotism and money. That's all. Sex and satanism have nothing to do with it. It's all about greed, family, and small collations of men screwing over other men -- well, I guess you could call that a form of sodomy.
lol .... he goes off on sodomites and satanists ... calling daddy Bush the worst of the bunch
« First « Previous Comments 39 - 55 of 55 Search these comments
Republicans lie about science in order to confuse the public into believing that well-established scientific facts are still being openly debated. The purpose of these lies is to keep the government from solving urgent problem the Republicans don't want solved. As long as the illusion of debate persists, people are willing to postpone much needed action. Republicans profit from the public being misinformed, but this profit comes at the expense of us all.
http://www.fVPIA6l2OTg
http://www.ILII3msFBiA
http://www.a4XCCkU0U3s
http://www.P6LZ8_kjF_0
http://www.zo_kfiZRSWQ
http://www.IBS4iFH0CoU
#politics