Texas legislator proposes $500 to stop abortions

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Harvey
Yep. $500 should just about cover the costs of supporting each of those kids until they turn eighteen. Maybe that kind of quality Texan thinking is the same thing that got us Bushlite. :roll:

exactly what I was thinking.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
75,000 abortions a year in just one state?

And the left has the nerve to complain about 1000 soldiers killed per year in Iraq.
At least the soldiers knew what they were getting into when the signed up.

While I would not outlaw it outright, I thing abortion is the most vial thing that goes on in our country today.

The left's view on kids: You can kill you baby up to the moment it is born, once that happens if you raise a hand to it we'll take it away and throw you in jail for being a bad parent.

because hypocritical, pedophilic priests are somewhat less vile?

 

[Phokus]

edit: NM

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Harvey
Yep. $500 should just about cover the costs of supporting each of those kids until they turn eighteen. Maybe that kind of quality Texan thinking is the same thing that got us Bushlite. :roll:

exactly what I was thinking.

Wow, at least Texans can read, I guess neither of you are from Texas. You missed it in the OP, and you missed in my post right above yours. I'll even quote it AGAIN...

"His proposal calls for giving any woman going to an abortion clinic the $500 option, to be paid no more than 30 days after the baby is born and given up for adoption. "

So what state are you two academics from again?

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
75,000 abortions a year in just one state?

And the left has the nerve to complain about 1000 soldiers killed per year in Iraq.
At least the soldiers knew what they were getting into when the signed up.

While I would not outlaw it outright, I thing abortion is the most vial thing that goes on in our country today.

The left's view on kids: You can kill you baby up to the moment it is born, once that happens if you raise a hand to it we'll take it away and throw you in jail for being a bad parent.

because hypocritical, pedophilic priests are somewhat less vile?

I am not an anti abortion fundie, but that is a pretty bad analogy right there.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
75,000 abortions a year in just one state?

And the left has the nerve to complain about 1000 soldiers killed per year in Iraq.
At least the soldiers knew what they were getting into when the signed up.

While I would not outlaw it outright, I thing abortion is the most vial thing that goes on in our country today.

The left's view on kids: You can kill you baby up to the moment it is born, once that happens if you raise a hand to it we'll take it away and throw you in jail for being a bad parent.

You guys want to protect a fetus so bad and then when its born, you want to throw the kid to the wolves. God forbid giving the children of this country free health insurance.

yes because we all know that the only outcome of not getting a baby aborted is, it is thrown to the wolves....nice false dilemma..

And we all know how great republicans are when it comes to supporting welfare/health care/after school programs. Republicans are for the fetus and against the child. How many times have we heard on this board that we should cut welfare and not give free health insurance. If republicans cared so much about the kids then they would have proposed free health care for everyone 18 and under. Thanks for playing.

EXACTLY. I love how those that wish to ban abortion are also those that are opposed to welfare, when keeping abortion legal helps to lessen the dependency on welfare....

a simple excerpt from a much larger chapter, but strangely relevant

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
75,000 abortions a year in just one state?

And the left has the nerve to complain about 1000 soldiers killed per year in Iraq.
At least the soldiers knew what they were getting into when the signed up.

While I would not outlaw it outright, I thing abortion is the most vial thing that goes on in our country today.

The left's view on kids: You can kill you baby up to the moment it is born, once that happens if you raise a hand to it we'll take it away and throw you in jail for being a bad parent.

You guys want to protect a fetus so bad and then when its born, you want to throw the kid to the wolves. God forbid giving the children of this country free health insurance.

yes because we all know that the only outcome of not getting a baby aborted is, it is thrown to the wolves....nice false dilemma..

And we all know how great republicans are when it comes to supporting welfare/health care/after school programs. Republicans are for the fetus and against the child. How many times have we heard on this board that we should cut welfare and not give free health insurance. If republicans cared so much about the kids then they would have proposed free health care for everyone 18 and under. Thanks for playing.

EXACTLY. I love how those that wish to ban abortion are also those that are opposed to welfare, when keeping abortion legal helps to lessen the dependency on welfare....

a simple excerpt from a much larger chapter, but strangely relevant

Funny how its the left on here that accuses the right of wanting to kill off all of the poor.....

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
75,000 abortions a year in just one state?

And the left has the nerve to complain about 1000 soldiers killed per year in Iraq.
At least the soldiers knew what they were getting into when the signed up.

While I would not outlaw it outright, I thing abortion is the most vial thing that goes on in our country today.

The left's view on kids: You can kill you baby up to the moment it is born, once that happens if you raise a hand to it we'll take it away and throw you in jail for being a bad parent.

because hypocritical, pedophilic priests are somewhat less vile?

I am not an anti abortion fundie, but that is a pretty bad analogy right there.

How so? John just mentioned abortion as being the most vile thing going on in this country. It's not even an analogy; (if that possibly makes sense to you) it's simply something else going on in this country that, in my mind, is certainly more vile than abortion. Never meant to be an analogy.

Think, before you post.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Harvey
Yep. $500 should just about cover the costs of supporting each of those kids until they turn eighteen. Maybe that kind of quality Texan thinking is the same thing that got us Bushlite. :roll:

exactly what I was thinking.

Wow, at least Texans can read, I guess neither of you are from Texas. You missed it in the OP, and you missed in my post right above yours. I'll even quote it AGAIN...

"His proposal calls for giving any woman going to an abortion clinic the $500 option, to be paid no more than 30 days after the baby is born and given up for adoption. "

So what state are you two academics from again?

The statement also relates to the cost of raising that child in general. Whether it comes from the mother's pocket, or the state's, it will still cost a ridiculous amount of money to raise the child. Way to think about the issue though. I suppose my NC education is definately better than whatever state-funded baby-sitting service you were put through 😛

As stated earlier, $500 won't even pay for the epidural, let alone the rest of the cost related to the birth. The point of the comment is that $500 is a piss-poor sum when considered against the costs of birthing a child. Besides, I'm sure the intect is to get the mothers to keep the child, as many mothers who intend to give up their children often don't once it is born. The policy simply leaves the option there

Play again, though 😉

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: zinfamous
The statement also relates to the cost of raising that child in general. Whether it comes from the mother's pocket, or the state's, it will still cost a ridiculous amount of money to raise the child. Way to think about the issue though. I suppose my NC education is definately better than whatever state-funded baby-sitting service you were put through

nice back tracking

As stated earlier, $500 won't even pay for the epidural, let alone the rest of the cost related to the birth. The point of the comment is that $500 is a piss-poor sum when considered against the costs of birthing a child. Besides, I'm sure the intect is to get the mothers to keep the child, as many mothers who intend to give up their children often don't once it is born. The policy simply leaves the option there

and like i said before, probably the only people who would take this are people who were going to carry to term and give up for adoption anyway. or, those that would dump the kid in a dumpster

not to mention the state is most likely to pick up the tab on a lot of the birthing costs anyway.

the intent is for dan patrick to draw attention to himself. that's all. he is paid to get a reaction, a response, to be outrageous. and he hasn't changed now that he's in the legislature.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Harvey
Yep. $500 should just about cover the costs of supporting each of those kids until they turn eighteen. Maybe that kind of quality Texan thinking is the same thing that got us Bushlite. :roll:

exactly what I was thinking.

Wow, at least Texans can read, I guess neither of you are from Texas. You missed it in the OP, and you missed in my post right above yours. I'll even quote it AGAIN...

"His proposal calls for giving any woman going to an abortion clinic the $500 option, to be paid no more than 30 days after the baby is born and given up for adoption. "

So what state are you two academics from again?

The statement also relates to the cost of raising that child in general. Whether it comes from the mother's pocket, or the state's, it will still cost a ridiculous amount of money to raise the child. Way to think about the issue though. I suppose my NC education is definately better than whatever state-funded baby-sitting service you were put through 😛

As stated earlier, $500 won't even pay for the epidural, let alone the rest of the cost related to the birth. The point of the comment is that $500 is a piss-poor sum when considered against the costs of birthing a child. Besides, I'm sure the intect is to get the mothers to keep the child, as many mothers who intend to give up their children often don't once it is born. The policy simply leaves the option there

Play again, though 😉

I am not endorsing this, I was merely pointing out the irony in you and Harvey making a blanket statement insulting Texans, when neither of you even took the time to read the whole post.

How could that statement relate to raising the chilid in general, when the only way that a mother could get the $500 is to agree to not raise the child herself? Spin all you like, its quite obvious that you and Harvey did not read (or comprehend) the sentence that I quoted in the OP.

You say, "The point of the comment is that $500 is a piss-poor sum when considered against the costs of birthing a child." The comment that you are referring to is "Yep. $500 should just about cover the costs of supporting each of those kids until they turn eighteen." I suppose your NC education isn't as great as you think...At least my Maryland education taught me not to stereotype a whole state.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
75,000 abortions a year in just one state?

And the left has the nerve to complain about 1000 soldiers killed per year in Iraq.
At least the soldiers knew what they were getting into when the signed up.

While I would not outlaw it outright, I thing abortion is the most vial thing that goes on in our country today.

The left's view on kids: You can kill you baby up to the moment it is born, once that happens if you raise a hand to it we'll take it away and throw you in jail for being a bad parent.

because hypocritical, pedophilic priests are somewhat less vile?

I am not an anti abortion fundie, but that is a pretty bad analogy right there.

How so? John just mentioned abortion as being the most vile thing going on in this country. It's not even an analogy; (if that possibly makes sense to you) it's simply something else going on in this country that, in my mind, is certainly more vile than abortion. Never meant to be an analogy.

Think, before you post.

Please, show me a comparison of how many abortions there are, and how many pedophile priests there are.

Oh, and judging by your previous post, I would suggest that you read the OP before you post.

 

[mc00]

I wouldn't have mind something like this, but I know religion folk are behind this... what is next law propose 3k for gay people move out of there state?

 

[Starbuck1975]

Why do we even bother having these abortion threads...the Pro-Lifers will always maintain that an unborn fetus is a human being, deserving of protection from what they consider to be no less than murder.

For Pro-Choicers, abortion is a lesser of two evils...not leaving women with no alternative but back alley abortions, protecting a woman's reproductive choices, a fetus is not a human being, etc.

My take...the Pandora's box is already open, so abortion is not going away any time soon...but I do consider abortion a tragedy of modern medicine...however, no less tragic is forcing a mother to have an unwanted pregnancy. There really is no right answer.

The best way to prevent unwanted pregnancies is to teach individuals to make responsible choices while engaging in intercourse...that means using protection...you want to have sex, but don't want kids? USE PROTECTION!!! Abortion should not be a form of birth control.

You want to limit abortions...pump funding into sex education. That would essentially reduce the abortion demographic to rape victims and other scenarios where the mother did not have a choice in using protection.

 

[shadow9d9]

"
You want to limit abortions...pump funding into sex education. "

They still don't do this in Texas, etc. where they teach "abstinence only" nonsense.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
Why do we even bother having these abortion threads...the Pro-Lifers will always maintain that an unborn fetus is a human being, deserving of protection from what they consider to be no less than murder.

For Pro-Choicers, abortion is a lesser of two evils...not leaving women with no alternative but back alley abortions, protecting a woman's reproductive choices, a fetus is not a human being, etc.

My take...the Pandora's box is already open, so abortion is not going away any time soon...but I do consider abortion a tragedy of modern medicine...however, no less tragic is forcing a mother to have an unwanted pregnancy. There really is no right answer.

The best way to prevent unwanted pregnancies is to teach individuals to make responsible choices while engaging in intercourse...that means using protection...you want to have sex, but don't want kids? USE PROTECTION!!! Abortion should not be a form of birth control.

You want to limit abortions...pump funding into sex education. That would essentially reduce the abortion demographic to rape victims and other scenarios where the mother did not have a choice in using protection.

But the radical righties want as many kids as possible, that's why they keep raising birth control prices.

 

[ProfJohn]

Does anyone know of a good comprehensive study on abortions?
Age, race, economic status, reason for abortion etc etc.
I think it would interesting to read such a report in order to get a better understand of the 'why' aspect behind woman taking such action.

I don?t think either side of the debate is in this for political reasons, to get more votes, instead both sides are basing their decisions of support on moral principle.
To the right it is morally wrong to kill a bunch of cell (unborn baby)
To the left it is morally wrong to tell a woman what she can and can?t do to her body.

 

[mc00]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Does anyone know of a good comprehensive study on abortions?
Age, race, economic status, reason for abortion etc etc.
I think it would interesting to read such a report in order to get a better understand of the 'why' aspect behind woman taking such action.

I don?t think either side of the debate is in this for political reasons, to get more votes, instead both sides are basing their decisions of support on moral principle.
To the right it is morally wrong to kill a bunch of cell (unborn baby)
To the left it is morally wrong to tell a woman what she can and can?t do to her body.

this is one that gets under my skin little.. "To the right it is morally wrong to kill a bunch of cell (unborn baby)"

I want to know those oppose abortion, are they against it out of there own heart or because there bible say so? I honestly haven't ran into someone have said they oppose to abortion, because they believe is wrong not because some old book say so.. is same thing as cutting baby foreskin, I always ask tell me what is benefit? either god come out of there mouth or just clueless what is the benefit...

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: mc00
I want to know those oppose abortion, are they against it out of there own heart or because there bible say so?

The bible clearly states that "abortion is a sin." It even uses the word, "abortion."

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: mc00
this one is one the get under my skin little.. "To the right it is morally wrong to kill a bunch of cell (unborn baby)"

I want to know those oppose abortion, are they against it out of there own heart or because there bible say so? I honestly haven't ran into someone have said they oppose to abortion, because they believe is wrong not because some old book say so.. is same thing as cutting baby foreskin, I always ask tell me what is benefit? either god come out of there mouth or just clueless what is the benefit...

Do you oppose murder (of an adult)? And is that opposition based on what the bible says or what?s in your own heart?

 

[mc00]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: mc00
this one is one the get under my skin little.. "To the right it is morally wrong to kill a bunch of cell (unborn baby)"

I want to know those oppose abortion, are they against it out of there own heart or because there bible say so? I honestly haven't ran into someone have said they oppose to abortion, because they believe is wrong not because some old book say so.. is same thing as cutting baby foreskin, I always ask tell me what is benefit? either god come out of there mouth or just clueless what is the benefit...

Do you oppose murder (of an adult)? And is that opposition based on what the bible says or what?s in your own heart?

heh, I know you got the clue I'm not religion person... of course I'm against someone getting killed if the person didn't deserve it(my own heart). yes you going trying compare it being same as cell(unborn baby) I'm all for women has the right to refuse unwanted pregnancy or give up for adoption, but if she does it just for heck of it and keep doing it than she committing murder.. Why I get hostile when come religion folk, because they believe we all should believe is SIN to abort a unwanted pregnancy, so I feel threaten trying force there believe on to me, if people are going to make law to prevent mother from getting abortion than provide good reason not only on bible saying because than we have those on other fence would debate it. I'm very strong believer people have right to live however they see fit(with god or without ).. but once the person try force to another than gets ugly, this what happening in my area.. I'm sorry if you didn't understand my bad grammar I try my best.

 

[hellokeith]

Originally posted by: mc00
this is one that gets under my skin little.. "To the right it is morally wrong to kill a bunch of cell (unborn baby)"

I want to know those oppose abortion, are they against it out of there own heart or because there bible say so? I honestly haven't ran into someone have said they oppose to abortion, because they believe is wrong not because some old book say so.. is same thing as cutting baby foreskin, I always ask tell me what is benefit? either god come out of there mouth or just clueless what is the benefit...

Last year my mother and her two sisters pulled the plug (life support) on their ailing mother (my grandmother), and I was in the room when she died. Seeing firsthand the life drain out her, seeing her heart flat line, seeing her breaths grow farther and farther apart.. it gave me a respect for life that I did not have before. After seeing that, I honestly would have chosen differently, to have the surgeons do the risky surgery instead of just let her pass away without exhausting all methods. This respect for life multiplied the beliefs I already had.

And we aren't talking about an ailing old person. We are talking about (as Dave likes to say) a bunch of cells which will develop into a human being. That they don't have legal rights as a person in this country makes them no less human. It baffles me how liberals can defend the worst of the worst criminals from the death penalty but allow innocent unborn humans be murdered on a daily basis. 🙁

 

[mc00]

Originally posted by: hellokeith

Originally posted by: mc00
this is one that gets under my skin little.. "To the right it is morally wrong to kill a bunch of cell (unborn baby)"

I want to know those oppose abortion, are they against it out of there own heart or because there bible say so? I honestly haven't ran into someone have said they oppose to abortion, because they believe is wrong not because some old book say so.. is same thing as cutting baby foreskin, I always ask tell me what is benefit? either god come out of there mouth or just clueless what is the benefit...

Last year my mother and her two sisters pulled the plug (life support) on their ailing mother (my grandmother), and I was in the room when she died. Seeing firsthand the life drain out her, seeing her heart flat line, seeing her breaths grow farther and farther apart.. it gave me a respect for life that I did not have before. After seeing that, I honestly would have chosen differently, to have the surgeons do the risky surgery instead of just let her pass away without exhausting all methods. This respect for life multiplied the beliefs I already had.

And we aren't talking about an ailing old person. We are talking about (as Dave likes to say) a bunch of cells which will develop into a human being. That they don't have legal rights as a person in this country makes them no less human. It baffles me how liberals can defend the worst of the worst criminals from the death penalty but allow innocent unborn humans be murdered on a daily basis. 🙁

I'm sorry to hear this... I respect your reasoning more than bible saying.. I have experience life and death, knowing is possible I might not wake up again.. yes I have seen situation father has to make choice between about to be born child or mother life who he choose to keep alive, and some of them choose the wife some of them choose child... is all about choice, and no one has the right to force the father choose child automatically or the mother. an I agree with death penalty beat the hell of me when I see they should let the ahole live after he killed so 100 people.. but that all another ball game.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: zinfamous
The statement also relates to the cost of raising that child in general. Whether it comes from the mother's pocket, or the state's, it will still cost a ridiculous amount of money to raise the child. Way to think about the issue though. I suppose my NC education is definately better than whatever state-funded baby-sitting service you were put through

nice back tracking

As stated earlier, $500 won't even pay for the epidural, let alone the rest of the cost related to the birth. The point of the comment is that $500 is a piss-poor sum when considered against the costs of birthing a child. Besides, I'm sure the intect is to get the mothers to keep the child, as many mothers who intend to give up their children often don't once it is born. The policy simply leaves the option there

and like i said before, probably the only people who would take this are people who were going to carry to term and give up for adoption anyway. or, those that would dump the kid in a dumpster

not to mention the state is most likely to pick up the tab on a lot of the birthing costs anyway.

the intent is for dan patrick to draw attention to himself. that's all. he is paid to get a reaction, a response, to be outrageous. and he hasn't changed now that he's in the legislature.

Backtracking my ass. read the original responses. we mention nothing about the cost to the parents of raising the kids, simply the cost of raising the kids. Is our point too clear and relevant that you try to pick it apart with such a simple misinterpretation, simply because you assume you will immediately disagree with what I say? How petty.

(How's that for reading into someone's comment? 😉)

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Harvey
Yep. $500 should just about cover the costs of supporting each of those kids until they turn eighteen. Maybe that kind of quality Texan thinking is the same thing that got us Bushlite. :roll:

exactly what I was thinking.

Wow, at least Texans can read, I guess neither of you are from Texas. You missed it in the OP, and you missed in my post right above yours. I'll even quote it AGAIN...

"His proposal calls for giving any woman going to an abortion clinic the $500 option, to be paid no more than 30 days after the baby is born and given up for adoption. "

So what state are you two academics from again?

The statement also relates to the cost of raising that child in general. Whether it comes from the mother's pocket, or the state's, it will still cost a ridiculous amount of money to raise the child. Way to think about the issue though. I suppose my NC education is definately better than whatever state-funded baby-sitting service you were put through 😛

As stated earlier, $500 won't even pay for the epidural, let alone the rest of the cost related to the birth. The point of the comment is that $500 is a piss-poor sum when considered against the costs of birthing a child. Besides, I'm sure the intect is to get the mothers to keep the child, as many mothers who intend to give up their children often don't once it is born. The policy simply leaves the option there

Play again, though 😉

I am not endorsing this, I was merely pointing out the irony in you and Harvey making a blanket statement insulting Texans, when neither of you even took the time to read the whole post.

How could that statement relate to raising the chilid in general, when the only way that a mother could get the $500 is to agree to not raise the child herself? Spin all you like, its quite obvious that you and Harvey did not read (or comprehend) the sentence that I quoted in the OP.

You say, "The point of the comment is that $500 is a piss-poor sum when considered against the costs of birthing a child." The comment that you are referring to is "Yep. $500 should just about cover the costs of supporting each of those kids until they turn eighteen." I suppose your NC education isn't as great as you think...At least my Maryland education taught me not to stereotype a whole state.

Please explain why you think the cost to the state of raising abandoned children is irrelevent to the argument. There is no backtracking here. If you read my post, you would relaize that I have read the OP. This is just petty

So, the state gives away $500, pays for the birth (in your example), and i then saddled with the cost of raising that child. Where do you think the state gets the money for this? C'mon...it can't be too hard for you to figure this out....c'mon now...

The pro-lifers continue to feed the very monsters that they despise: welfare, and bitch and moan when they're saddled with the cost of raising these kids that demanded must be born. Not to mention the fact that the majority of them will probably be sent off to prison, incurring further costs...bu at least get more people in prison, eh? Always the right answer :thumbsdown:

(yeah, I went off track, but even an idiot can reason their way to the economic burdens that these policies entail)