210 Democrats Voted Against Providing Immediate Medical Assistance to Babies Who Survive Abortion

Perfect examples of apostates. This nation wants the freedom to choose, and they are going out of their way to prevent that.

 

Anti abortionists continue to make egregious arguments.

 

That was the parental intent.... guess you aren't as pro-parent as you were when Ma and Pa Redneck wanted to tell school boards what their jobs were??

You do realize this is an incredibly rare situation, right? Pretty poor doctoring, too.....

 

Oh, what a clever passive aggressive insult....seems to be all you have to contribute..
XXJefferson#51 demands proof and links....I just wondered if he provided any...sorry your feelings were hurt

 

Why would Marx advocate abolition of the family??? What is his rationale? Or are you misquoting?

 

Logical Manifesto.... "If you are aborting a fetus for any reason, assume it's for the benefit of the existing family/person"

I do....

 

Are you willing to pay to keep these living abortion failures alive? If not, why?

 

The reason I'm a libertarian and an advocate for freedom is that I've read more leftist literature than most leftists.

Have you never read the Communist Manifesto?? "Abolish the family!" certainly is in there. A verbatim quote, exclamation point and all.

------------------------------------

The fundamental building block of every society is the family. If your goal is to control people and every aspect of society, you can't allow any challenge to that control exist; hence, leftist literature is always scheming ways to attack and weaken the family structure.

To that end, the most effective attack against the stability of the family unit is Feminism. Followed by premature sexualization, divorce, perverse sexuality, pedophilia, the tearing down of men and fathers, inflation and other financial stressors, etc.

Anything that can contribute to destabilizing the family, which will create dysfunctional children that will grow into dysfunctional adults, is used by the left in an effort to break families apart to creat a more unstable society.

As a leftist, you really should read the literature. I'm not a leftist, but I've read up the subject.

 

Yes I read the Communist Manifesto, and I know there is reference to the abolition of the family. But certainly you didn’t reject Marx because of that one passage.

I’d say he was referring to the family as it is structured, treated, and understood in capitalist society. The family will persist, and it should. But it may change in it’s form as the economic system changes.

Are you familiar with his Critique of the Gotha Programme? How about Lenin’s NEP?

You would make a huge mistake to think I am ignorant of Marx’s writings and other related writings.

 

Wow, there are no words to respond to this.....

 

it will cost them the election

 

I showed you that it's happening.

What more do you need that would make you say that maybe something needs to be done?

 

wait wait wait

I thought the 'thing' being aborted wasn't a person yet

So how can this be about parents rights?

If the 'thing' being aborted is a person then it has a right to life....or so I thought

 

You didn't show me that there wasn't already a federal law against the thing that you want a new federal law for while you made your false accusations. Why does there need to be a new federal law for something already covered by federal law?

 

Don't confuse me being amazed at your laziness and unwillingness to do an ounce of research with me getting my feelings hurt.

It seems you are the one who's upset at having your laziness called out (hence your emotional response).

I'm guessing you still haven't done any research either. Bring something to the table if you want any further discussion.

 

I'll just take this as you not giving a **** about babies born alive being left to die given you couldn't even answer the question, or even address it for that matter.

I even showed you states passing laws prohibiting helping a baby born alive being helped. You still don't give a ****.

Once again, what more do you need that would make you say that maybe something needs to be done?

Now, go on and deflect to saying that there's already a law against it.

But this time tell me what law. Then, you can also tell me how none of these dr's letting babies die are being prosecuted for violating this mysterious law that you claim is already in place.

 

….and the “research” was largely limited to hearsay and anecdote…

 

And I'll just take your false accusations against me and your inability to understand that there is already a federal law about this as evidence that you aren't ready for this conversation.

 

What about abortions that result in a live birth? One CDC report on death certificates for infants for 2003 to 2014, showed “143 deaths involving induced terminations” of pregnancies during that 12-year period, 97 of which “involved a maternal complication or, one or more congenital anomalies.” The data “only include deaths occurring to those infants born alive; fetal deaths (stillbirths) are not included.”

The CDC notes that the 143 number could be an underestimate of induced terminations of pregnancies.

https://www.factcheck.org/2019/03/the-facts-on-the-born-alive-debate/

 

Sounds like an appeal to authority fallacy to me. I don't agree with communism/socialism as the primary economic tools, but my disagreement would never be based only upon what the founder said or did not say. Reasoned arguments are the key. Socialism does not inherently abolish the family - therefore this argument has nothing to do with socialism and more to do with what Marx may have personally felt.

This is selective attention in action. ALL totalitarian structures seek to eliminate competitors, both left and right wing. Marxism was originally concerned with the exploitation of blue collar persons, not power per se. But once it got into the hands of the powerful, the script changed.

The reality is that good policy must be crafted with measureable goals and data to back it up. Incentives must be aligned. Government owned things can be effective in some situations, but one cannot deny the effectiveness of using people's drive to become wealthy to spur innovation, just as one cannot deny the potential societal costs of leaving that completely unbridled. Both libertarians and socialists need to face reality that just because you love your hammer doesn't mean every problem is a nail.

 

You're entirely missing the point. Why did dems vote to NOT give medical care to the living babies? If there was a law already in place, why did the dems want to change that to allow the babies to die?

 

LOL

You can't address anything I've said and you didn't even try. You can't even defend your position and aren't even trying.

 

What “change”…!?? If there is already a federal law in place (and has been for 20 years…!) that protects live births, what “change” was being attempted…??

As I said elsewhere, this is akin to Republicans saying “We’re going to introduce a law which will make armed robbery illegal!”…..even though such a law already exists…!

Good grief…

 

so is that a yes or no? Should taxpayers pay the cost?

 

It’s banging a drum for the mouth-breathers….nothing more…