All of us have heard the lie that "no public funds go to fund abortion". It's a lie because it sounds like your money isn't going to pay for someone else's abortion. The like is usually backed up showing some sort of map saying that "federal funding of abortion is prohibited. However, in many cases, the state picks up the tab for what the feds won't pay for. https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/state-funding-abortion-under-medicaid And while technically accurate in that 20% of this comes out of your taxes. However, it would be more accurate to say that taxes pay for 20% of all abortions in their entirety whereas the individual pays none of the cost. In the majority of cases where people have a job, and are required to purchase health insurance, that insurance will cover abortion services (even if you are a guy). Currently 90% of health care plans in some areas cover abortion services. http://www.politifact.com/virginia/...virginia-says-90-percent-health-care-policie/ So, Obama Care funded, or not, male, or female, we are all more likely than not paying for someone else's abortion, or you will have to pay for the ObamaCare health care tax penalty.
And from that same pool of money comes funds for life-saving incubators and prenatal care. So I suggest you think of your money going to those benefits to life. And don't get an abortion. Do you have problems with some of your money going towards cruise missiles that may or may not kill a pregnant woman? Why do you think there is a difference?
Part of the social contract is that your community pays for things you use, even when each member does not, and even when some of member don't want you to get them, through taxes. Another part of the contract is that you pay for services you do not like, services you do not use and some of those services will go to people you do not like. This is where pro-lifers have to just suck it up. I have to suck it up when I pay for executions when I loath the death penalty.
So, Obama Care funded, or not, male, or female, we are all more likely than not paying for someone else's PROSTATE surgery ( even if you are a WOMAN !) , or you will have to pay for the ObamaCare health care tax penalty.
If you are honestly concerned about the impact to your personal finances, you should be relieved to know that legalized abortion has saved you from paying higher taxes to support millions of newborns who would have been thrust into poverty if their mothers had been forced to carry every pregnancy to term. If you are not relieved to learn that, you must have some other reason for wanting to stop abortions. Maybe we should be talking about the real reason you think abortions should be stopped.
Shame your own link states the 90% claim is false. and this - http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot...n-taxpayers-paying-for-abortion/#402f89697709 - puts all your claims into the realm of fantasy
We all now have to have health care because of "Obama Care" or pay the tax. Your health care plan more often than not covers abortion. Therefore, you will pay for someone's abortion. I thought I was pretty clear about this, but you keep drawing a distinction between those who have their abortions covered 100% by taxpayers, and those who have theirs 90% covered by others in their insurance pool. Sounds a little disingenuous don't you think.
republicans money goes to things like the war in Iraq, Democrats goes to things like health care services you want to reduce abortion, make sure long lasting birth control is easily accessible to all .
To start with, you sound like someone saying: "We're only aborting poor minorities, that won't ever amount to anything" with this ridiculous argument. Moreover, when I look at the math, I do start to worry. 1. First there is the concern that there are millions of future taxpayers that will never be. 2. I feel like more people will have irresponsible sex with this 'convenience' at their disposal. The explosion in STD rates which I see as a direct consequence of 'easy abortion' and the cost of treatment is equally concerning. How are you going to pay, when 50+% of young adults have STDs, and need treatment? (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/11/18/cdc-alarming-increase-stds/75978596/) 3. Additionally, I feel this is making it easier for couples to push off having kids until later. Having kids later in life is much more expensive, and riskier as we all know. 4. Lastly, there is the trend data. Listening to the "Abortion makes sense economically" argument you would think that there would be some sort of death of poverty in the US, and we all would be enveloped in a rainbow of prosperity. Unfortunately, it looks like the exact opposite. Children living in poverty has increased steadily since Roe V Wade is now at an all time high in our country. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-s-is-among-the-worst-in-the-developed-world/)
When in some cases you are paying $168,000 per year to incarcerate someone, how is it exactly you are "paying to execute" someone? http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/24/n...-inmate-is-nearly-168000-study-says.html?_r=0 Aren't you just having righteous indignation over saving money?
Yes. I feel I'm consistently pretty damn cheap. When I see terrorists in the middle east driving around in US made Humvees, that ticks me off too. http://pamelageller.com/2014/06/al-...l-bank-make-worlds-richest-terror-force.html/
What I spend to incarcerate ( the cell, walls and staff etc), I spend to contain crime and still keep my humanity and live in a civilized nation. What I spend to bodily restrain someone, and then either poison, electrocute, hang or shoot them to death, I spend to lose my humanity and turn my home into a barbaric community. I prefer to invest more, so that I lose less of what makes me and my country different from Iran or North Vietnam.
Why not focus on improving the domestic economy? Won't a stronger economy let more people pay for their own things? Or do you like outsourcing? NAFTA, GATT, TPP... (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...n-voted-virtually-every-trade-agreement-kill/)
There was nothing in your linked article to connect child poverty with RvW, none whatsoever.. But there was this, ""Like our high infant mortality rate,""....and having clinics, that provided pre-natal care closed by Republicans doesn't help. """"1. First there is the concern that there are millions of future taxpayers that will never be. """"" GOOD! We have too many people now....people who can't find jobs. """2. I feel like more people will have irresponsible sex with this 'convenience' at their disposal."""" Your feelings don't matter. Since the first person existed people have had irresponsible sex....and abortion, legal and illegal, never made a difference..... """"3. Additionally, I feel this is making it easier for couples to push off having kids until later. Having kids later in life is much more expensive, and riskier as we all know.""" Baloney.....control issues much? You now want to regulate WHEN people can have kids. Maybe they wait until they can AFFORD them .....and for sure it's no one else's business unless they want to pass laws forbidding women over a certain age from having kids...and they'll be forced to get abortions if they become pregnant.
Interesting you are lambasting me for defending those who can't defend themselves. I didn't say I supported executions. I merely said I didn't support abortion. If I was a black infant in his mother's womb, I might prefer to grow up in one of these 'barbaric' cultures as you put it because my chance of survival would be many times greater. http://www.politifact.com/texas/sta...a-meyer-says-more-black-babies-are-aborted-n/
Ya, why not focus on improving the economy and spend less time trying to regulate, with regulations that Republicans allegedly hate, women's reproductive tracts...
I am throwing out an educated guess based on statistics. Do you have statistics that show otherwise? Should I be "tasting the rainbow" of prosperity since Roe v Wade? You mean a record number of people looking to retire that will have no tax base to support them? My self esteem garden withers No statistics to back this either? - - - Updated - - - Last I heard Trump supported abortion. He also seems to care about fixing the economy. Are you telling me I should attend a rally?
Except I did not 'lambast' anyone for anything. I am pointing out that we all have to sacrifice an important part of our individual moral code, when we work collectively to fund our society.
Just thought I'd include all of my post not just the parts you weren't afraid of. Did I mention Trump? No. Did you think Republicans have NEVER tried to regulate women's reproduction before Trump !!! ? REALLY! Gee, you missed Texas get slapped back into place by the Supreme Court in just the last week or so ...they tried to regulate women's reproductive tracts, regulations are good things to Repubs when it's aimed at controlling women.... When you say :""3. Additionally, I feel this is making it easier for couples to push off having kids until later. Having kids later in life is much more expensive, and riskier as we all know.""" You are talking about forcing women, who are passed the age YOU find acceptable, to have abortions.....HOW else would that work to solve your problem? You:"""2. I feel like more people will have irresponsible sex with this 'convenience' at their disposal."""" Your feelings don't matter. Since the first person existed people have had irresponsible sex....and abortion, legal and illegal, never made a difference..... There I included the part that you didn't find CONVENIENT. Quote Originally Posted by FoxHastings View Post There was nothing in your linked article to connect child poverty with RvW, none whatsoever.. You: """I am throwing out an educated guess based on statistics"" Neither you nor your link provided any statistics proving that RvW caused poverty. An "educated" guess needs education before the "guess".
Good. Now we just need to get Medicaid to pay for abortions.....and make it law that EVERY insurance company covers abortion
Right now we don't have enough jobs for future taxpayers to pay their taxes with. The more people we have than jobs, the more money it costs. That means your argument is flawed in that more taxpayers does not mean anything if there's not more jobs to go with them.
Maybe you can explain how when poverty flourishes, and there are record number of single parents, violence against women is on the rise, that women's rights are better? All of these negative factors are on the rise, and you don't seem to want to tie any of it to society's objectification of women and treating them like sex objects. Or the legislation that makes it easier to men to just walk away... If women had children at a younger age, it is the ideal for healthy children, and for the overall health of women. If it were up to me I wouldn't encourage kids to 'boink' everyone until they find the perfect partner at 40. Perhaps wait until they are married to participate in activities that are likely to create children we might have fewer 'mistakes'. The difference is when a society encourages behavior which hurts society, it gets more of it. Do you deny this is way more prevalent in today's society? There is a strong correlation when the day Roe V Wade was passed, the poverty rate started to rise steadily till today. You still have no reasonable alternatives or counter theories?
That's not the only options. I would rather there be fewer abortions, fewer unplanned pregnancies, and fewer welfare queens. Ideally, none.
