• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What is your plan for dealing with 800,000 children each year if you ban abortion?

Scrabaholic said:
Incorrect. Murder is never legal.
Click to expand...
In cases of self defense?
But we're talking of abortion, the cessation of bringing a birth to term, which has been made legal by law.
 
Scrabaholic said:
Killing in self defense is not murder. Nor is abortion.
Click to expand...
Both are social norms, and even codified law. They can even be called cultural standards. But they are not universal facts, they are opinion. Other societies, and other people , may see it differently, and codify their opinions accordingly.
 
weaver2 said:
One person proposed raising taxes to take care of the extra children. That's the only real plan.
Click to expand...

It's pretty startling that only one conservative has ventured a suggestion about what to plan for if they overturn Roe. Not one of them wants to think that through. This is just another reason to think that saving little pre-born babies isn't really the goal of the anti-abortion males that post such sanctimonious bullshit about the value of every life.
 
weaver2 said:
If abortion was banned, penalties were heavy and intensive policing was used to track down providers and women so that very few abortions happened there would be about 700.000 additional children born every year.

What kind of legislation would Congressman and women have to enact in order to deal with 700,000 unwanted children every year that need medical services, child care, education, financial support of 75%, police, jails, counseling, job support, welfare?

Since banning abortion is a conservative dream how will you accomplish this and what kind of solution do you proposer dealing with the 700,000 additional unwanted children ?
Click to expand...

1602806893098.png
 
weaver2 said:
Well, yeah! But that doesn't deal with the extra children after overturning Roe.
Click to expand...

How about mandatory support of said baby(-eis) from the baby daddy? So much easier to get a check from Uncle Sam than baby daddy?
 
Would you be opposed to sending such fathers to work camps then? So they can work under supervision? Problem is you want it not just both ways - but every way. You want women to remain stupid so they can put out for just any ol' Tom, Dick, or Harry without holding her or the baby daddy accountable for any action on their part. The sexual revolution is over - women lost.
 
Abortion is NOT going to be banned, and Roe v Wade IS and will remain the Law of the Land unless, in a very unlikely event, an Amendment to our Constitution could be passed to create a basis upon which Roe v Wade could be overturned.
Get the Barrett confirmation over with as quickly as possible, and I believe both Democrats and Republicans will find her the quintessential Justice if we want to eliminate or reduce the application of political bias from the interpretation of our Constitution as the means by which Congress fundamentally changes our form of government.
And I support a Woman's Right to choose an abortion end only after birth.
 
screenwriter said:
Would you be opposed to sending such fathers to work camps then? So they can work under supervision? Problem is you want it not just both ways - but every way. You want women to remain stupid so they can put out for just any ol' Tom, Dick, or Harry without holding her or the baby daddy accountable for any action on their part. The sexual revolution is over - women lost.
Click to expand...

The CCC program giving young men work during the depression from 1934 to 1943 served 3M men and cost $3B. Every year 800,000 abortion are performed representing 800,000 baby daddies. In 9 years the would be 7.2M young men in a CCC like work program. Is it realistic to expect this to be a solution to 800,000 unwanted children born every year?
 
Individual said:
Abortion is NOT going to be banned, and Roe v Wade IS and will remain the Law of the Land unless, in a very unlikely event, an Amendment to our Constitution could be passed to create a basis upon which Roe v Wade could be overturned.
Get the Barrett confirmation over with as quickly as possible, and I believe both Democrats and Republicans will find her the quintessential Justice if we want to eliminate or reduce the application of political bias from the interpretation of our Constitution as the means by which Congress fundamentally changes our form of government.And I support a Woman's Right to choose an abortion end only after birth.
Click to expand...

Six SC justices, assuming Ms Barrett is confirmed, have stated that Roe is bad law and they would overturn it. What makes you sure that abortions will not be banned when abortion decisions go back to the states to decide?
 
weaver2 said:
Six SC justices, assuming Ms Barrett is confirmed, have stated that Roe is bad law and they would overturn it. What makes you sure that abortions will not be banned when abortion decisions go back to the states to decide?
Click to expand...
Five would be enough, yet Roe v Wade has not been overturned.
Are you aware of anything per se, in our Constitution other than a strictly religious interpretation, which would/could provide a basis for the SC to rule Roe v Wade unconstitutional?
 
Individual said:
Abortion is NOT going to be banned, and Roe v Wade IS and will remain the Law of the Land unless, in a very unlikely event, an Amendment to our Constitution could be passed to create a basis upon which Roe v Wade could be overturned.
Get the Barrett confirmation over with as quickly as possible, and I believe both Democrats and Republicans will find her the quintessential Justice if we want to eliminate or reduce the application of political bias from the interpretation of our Constitution as the means by which Congress fundamentally changes our form of government.
And I support a Woman's Right to choose an abortion end only after birth.
Click to expand...
weaver2 said:
The CCC program giving young men work during the depression from 1934 to 1943 served 3M men and cost $3B. Every year 800,000 abortion are performed representing 800,000 baby daddies. In 9 years the would be 7.2M young men in a CCC like work program. Is it realistic to expect this to be a solution to 800,000 unwanted children born every year?
Click to expand...


Nah, by all means .... kill them off. After all abortion is Darwin's right hand man. Nothing I can say or do will ever make an abortophile see the human reproduction cycle as something to be taken seriously in the first place. No difference in abortion and animals that eat their young. So much for being evolved.
 
screenwriter said:
Nah, by all means .... kill them off. After all abortion is Darwin's right hand man. Nothing I can say or do will ever make an abortophile see the human reproduction cycle as something to be taken seriously in the first place. No difference in abortion and animals that eat their young. So much for being evolved.
Click to expand...
No one is forced to have an abortion. Though eating a child, your own or others, should be illegal and probably would result in prosecution.
Darwin has nothing at all to do with abortion.
 
screenwriter said:
If chicks would choose their babydaddies like they choose their selfies, they wouldn't have all that drama...
Click to expand...

And the "point" of this is...what, exactly? It doesn't have anything to do with a real plan for dealing with 800,000 children each year if abortion is banned. Do you have a plan? Because other than raising taxes, no one else on the anti-abortion side has come up with one.
 
weaver2 said:
One person proposed raising taxes to take care of the extra children. That's the only real plan.
Click to expand...

Aren't anti-abortion conservatives among the first to screech the loudest at the mention of raising taxes? Funny how raising taxes is the only "plan" they've managed to come up with.
 
screenwriter said:
How about mandatory support of said baby(-eis) from the baby daddy? So much easier to get a check from Uncle Sam than baby daddy?
Click to expand...

Sounds good in theory. Problem is, how does the government get mandatory child support from the baby daddies who bail out and leave for parts unknown, where they can't be found? Do you think the woman (or teenage girl, for that matter) and the child(ren) should just starve in those circumstances? :rolleyes:
 
weaver2 said:
How many articles have you read describing the success of getting fathers to support their children.
Click to expand...

Good point. I haven't read any. More often than not, fathers who never wanted children in the first place and don't want to support them financially find ways to avoid doing so.
 
screenwriter said:
Would you be opposed to sending such fathers to work camps then? So they can work under supervision?
Click to expand...

How could such a "solution" be carried out for fathers who can't be found? This is no more a "solution" than legally banning abortion would be. So no, you still don't have a plan, not one that makes sense anyway.
 
screenwriter said:
You want women to remain stupid so they can put out for just any ol' Tom, Dick, or Harry without holding her or the baby daddy accountable for any action on their part. The sexual revolution is over - women lost.
Click to expand...

You. Wish. Since choosing to have sex isn't a crime or some kind of "immoral action," there's no need for any "accountability" or punishment. I really believe that the only reason anti-abortion conservatives want to ban abortion is to punish women for actions they don't approve of. You know, like having sex, especially women who aren't married. And the punishment they like most is forcing women to stay pregnant and give birth, even if it's against their will.
 
Individual said:
Five would be enough, yet Roe v Wade has not been overturned.
Are you aware of anything per se, in our Constitution other than a strictly religious interpretation, which would/could provide a basis for the SC to rule Roe v Wade unconstitutional?
Click to expand...
Roberts is nota locked in conservative vote which is why Ms Barrett is so sought after. I believe that the 10th Amendment has been the reason Roe is called bad law.
 
weaver2 said:
Roberts is nota locked in conservative vote which is why Ms Barrett is so sought after. I believe that the 10th Amendment has been the reason Roe is called bad law.
Click to expand...

weaver2 said:
Six SC justices, assuming Ms Barrett is confirmed, have stated that Roe is bad law and they would overturn it. What makes you sure that abortions will not be banned when abortion decisions go back to the states to decide?
Click to expand...
Congress IS delegated to the U.S. Congress to pass laws. Can you make a case of HOW Roe v Wade violates the 10th Amendment?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom