There is no longer a PRO-CHOICE MAJORITY in the U. S. Senate.

Shutting down PP has nothing to do with lowering abortions; PP provides sexual education, healthcare and contraceptives to the young and poor; without PP, there will be far more unwanted pregnancies and abortions.
Shutting PP is about GOP wanting to dictate its agenda; it is about legislating their faith.
There is no such a thing as Pro-Life; the correct term is Anti-choice. Women choice that is.

 

Of course "the pill" took birth control to a new level, separating the use of birth control from the act of intercourse, and also providing a level of reliability never before available. Many of the earlier types of birth control are still in use today in basically the same form, however, and many women cannot use the hormonal BC, so are forced to resort to older methods. IUD's were available YEARS ago. The point is that birth control was available and widely used, and people did have pre-marital, extra-marital, and marital sex, and many of them escaped the pregnancy/childbirth punishment that you are so longing to inflict upon women today.

 

You guys could always go into the non-profit business ya know? There is nothing keeping PP from being a private non-profit is there?

Talk to George Soros and Bill Gates, I am sure they will be more then willing to fund it.

 

It's really hard to come to terms with a human being that considers pregnancy and children as punishment.

 

Right wingers make me laugh. They proclaim to stand for small goverment intrusion, and liberty, yet on the other hand they desire for the goverment to dictate what a woman does with her body. What revolting hypocrisy.

Truth is right wingers love big goverment more than anyone but only when it suits their agenda.

 

Bunch of old white male duffers still trying to legislate uterine rights. Shameless. At least pro-choice women are still the vast majority of women.

 

You will have to elaborate on this danger from older types of birth control. Birth control, even the earlier methods, saved women's lives and health. And saved the lives and health of their children too.

http://generalhealthtopics.com/timing-births-438.html

Too many births, births too close together, and births to adolescent girls or women over the age of 35 endanger women's lives and account for approximately one third of all infant deaths.

http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/14608/pregnancies_risky_when_too_close_together/

HealthDayNews -- Women who have their babies too close together have an increased risk for complications, including premature birth, low birth weight and even death of the baby.

 

Sorry, I am not doing your homework for you. Your an adult, you have internet access and access to health professionals. Research it yourself. I am not going to provide you with sources just so you can turn around and say, "Those sources aren't good". Find them yourself. If you say you can't, then you haven't looked hard enough have you?

All I can tell you is that your pro-feminazi stance is all shadows and fake.

They use to use women as guinea pigs for this stuff and many of them died or were left barren b/c of it. But keep on supporting the same pharmacuteical companies you guys love to hate on on any other issue regarding medically related stuff. Funny how you guys get all lovy dovey with them on this issue of women's rights, but on anything else they are an evil empire....lmao.

 

I researched your claim, and found nothing credible--a site called "PillKills" or some such from the radical American Life League. Thanks for exposing the anti-choice agenda, which is not just against abortion, but also contraception. The Pence bill is just an example because it would limit the availability of birth control. Most Americans do not agree with your radical agenda, that every family should be like the Duggars.

 

That just means you've made an empty claim, you can't back it up. It's hard to believe women were killed by condoms or diaphragms, and it's easy to believe that women died from too frequent childbearing.

 

From an economic standpoint, criminalizing abortion would expand the national deficit, force mothers into poverty, and spread thin our nation's resources and benefits. In my opinion, I don't think anyone really wants to pay for someone else's children. It's big talk from a faceless, nameless forum poster, but when those poor, unaborted children start feeding off the system, most Republicans will not support them at the expense of the taxpayer.

 

Actual research, takes longer then a 10 second Google search.

But thanks for proving my point anyways.

 

No, that is not what it means.

What it means is, your unwilling to actual find the truth and instead of researching it yourself, are just gonna call my claim empty, even though you haven't even been bothered to go look for it yourself.

This would have been the same responses from you and Cady, had I provided a source for my information.

This is why I have stopped providing you people sources, b/c your just gonna claim it isn't legit anyways. It's a futile exercise, like asking you guys to actual do your own research.

 

If there were any truth at all to your claim, yes, something would show up on a quick google search. And if there were any truth at all to your claim, you wouldn't be embarrassed to link to it.

 

Research is your friend Cady.

Your an adult, do your own. I am not your momma. If your interested enough to find it, you will find it on your own time. If not, then you won't.

I am not going through a futile exercise with you people anymore.

 

If you expect anyone to believe YOUR claim, then you have to back it up. That is the way real debate works. Otherwise no one can take you seriously.

 

No, I don't care if you believe my claim. It's up to you to figure out if you want to look into it or not, not me.

See, I have seen you and Grannie countless times ask for sources then when one is provided just dismiss it as soon as it is provided. I am not doing that anymore.

If the folks I am talking to want to know more, I am going to ask them to research it themselves. I am not your momma and I am not going to do the work load for you. If your highly interested in it, you will seek it out yourself. That is up to you.

 

Then you are not here on this debate forum to debate. You are here to spread your propaganda. To say to a debate opponent, "You go research until you can prove my point," is laughably absurd.

 

It's the only way to tango with people who aren't really here for debate Cady.

Asking for sources, then immeditely dismissing them isn't a form of debate either Cady.

Now, either go do your own research and come back with something or not, I don't care. That is up to you.

I am done talking about this.

 

I don't want to tango. I want you to attempt to prove your point, the way real debate works, which you have refused to do.

Then provide unbiased sources to prove your point. Surely you know the difference.

 

Let's summarize your situation. Someone posts that for every dollar spent on sex education we save $4 in Medicare/Medicaid. You challenge for a fact link. I provide it. You challenge experts whose work is with budgets on Planned Parenthood. I provide a link from Wiki showing the credibility of those experts. You then challenge Wiki's credibility. I provide a link showing how Wiki Encyclopedia works. Then you post this obscure link from the American Speculator http://spectator.org/archives/2009/12/30/wikipedia-meets-its-own-climat whom no one has ever heard of, and is not credentialed by Google. Besides it does not defend a thing you are saying! Then you dance around like you have had some kind of big win! You were nailed back in post #97 and have nothing credible to support your postions. You are a manure spreader, and that is all there is to it.

$5 says you're a ********** and wouldn't recognize a fact if it hit you on the head.​

 

Going back to the thread title... it appears the U.S. Senate finally mirrors the U.S. Population.

FINALLY! A Representative Republic.



http://www.gallup.com/poll/118399/more-americans-pro-life-than-pro-choice-first-time.aspx

 

Popular opinion about laws change all the time. The 14th Amendment written after the Civil War has not been changed, though many are upset that it has turned into a loophole for illegal aliens.

The House and the Senate can think what they want about Roe V Wade. Even if they passed repeal, President Obama would veto it.

Even if President Obama did not veto, the U. S. Supreme Court is not going to be able to change their postion easily. They would require major new information to reverse themselves.

We Pro-Choice people always watch this issue carefully, but we are not concerned. In 2012 the politics will go up for election again. American voters will express their concern that EMPLOYMENT has not been America's top priority. Republicans are running around talking repeal of Roe, and repealing Healthcare when JOBS is the real issue. Republicans will get a hard slap in 2012 as they exit the U. S. House.

Planned Parenthood is a program that will have to justify itself for funding as they do every year. Sadly, killing the fetus is viewed as efficient by law makers. And sex education is even more efficient than abortion. I hate to see Pro-Choice and Planned Parenthood win based on dollars instead of principle, but that is hard-ball politics American style. Republican greed will save Pro-Choice and Planned Parenthood.

Visiting Planned Parenthood is painful for anyone.
Religious fanatics make it more difficult, and it is none of their business.​

 

My point was the original poster was actually in an up-roar over the composition of the U.S. Senate. I say... so what that is how most Americans feel. In fact, I am in the minority with you.

However, this is not an issue as you stated that will be overturned and far too many people make far too big a deal out of this issue. Many people single item vote on it as my mom (Liberal) does and forgets that things like fiscal responsibility are far more important.

The abortion issue for some reason has been tied to politicians that are also big spenders by general rule. There is no need for that to be the case, but we destroy the rest of the countries economy, because gosh darn it, abortion rights are threatened! When in reality abortion rights are very safe. It is a scam to get votes for big spenders.

 

That poll was from 2009. Here's a newer one:

http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

More importantly, 75% of those polled think abortion should be generally available or available with some restrictions.