celticwar17
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2011
- Messages
- 6,540
- Reaction score
- 2,524
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
some people are just not fit for being parents no matter how much money you throw at them, but not suggesting that we should all just start prying babies form peoples hands or whatever... just that adoption has a place... a very good one.Of course not. They were all very grateful to their adoptive parents. My main issue is that I would prefer it if society made it easier for low-income or single mothers to be able to keep their own children. It's something I don't mind my taxes paying for.
some people are just not fit for being parents no matter how much money you throw at them, but not suggesting that we should all just start prying babies form peoples hands or whatever... just that adoption has a place... a very good one.
what?Heavens - I read that, though I was in a different thread and went 'oh my god what's wrong with you' - LOL
some people are just not fit for being parents no matter how much money you throw at them, but not suggesting that we should all just start prying babies form peoples hands or whatever... just that adoption has a place... a very good one.
I don't understand your opposition?Heavens - I read that, though I was in a different thread and went 'oh my god what's wrong with you' - LOL
It does have its place. I never said otherwise. So does foster parenting. I have nothing against it. I would just like to make it easier for women to be able to keep their children and not have to give them up just because of their financial situation. I can't help how my personal and admittedly completely anecdotal experience with adoption has shaped my perception of it. It's not a one size fits all solution.
I'll answer that one.
Yep. I knew. And they could have forced me to look at pics and hear the heartbeat and I still would have done it.
There ya go. Straightforward answer if there ever was one. No *****footin' around.
Governments have no ****ing right to force unnecessary and unwanted medical procedures on anybody. End of story.
Do you understand that's exactly how pro-life people feel about those who force a "medical procedure" on a child? This ultrasound merely makes the woman uncomfortable for awhile. An abortion ends the life of a child.
What about true education of the ramifications of having a child when you are not prepared to have one? See, we seem to be searching for ways to shrug responsibility for actions, when we know full well what the consequences of that action results in.
j-mac
But Josie, why should they have to endure a medically unnecessary procedure to undergo a legal medical procedure?
An abortion isn't just a medical procedure.....
...If the state of Texas wants to try to save lives of unborn children by requiring women to have an ultrasound to see their baby, I'm all for it.
sure it is, especially the early ones.
Then it can be treated just like any other medical procedure. The government mandates certain therapies and "violations of privacy" before having procedures done. If it's just a medical procedure then the government can regulate it equally like all the others.
the govt. has NO RIGHT, mandating any medical procedures, under penalty of prison, especially if the procedure is purely for ideological reasons.
this is the kind of thing the USSR or Nazi Germany would do. yes, I just went there.
Oh but it does, and it exercises that right.....
please name another totally elective procedure, that is mandated by the government, for purely ideological purposes.
and don't move the goalposts, thanks.
An abortion isn't just a medical procedure. It's not just removal of tissue or a tumor. No one would ever say that everyone with a brain tumor should have to SEE it before it's removed. That's stupid. The reason this procedure is important is because it's LIFE inside. It's a game changer. It's completely different than any other surgery.
If the state of Texas wants to try to save lives of unborn children by requiring women to have an ultrasound to see their baby, I'm all for it.
...
Fact: the government has the right to regulate healthcare and mandate things. You don't like it, and you may not like it because it moves in a positive step towards correcting the atrocity of abortion. But no matter how many times you simply say "the government has no right" that doesn't change the fact that the government does have that right and is exercising those rights at this very moment with other patients regarding other therapies/procedures/
the govt. has NO RIGHT, mandating any medical procedures, under penalty of prison, if the procedure is purely for ideological reasons.
*tink, *tink, *tink......Obamacare anyone?
j-mac
no, the govt. has NO right to mandate a totally elective medical procedure, that is not meant to protect the health of the person and is totally motivated by ideology, under penalty of prison for the victim and loss of license for the doctor.
SCOTUS will agree with me, as will the Appellate Courts in TX and Va.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?