On 'Pro-Life' Conservatives

[Guno צְבִי]

[Casual Leftist]

It's sad but true. So often I hear "well it's the parents fault" - "why should I have to pay for other peoples kids?" as if other people have the same life options as they did.

They don't care about children that aren't their own.

[Mason Michaels]

It's sad but true. So often I hear "well it's the parents fault" - "why should I have to pay for other peoples kids?" as if other people have the same life options as they did.

They don't care about children that aren't their own.

In the womb,Republican fascist claim to care,once the kids of less fortunate or poor parents are born.
They just as soon put kids in their concentration cages!

[CFM]

It's sad but true. So often I hear "well it's the parents fault" - "why should I have to pay for other peoples kids?" as if other people have the same life options as they did.

They don't care about children that aren't their own.

Are you saying it's the fault of those that aren't the kid's parent(s)?

Are you saying those of us that aren't a kid's parent(s) have more of a responsibility to that kid than their parent(s)?

It's clear that the parent(s) don't care about the children that ARE their own.

Hate to break it to you but if a parent indicates their kid isn't a good enough investment for them to do for their own, they can't convince me that it's a good investment for me.

[CFM]

In the womb,Republican fascist claim to care,once the kids of less fortunate or poor parents are born.
They just as soon put kids in their concentration cages!

If the kid comes out of the womb, it's the result of a choice someone else made. That means the someone else that made the choice pays the cost.

You don't won't me having a choice in it, don't demand I help support the one you made.

[Casual Leftist]

Hate to break it to you but if a parent indicates their kid isn't a good enough investment for them to do for their own, they can't convince me that it's a good investment for me.

Your argument boils down to a child should be punished for having terrible parents. Sorry timmy, if you want a school lunch you get a job like the rest of us.

[CFM]

Your argument boils down to a child should be punished for having terrible parents. Sorry timmy, if you want a school lunch you get a job like the rest of us.

Not at all. My argument is exactly what I said. It's not about punishment, it's about those having a responsibility for THEIR kids doing what they should be doing. No one is expecting Timmy to pay for it, just his parent(s).

Your defense of what you support centers around the mindset that those of us that aren't the kid's parent(s) have more of a responsibility for him/her than the parent(s).

[StoneByStone]

It's sad but true. So often I hear "well it's the parents fault" - "why should I have to pay for other peoples kids?" as if other people have the same life options as they did.

They don't care about children that aren't their own.

Many of them don't even care about their own. That's why they don't want gun control and environmental regulations.

[Casual Leftist]

Not at all. My argument is exactly what I said. It's not about punishment, it's about those having a responsibility for THEIR kids doing what they should be doing. No one is expecting Timmy to pay for it, just his parent(s).

Your defense of what you support centers around the mindset that those of us that aren't the kid's parent(s) have more of a responsibility for him/her than the parent(s).

No, you're just absolving yourself of social responsibility while saying you care. What if the parent can't pay for it? The kid goes hungry and all you can say is 'not my responsibility'.

[jimmymccready]

Social responsibility for the whole, CFM, is Americanism and you will do your bit.

[Eagle_Eye]

It's sad but true. So often I hear "well it's the parents fault" - "why should I have to pay for other peoples kids?" as if other people have the same life options as they did.

They don't care about children that aren't their own.

That liberal BS has been debunked so many time it's laughable.

Republicans, independents and Democrats all support proposals that will help more families access high-quality early learning and care opportunities:2018_national_poll.jpg

https://www.ffyf.org/democratic-and-...re-nationally/
https://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Re...+_Children.htm

[Casual Leftist]

That liberal BS has been debunked so many time it's laughable.

Well then I guess CMT is just a pile of liberal BS because he's making the exact argument I criticize.

https://www.ffyf.org/democratic-and-...re-nationally/
https://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Re...+_Children.htm

Even your own chart shows a 15-30% lead on caring about education funding for children. Also, those kinds of polls while inciteful don't tell us the reality that GOP leadership has different priorities from their voters. The GOP leadership is the one doing the cuttings.

And I've never seen a Dem try to cut spending for children healthcare or food access.

2012 they tried cutting off a quarter million kid for lunches https://thinkprogress.org/house-gop-...-da38535f5bbd/
Devos wants to cut after school programs https://fortune.com/2019/04/03/devos...hool-programs/
Cutting special needs funding https://www.healthcarefinancenews.co...-special-needs

[Eagle_Eye]

Well then I guess CMT is just a pile of liberal BS because he's making the exact argument I criticize.



Even your own chart shows a 15-30% lead on caring about education funding for children. Also, those kinds of polls while inciteful don't tell us the reality that GOP leadership has different priorities from their voters. The GOP leadership is the one doing the cuttings.

And I've never seen a Dem try to cut spending for children healthcare or food access.

2012 they tried cutting off a quarter million kid for lunches https://thinkprogress.org/house-gop-...-da38535f5bbd/
Devos wants to cut after school programs https://fortune.com/2019/04/03/devos...hool-programs/
Cutting special needs funding https://www.healthcarefinancenews.co...-special-needs

The chart shows that over 50% of Republicans support children's programs. But nice try. If you lefties had only two choices increase welfare or protect the US you would choose welfare.

And I've never seen a Dem try to cut spending for children healthcare or food access.

A Dem. would never cut any welfare or giveaway program unless it was their money being spent.

[Casual Leftist]

The chart shows that over 50% of Republicans support children's programs. But nice try. If you lefties had only two choices increase welfare or protect the US you would choose welfare.

Republican leaders? I acknowledged the perceived popular support but it clearly doesn't reflect in the administration. If we care about more than just babies, perhaps teenagers and young adults too - Betsy Devos does not reflect a good care about older children as well. Unless you believe charter schools are the best form of education.

A Dem. would never cut any welfare or giveaway program unless it was their money being spent.

What? It's never "their" money being spent - it's tax money spent on projects. They do pay taxes just like everyone else. Bernie Sanders would be raising taxes on himself.

[Mason Melchizedek]

The chart shows that over 50% of Republicans support children's programs. But nice try. If you lefties had only two choices increase welfare or protect the US you would choose welfare.



A Dem. would never cut any welfare or giveaway program unless it was their money being spent.

We have enough nukes to end civilization,and the most modern military in the world!
But you just admitted that even more is more important than American kids,welfare!