Attacking Hyde

tekkychick said:
Abortion doesn't murder children.
Click to expand...


Of course,...........you think pregnancy is a disease...so the taxpayers should pay for it....because you'll be 'inconvenienced' by a child......
Oh...its not a child....you'll be 'inconvenienced' by this...this...this....tumor ?...that you'll have to raise and feed and send to school....

How totally ignorant you are.
 
without getting into the endless abortion 'debate' - it seems that reproductive health, including abortion is both legal and necessary for women.

Why single out Medicade recieving women for no aid? It would appear the poorest need the most help.

To deny Medicade receiving women abortion funding, is wrong in that it allows women whom are poor, (in all probability) a more difficult time to care for children to be forced into childbirth.

It's discriminatory, and poor policy, both.
 
Superfreak said:
Ok Hitler... settle down, sure there are plenty of children being killed today, you should be proud.
Click to expand...

You've got it bad don't you? Do you think calling her Hitler will endear you? Really? Are you going to splash water from a puddle on her on the way to the bus today, too?
 
Hard to take a solid stance on this, altho I know which way I would vote and who I'd support.

As a person who likes to see standards applied fairly (yes, I realize that's not realistic), I'd say that if 'elective' procedures are not covered under Medicare, then abortion shouldnt be covered.

As a taxpayer, I see that in the long-run, the expenditure for an abortion saves taxpayers thousands, if not more, per procedure in many cases and think it saves $ long-term.

As member of society, I most definitely see that enabling the procedure provides better opportunities for the women (increasing their contributions to society) and lessens the numbers of abused and maladjusted kids dumped into the world and committing crimes. Again...a benefit.

So if the concern is $$, covering abortion would save $ in the long run.

I am framing my discussion around the original post's topic and hoping that calm heads can look at my response objectively without all the emotional rhetoric. (But that never happens on this topic)
 
Liberal 'logic':

'If some law you don't like exists, too bad so sad, you lost, the fight is over.

If some law I don't like exists, well the fight is never over until we change the law to what we like'
 
annata said:
without getting into the endless abortion 'debate' - it seems that reproductive health, including abortion is both legal and necessary for women.

Why single out Medicade recieving women for no aid? It would appear the poorest need the most help.

To deny Medicade receiving women abortion funding, is wrong in that it allows women whom are poor, (in all probability) a more difficult time to care for children to be forced into childbirth.

It's discriminatory, and poor policy, both.
Click to expand...


If there is a medical problem with a pregnancy, any and all care should be covered under Medicade for the poor....absolutely.....including abortion if necessary.
 
Superfreak said:
Liberal 'logic':

'If some law you don't like exists, too bad so sad, you lost, the fight is over.

If some law I don't like exists, well the fight is never over until we change the law to what we like'
Click to expand...

Given the way the Republicans in Congress are treating the Affordable Health Care Act, doing anything and everything to prevent implementation until they can get the votes in the Senate to overturn it, I would say your description is much more apropos of the way that Republicans operate than the way Democrats operate. Democrats can hardly stay focused until the next session let alone for years on end.
 
Dantès said:
Given the way the Republicans in Congress are treating the Affordable Health Care Act, doing anything and everything to prevent implementation until they can get the votes in the Senate to overturn it, I would say your description is much more apropos of the way that Republicans operate than the way Democrats operate. Democrats can hardly stay focused until the next session let alone for years on end.
Click to expand...

I was referring to Darla's nonsense... do try to keep up.
 
Dantès said:
Given the way the Republicans in Congress are treating the Affordable Health Care Act, doing anything and everything to prevent implementation until they can get the votes in the Senate to overturn it, I would say your description is much more apropos of the way that Republicans operate than the way Democrats operate. Democrats can hardly stay focused until the next session let alone for years on end.
Click to expand...
This disaster of a law needs to be overturned. The left's objective here is to make as many people totally dependent on big daddy government as possible. And what better way than destroying health insurance?
 
Superfreak said:
No, as my comments were quite clear. It is a problem with advanced technologies. You take a fertilized egg and freeze it, the child is no longer growing and developing. Or do you think it is? A fertilized egg that does not implant also dies.
Click to expand...

A fertilized egg doesn't implant until six to 12 days after ovulation yet some of the anti-abortion people are against the morning-after pill. Wonder why.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top