Originally Posted by joeydb (Post 764576)

Many of the 40 million aborted would have been taxpayers too. That helps.

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk (Post 764575)

And if my aunt had a penis she'd be my uncle. Yes, people should exercise better judgment about sex. They should also eat more fruits and veggies, not smoke, exercise at least 30 minutes five times a week and always wear their seatbelts. But they don't. However, all of those situations that don't involve sex mostly affect the individual. Sex affect the possible birth of a baby, that, as you have pointed out, is an individual. If you're going to insist that women not have a choice about whether to bear a child, then you need to be willing to support the brand-new life that has come into the world. Babies have NO control over the circumstances of their conception or the economic status of their parents. None. By saying "well, the parents should have exercised better judgment" you're electing to punish babies because you disagree with the parents' sexual habits.

And that's the part about the anti-abortion side's view of the pro-choice side that makes me so sad. The pro-choice side is very aware that we are talking about real babies and real lives coming into the world and is trying to create a place where every one of those babies is desired, as pro-choicers are also fierce advocates of sex-ed and pre-natal care for women who choose to have kids. The anti-abortion side doesn't seem, to this pro-choicer, to be offering any solutions other than, "Well, the woman should have kept her legs crossed." I really feel if these alleged pro-lifers actually cared about babies that if they and the pro-choicers united on a move to reduce the number of abortions actually performed, as opposed to fights over the legality of them, that huge strides could be made to creating a support system for both babies and parents.

But I don't think it's about babies for anti-abortionists.

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk (Post 764580)

Can you prove that? Isn't one of the big right-wing memes right now that half of Americans pay no tax at all? So really, according to the right-wing, only 20 million would be tax-payers; the other 20 million would be moochers.

Originally Posted by joeydb (Post 764566)

Which is why they should exercise better judgment. They, not the taxpayers, should bear the responsibility for events stemming from their own actions. Why is this so hard for people to understand? There is no right to responsibility-free sex. The "Free Love" thing from the sixties and seventies was the result of the collective drug-induced stupors of the hippies and disco freaks. It never existed.

Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 764573)

while I agree with the above... think of how much tax money would be saved in this country if every individual managed their own affairs responsibly, like Joey pointed out.

Originally Posted by joeydb (Post 764576)

Many of the 40 million aborted would have been taxpayers too. That helps.

Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 764584)

And think about how great of a country it would be without CEO's lining their own pockets at the expense of everyone. Think about how much more income tax would be generated... This post may be off topic but I felt left out of your Fantasyworld.

Originally Posted by joeydb (Post 764576)

Many of the 40 million aborted would have been taxpayers too. That helps.

Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 764586)

its a damn shame that has to be a fantasy to think that people can behave responsibly.

says a lot about the human race.

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk (Post 764578)

Which individuals do you think are eating up most of our tax dollars, Antitrust? I'm not trying to pick a fight; I'm genuinely curious where you think the government spends the majority of its money. Judging from your posts, you get most of your news from right-wing sources, so I'm curious what they're telling you.

Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 764584)

And think about how great of a country it would be without CEO's lining their own pockets at the expense of everyone. Think about how much more income tax would be generated... This post may be off topic but I felt left out of your Fantasyworld.

Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 764588)

:tro: Agree

Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 764592)

Since we are living in a Fantasy world. In my fantasy world All people would have to register Pro-Choice or Anti-Abortion on their 21st birthday. Abortion would be banned when more than 50% are Anti-Abortion. Those on the Anti-Abortion list will be randomly assigned a child to adopt and support by the government from the pool of women not wanting to have the baby. How long you think the Anti-Abortion List will be more than 50%..

Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 764593)

I would love to adopt but I dont even think I can do that being gay and living in Florida.

Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 764594)

And that is wrong and shows the contradiction. My impression of Florida is that it is quite conservative. I would think they are Anti-Abortion yet they won't allow a gay person to adopt.

Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 764602)

my brain doesnt have the ability to understand the religious right and their beliefs.

Originally Posted by Antitrust32 (Post 764583)

I really cannot comprehend why so many women have unplanned pregnancies. I live in a overall poor bible belt area where I have seen more pregnant teenagers in the past 2-3 year than I have in the rest of my life combined.

My good friend is now pregnant with her 3rd child at age 22, not any of them are planned. I constantly ask her how she can possibly have 3 unplanned pregnancies. She has no answer for that.

And I'm sorry, but women who are "on the pill" but forget to take it, or dont take it at the same time every day... those women are NOT on birth control.

Having children is such a huge decision to make and a lifetime of responsibility. It is much more difficult to get pregnant than to not get pregnant, considering how many different birth control methods are out there.

Its pretty sad that there are so many women out there that have unwanted pregnancies when it would have been so easy not to get pregnant in the first place. If you are not responsible enough to do that, you should not be having sex. I think it boils down to someone not respecting themself or their body.

Originally Posted by somerfrost (Post 764638)

I agree with one point, it certainly does seem that more and more young women are having babies today, when I lived in Ohio it seemed every girl I met had at least one child (I was managing a convenience store so the population I can speak to were employees and customers). Upon returning to Pa., I saw much the same thing...don't know whether my limited observations are in line with national statistics or not. It should be noted that these are young girls with babies or pregnant, not young girls who had an abortion. To me, this is an indicator that despite the increase in effective birth control methods, young women and girls are not taking them. Is that because they don't care, are irresponsible, or simply don't have access to them? I don't know and neither does anyone else. That's why I believe that we have a long way to go to provide necessary services to women. Just as obvious is the male attitude of complete disregard for the ramifications of having unprotected sex. Some things haven't changed from when I was young....boys are still admired by their peers for being "playas" or "studs" and tremendous pressure is placed on young girls to "put out" to remain popular or to keep a demanding boy friend who tells her, "if you love me, you'll do it". I maintain that this is a culture that needs to change, boys must be taught respect for girls and must stop using them for sexual gratification disguised as "love".

Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 764646)

Nowadays for fuksakes that glamorize teen moms on MTV...:zz: