"The rape thing"

[nehalem256]

Who cares? It's just a medical procedure, same as cutting off a tumor.

So are breast implants. Should the government pay for that too?

 

[mvbighead]

So are breast implants. Should the government pay for that too?

One is cosmetic... the other isn't.

With regard to abortion, you're looking at a cost of $1000 (according to planned parenthood site). With regard to someone not doing it because they can't afford it, you're looking at a cost significantly higher when the parent ends up on welfare, or when the child grows up without a parent and possibly winds up somewhere that has a higher cost to a tax payer (IE - Juvenile detention center, prison, etc.).

To me, if a woman prefers abortion to the other consequences, but cannot afford it, it is a better cost for the tax payer to pay for the abortion, than the other. Now, someone may disagree with with the practice of abortion, and that is all well and good, but they aren't the ones doing it. From a pure cost analysis, abortion is the preferable option for the tax payer.

 

[jackstar7]

One is cosmetic... the other isn't.

With regard to abortion, you're looking at a cost of $1000 (according to planned parenthood site). With regard to someone not doing it because they can't afford it, you're looking at a cost significantly higher when the parent ends up on welfare, or when the child grows up without a parent and possibly winds up somewhere that has a higher cost to a tax payer (IE - Juvenile detention center, prison, etc.).

To me, if a woman prefers abortion to the other consequences, but cannot afford it, it is a better cost for the tax payer to pay for the abortion, than the other. Now, someone may disagree with with the practice of abortion, and that is all well and good, but they aren't the ones doing it. From a pure cost analysis, abortion is the preferable option for the tax payer.

Beware. You're about to be sucked into a nehalem vortex.

 

[Juddog]

One is cosmetic... the other isn't.

With regard to abortion, you're looking at a cost of $1000 (according to planned parenthood site). With regard to someone not doing it because they can't afford it, you're looking at a cost significantly higher when the parent ends up on welfare, or when the child grows up without a parent and possibly winds up somewhere that has a higher cost to a tax payer (IE - Juvenile detention center, prison, etc.).

To me, if a woman prefers abortion to the other consequences, but cannot afford it, it is a better cost for the tax payer to pay for the abortion, than the other. Now, someone may disagree with with the practice of abortion, and that is all well and good, but they aren't the ones doing it. From a pure cost analysis, abortion is the preferable option for the tax payer.

$1000 versus 18 years of welfare - hmm math is hard.

 

[nehalem256]

One is cosmetic... the other isn't.

One could easily argue that having small breasts is not a woman's fault whereas being pregnant almost certainly is.

EDIT: Both are largely unnecessary.

With regard to abortion, you're looking at a cost of $1000 (according to planned parenthood site). With regard to someone not doing it because they can't afford it, you're looking at a cost significantly higher when the parent ends up on welfare, or when the child grows up without a parent and possibly winds up somewhere that has a higher cost to a tax payer (IE - Juvenile detention center, prison, etc.).

To me, if a woman prefers abortion to the other consequences, but cannot afford it, it is a better cost for the tax payer to pay for the abortion, than the other. Now, someone may disagree with with the practice of abortion, and that is all well and good, but they aren't the ones doing it. From a pure cost analysis, abortion is the preferable option for the tax payer.

If your goal is to minimize costs than abortions should be mandatory for poor women.

 

[zinfamous]

One could easily argue that having small breasts is not a woman's fault whereas being pregnant almost certainly is.

you're just precious, aren't you?

:hmm:
...is this what happens when one is slow to figure out that the square shape goes into the square hole, and the star shape goes into the star hole in preschool?

 

[mvbighead]

If there is any accuracy to this:
http://www.quora.com/What-does-Welfare-pay-per-child-for-single-parent-illegals

235/month. 2820/year. $50760 till 18.

So, a recurring cost of 2820 per year, or a $1000 procedure. Hmmm. Math is hard indeed.

 

[nehalem256]

you're just precious, aren't you?

:hmm:
...is this what happens when one is slow to figure out that the square shape goes into the square hole, and the star shape goes into the star hole in preschool?

Baring rape, pregnancy is a condition that results from a woman's choices.

She then wants to cry and have society pay for the consequences of those choices.

So much for women being independent I guess

Her body. Her choice. Her responsibility.

 

[nehalem256]

If there is any accuracy to this:
http://www.quora.com/What-does-Welfare-pay-per-child-for-single-parent-illegals

235/month. 2820/year. $50760 till 18.

So, a recurring cost of 2820 per year, or a $1000 procedure. Hmmm. Math is hard indeed.

Or we could post the cost of raising a child vs. paying the $1000 for the abortion themselves.

 

[Juddog]

Baring rape, pregnancy is a condition that results from a woman's choices.

She then wants to cry and have society pay for the consequences of those choices.

So much for women being independent I guess

Her body. Her choice. Her responsibility.

Oh so now it's her choice? Too bad more republicans aren't pro-choice, since anti-abortion is currently the party line.

 

[mvbighead]

One could easily argue that having small breasts is not a woman's fault whereas being pregnant almost certainly is.

EDIT: Both are largely unnecessary.



If your goal is to minimize costs than abortions should be mandatory for poor women.

Both are unnecessary? Really? Pregnancy is necessary for the species to continue on. Breasts are necessary to feed young, however there is an alternative in the form of baby formula.

As for mandatory abortions for the poor? That defies the Pro-Choice stance. The plain and simple approach here is that if a poor person chooses to have an abortion but cannot afford it, it is certainly a better option for the tax payer to pay for the abortion, and not the subsequent raising of the child. That is a choice for the person to make, not the government, not the tax payer.

 

[mvbighead]

Baring rape, pregnancy is a condition that results from a woman's choices.

She then wants to cry and have society pay for the consequences of those choices.

So much for women being independent I guess

Her body. Her choice. Her responsibility.

You're right... a woman gets pregnant all on her own.

 

[nehalem256]

Both are unnecessary? Really? Pregnancy is necessary for the species to continue on. Breasts are necessary to feed young, however there is an alternative in the form of baby formula.

Abortions are unnecessary. And are in fact detrimental to the species continuing for obvious reasons

As for mandatory abortions for the poor? That defies the Pro-Choice stance. The plain and simple approach here is that if a poor person chooses to have an abortion but cannot afford it, it is certainly a better option for the tax payer to pay for the abortion, and not the subsequent raising of the child. That is a choice for the person to make, not the government, not the tax payer.

And then they should be responsible for paying for the abortion or subsequent raising of the child.

It is better for the taxpayer if all poor women get abortions. But you do not really care about the taxpayer, you only care that women can do whatever they want and force others to pay for the consequences.

 

[nehalem256]

You're right... a woman gets pregnant all on her own.

Do you think the man should have any choice on whether to continue the pregnancy....

EDIT: And why are you trying to make a man responsible for a woman's body anyway?

 

[HomerJS]

Abortions are unnecessary. And are in fact detrimental to the species continuing for obvious reasons



And then they should be responsible for paying for the abortion or subsequent raising of the child.

It is better for the taxpayer if all poor women get abortions. But you do not really care about the taxpayer, you only care that women can do whatever they want and force others to pay for the consequences.

Look up ectopic pregnancy and then reply to your own reply

 

[mvbighead]

Or we could post the cost of raising a child vs. paying the $1000 for the abortion themselves.

I don't understand your point?

The welfare system exists. People that need it tend to take advantage of it.

Why is abortion different in your mind?

 

[mvbighead]

Abortions are unnecessary. And are in fact detrimental to the species continuing for obvious reasons



And then they should be responsible for paying for the abortion or subsequent raising of the child.

It is better for the taxpayer if all poor women get abortions. But you do not really care about the taxpayer, you only care that women can do whatever they want and force others to pay for the consequences.

If the alternative is a homeless mother and child, yes, I would rather see some tax money put towards raising a child. That is a positive for the growth of the human species, as you put it.

 

[sandorski]

Related: Wanna make $1million? Start Praying

 

[mvbighead]

Do you think the man should have any choice on whether to continue the pregnancy....

EDIT: And why are you trying to make a man responsible for a woman's body anyway?

No, the man does not have a choice, with exception to using birth control methods available to him during the act of conception (IE - intercourse). Beyond that, abortion is performed within the female body. Anything that happens there is her choice. Her choice may be persuaded by the male counterpart, but persuasion is the limit.

Two people make a choice during the act of sex (in most cases). Ultimately, the man is responsible for conceiving the child. If he creates life, so long as he pays child support, he is likely given rights of visitation unless circumstances exists whereby he should not have visitation rights. Beyond that, if the woman chooses to have the child, it is her body that will either go through the abortion or pregnancy.

 

[jackstar7]

No, the man does not have a choice, with exception to using birth control methods available to him during the act of conception (IE - intercourse). Beyond that, abortion is performed within the female body. Anything that happens there is her choice. Her choice may be persuaded by the male counterpart, but persuasion is the limit.

Two people make a choice during the act of sex (in most cases). Ultimately, the man is responsible for conceiving the child. If he creates life, so long as he pays child support, he is likely given rights of visitation unless circumstances exists whereby he should not have visitation rights. Beyond that, if the woman chooses to have the child, it is her body that will either go through the abortion or pregnancy.

I warned you.

 

[mvbighead]

I warned you.

Yes, you did. I think I'll just go ahead and be done here.

Apparently it is better to have thousands of people homeless than it is to pay slightly higher taxes.

 

[Atreus21]

Yeah... another one...

Republican candidate calls aborting rapist's child 'more violence on woman's body'

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/..._1_abortion-personal-medical-decisions-incest

When provoked, and after all the furor on the subject of abortion and rape during the last couple weeks, why keep opening your mouth about it?

Uh...not seeing the outrage here.

 

[Phokus]

Uh...not seeing the outrage here.

That's because you're a conservative. If you were a normal well adjusted person, you would see the outrage.

 

[nehalem256]

No, the man does not have a choice, with exception to using birth control methods available to him during the act of conception (IE - intercourse). Beyond that, abortion is performed within the female body. Anything that happens there is her choice. Her choice may be persuaded by the male counterpart, but persuasion is the limit.

And why are you trying to make other people responsible for the things that occur in her body?

Two people make a choice during the act of sex (in most cases). Ultimately, the man is responsible for conceiving the child. If he creates life, so long as he pays child support, he is likely given rights of visitation unless circumstances exists whereby he should not have visitation rights.

The bolded would be a lie. It should be IF THE WOMAN CHOOSES TO HAVE THE CHILD.

Beyond that, if the woman chooses to have the child, it is her body that will either go through the abortion or pregnancy.

And? Her body. Her choice. Her responsibility. Exactly what I said.

 

[nehalem256]

Yes, you did. I think I'll just go ahead and be done here.

Apparently it is better to have thousands of people homeless than it is to pay slightly higher taxes.

Why are they homeless? Because of the choices women make about their bodies? Why don't you trust women?