Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Can we all agree on abortion & defeat Republican
Common Ground Common Sense > Issues that Affect Our Lives > Civil Rights and Civil Liberties > Women's Issues
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Mass
QUOTE(Mac2 @ Feb 11 2005, 09:43 AM)
Abortion really is an issue where there is no compromise. If you believe otherwise, go to any coffee house and discuss it with 10 people; you would see what I meant.
*



I get the feeling that you are right and I was wrong. I was hoping that people would focus on measures that would make abortion unnecessary, it is obviously not the case.
tnwycked
QUOTE(Arneoker @ Feb 11 2005, 09:44 AM)
Excellent idea!  Could be a good way to raid their base as well as promote a good policy.
*



Agreed!
Arneoker
QUOTE(Mass @ Feb 11 2005, 12:22 PM)
I get the feeling that you are right and I was wrong.  I was hoping that people would focus on measures that would make abortion unnecessary, it is obviously not the case.
*

But we are talking about such measures. However, there are those "tough nut" cases which Beamer brought up. We cannot just sweep those under the rug. But I don't think it is a vain hope to come to common ground on a lot of good policy proposals.
Mass
QUOTE(Arneoker @ Feb 11 2005, 10:55 AM)
But we are talking about such measures.  However, there are those "tough nut" cases which Beamer brought up.  We cannot just sweep those under the rug.  But I don't think it is a vain hope to come to common ground on a lot of good policy proposals.
*



There are basically two sets of things that I think important in this issues:

- right not to get pregnant if I dont want to (this is absolutely ignored by the present administration).

- right to have an honest and neutral information for a woman who goes to a clinic: this would include abortion, possibility to keep the baby if she wants (help to find info that she may not know that would solve the problem that leads her to an abortion), and adoption. Unfortunately, the key word neutral is just wishful thinking. On one side, the prochoice movement is often not ready to consider other options than abortion, and quite often even dont consider some women need information and advice. On the other hand, people who push abortion (I am not aiming anybody in this panel), often put a moral spin against abortion rather than present neutral information.
Arneoker
QUOTE(Mass @ Feb 11 2005, 12:40 PM)
There are basically two sets of things that I think important in this issues:

- right not to get pregnant if I dont want to (this is absolutely ignored by the present administration).

- right to have an honest and neutral information for a woman who goes to a clinic:  this would include abortion, possibility to keep the baby if she wants (help to find info that she may not know that would solve the problem that leads her to an abortion), and adoption.  Unfortunately, the key word neutral is just wishful thinking.  On one side, the prochoice movement is often not ready to consider other options than abortion, and quite often even dont consider some women need information and advice.  On the other hand, people who push abortion (I am not aiming anybody in this panel), often put a moral spin against abortion rather than present neutral information.
*

Excellent points, and I agree. I cannot see Government-funded facilities pushing a general line that abortion is either immoral or is okay and no big deal. They need to be neutral on the moral issues. This should not be beyond the capability of truly professional medical practitioners.

The true challenge is:

Can at least some pro-choicers see your points and agree that choice is also about the option of deciding to keep the baby and support for that kind of decision?

Can at least some pro-lifers come down from their holy crusade, stop demonizing the "other side", and work on noncoercive ways of reducing the abortion rate?

The problem is with the political activists, not the medical community, IMO.
tnwycked
QUOTE(Mass @ Feb 11 2005, 09:44 AM)
Rather than going alone to a doctor or a clinic to have an abortion?  A lot.  I have been a teen at once time and I know that, though my parents were less than open when it came to these subjects, I would eventually have gone to them (even if this would have beem difficult).

However, once again, my first choice is that this teenager has access to contraceptive means and avoid to get pregnant (if she really has to have sex).  Which means that I think the main focus should be on PREVENTION.
*



There were 4 of us teen girls in my home, and I now have 2 teen girls of my own.

And I have already covered abstinence and prevention in my home, along with what could happen if it doesnt work.

But we are going off topic, this topic didnt seem to be about preventing but more what happens when the prevention fails, because sometimes even with b-control it does.
graham4anything
You all act like abortion is the biggest issue and the one that can change things around.
I disagree.

Today abortion, tomorrow they will want to restrict LBJ's civil rights and voting acts

I say it is legal as is. The rest are wedge issues.
Besides, they will just think of something else

No more elongated toilet bowl seats they said. If you can't fit on a regular one, too bad they howled.And so elongated toilet seats were no longer allowed.
Comfort be damned others shouted

Then toilet paper was not meant to be soft. It is UNAMERICAN to use
squeezably soft Charmin. We must use left wing newspapers the right wing purists shouted as the threw their Charmin into the bonfire and angrily rioted through the towns
"Quick hide your charmin up in the attic, they are a comin' with torches to burn down your home"


First They Came for the Jews
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.


Pastor Martin Niemöller
"first they came, but that was not me, so I did nothing"
tazvil04
QUOTE(savemefrombush @ Feb 11 2005, 09:39 AM)
why is the abortion issue so big - why aren't we concentrating on the economy and security?
*


Abortion is a big issue because it is a single issue that will dtermine whether or not someone votes for a candidate - evangelicals and others support Bush and the Republican party with money and votes for the most part because of this issue.

If we can pull some of that support away from them - and divide those supporters telling them that we are more the party of Christians because while we have a secular government and Constitution which permits abortion and we must respect that reality we are doing everything in our power to make Clinton's safe, legal and rare statement more of a reality - and the Republican party is not doing anything to address this issue except working to change the membership of the Supreme Court which does nothing to address the problem of why someone may choose to have an abortion - and limiting or where possible eliminating those factors.

Its a put your money where your mouth is issue and the Dems should show that we are willing to put our money where our mouth is - speak up for abortion rights - but for abortion alternatives as well - so that it becomes even more safe, legal and rare.

We are the party of Chrisitans because we support issues which advance the interests of all people

Another reason we need to focus on this is the character issue.

Character is all the Republican party has to go on really (than and defense if you believe that they are perceived as being better on that issue too0. Many people join relgiousity with character. While this is a bunch of crap because the Republican party is full of a bunch of hypocrits - at elast as far as their leadership is concerned - people still make their decisions to vote based on the issue of character.

As Bill Clinton said once - a Republican stated that their party must attack the character of Democrats because on the issues the Democrats have better ideas. This was borne out in the polls which demonstrated that on the policy issues most Americans favored the Democrats - but on the leadership and character issues they favored Bush.

If we can win the character debate - becauase of our being popular on the policy questions - we win the election - every election.

It starts with abortion.

Republicans know they can count on a huge block of voters because of this 1 issue.

We need to take that away from them and we can.

I think many or most of us here from many different walks of life have found some common ground on this post. If we can find commong ground - the Democratic party can - and we can advance a platform that is simple, sensible and satisfactory to the evangelicals - thereby increasing the Democratic party's tent and forcing the Rs to fight for their most important constituency. .
Arneoker
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Feb 11 2005, 01:05 PM)
You all act like abortion is the biggest issue and the one that can change things around.
I disagree.

Today abortion, tomorrow they will want to restrict LBJ's civil rights and voting acts

I say it is legal as is. The rest are wedge issues.
Besides, they will just think of something else

*

Abortion is a big issue even if it is not the biggest issue. I think that there's no denying it.

If we cannot broaden our appeal on abortion, we are unnecessarily hobbling ourselves.

No one here is saying changing the laws. (There is discussion on parental notification and late-term abortion, but those issues have been around for years anyway.) We are trying to see what noncoercive things can be done on this issue.

Yes they will think of something else. But that doesn't mean that abortion isn't a serious, real issue with big political implications that we cannot ignore.
Beamer
Right now though, as far as I know, there is no proposed legislation dealing with abortion at the federal level. The matter may not come up unless Bush tries to appoint more judges to the Supreme Court, or possibly Federal judicial appointments in general.

I think the issue is how we talk about abortion. For instance, Hillary Clinton spoke about it recently, and I wonder how many of us agreed with what she said. I found what she said acceptable. How about you all?
gmanders777
Just start calling it what it will be (Pro-Life):

"No Woman's Choice"
tazvil04
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Feb 11 2005, 10:35 AM)
You all act like abortion is the biggest issue and the one that can change things around.
I disagree.

Today abortion, tomorrow they will want to restrict LBJ's civil rights and voting acts

I say it is legal as is. The rest are wedge issues.
Besides, they will just think of something else

No more elongated toilet bowl seats they said. If you can't fit on a regular one, too bad they howled.And so elongated toilet seats were no longer allowed.
Comfort be damned others shouted

Then toilet paper was not meant to be soft. It is UNAMERICAN to use
squeezably soft Charmin. We must use left wing newspapers the right wing purists shouted as the threw their Charmin into the bonfire and angrily rioted through the towns
"Quick hide your charmin up in the attic, they are a comin' with torches to burn down your home"
First They Came for the Jews
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
"first they came, but that was not me, so I did nothing"
*



G4A -

You are absolutely right that there are other more important issues - particularly security - and you know I believe we have to become the party of security - job security - health security - economic security - retirement security - social security - homeland security - education security - child security - security for the Iraqi people and our troops ----but I also believe that this has to become a part of the discussion in the party now.

We can make gains on this issue and divide the Republicans on this issue.

I have talked to some evangelicals who agree on this issue that the Republicans do not do enough - and their policies are based on the wish and hope that if and when a case gets to US Supreme Court - maybe a new justice will limit the right to abortion...but it does not solve the underlying problem.

God wants our society to help individuals make the right choices - not make the right choices for them.
tazvil04
QUOTE(gmanders777 @ Feb 11 2005, 10:50 AM)
Just start calling it what it will be (Pro-Life):

"No Woman's Choice"

*


I prefer

God gave free will to women too!
Arneoker
QUOTE(beamer619 @ Feb 11 2005, 01:19 PM)
Right now though, as far as I know, there is no proposed legislation dealing with abortion at the federal level.  The matter may not come up unless Bush tries to appoint more judges to the Supreme Court, or possibly Federal judicial appointments in general.

I think the issue is how we talk about abortion.  For instance, Hillary Clinton spoke about it recently, and I wonder how many of us agreed with what she said.  I found what she said acceptable.  How about you all?
*

From what I understood, I agreed with her completely.
gmanders777
QUOTE(tazvil04 @ Feb 11 2005, 11:52 AM)
I prefer

God gave free will to women too!
*


G-d may have, but men taketh it away my dear friend smile.gif
Salute_Liberty
Nope, absolutely not. We MUST NOT be blackmailed to give up our own principles and discipline that all human beings are equal and be given the same liberty as the powerful majority. To go along for the sake of hypocrisy is selling our souls to the devil. The story of the parting Red Sea has taught us that no man should be held in bondage. Jesus' death has shown us that we have to follow our own conscience to free ourselves and ALL for universal goodness. His own disciples even betrayed him because they left him to be arrested after the Last Supper. Peter and Judas were the worst hypocrites.

If you want to be refreshed about all the betrayals from His own disciples:

http://www.textweek.com/art/denial.htm

It's a lesson learned that some of the religious leaders could betray us too. Be strong and not be swayed away from your own conscience and fight that ALL men will achieve equal treatment. No laws by a few should control the hearts, minds and bodies of human beings to do what they will. Allowing that is allowing one man to do what he wants to another and allows the victim no grounds for escape.

P.S. I will not sell my soul to Satan and will stand against those religious pundits who are determined to betray Jesus and lead me on a path to crucify any human being just because they are different from the way we think. Jesus thought different from the orders of his time. If we really love Jesus, we should help, not be part of those who are set to destroy the lives of our neighbors and those who walk among us!
graham4anything
I don't think we should.

Give an inch, soon they will cut off the whole thing

Fight back dirty on this.
Find who in congress had wives/girlfriends who had one and publicize it

Out every hypocrite who has had scandal, or affairs...everyone of them

If they are so moral, show the world what that means.

Hillary has another advantage. All her garbage is out there...do the same for all these idiots

Why not offer a reward George Soros of 1 million dollars for anyone who has info leading to the outing of any republican who goes along with this
Dirt with dirt-take the gloves off
Beamer
January 24, 2005
Remarks by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
to the NYS Family Planning Providers


Thank you all very much for having me. I am so pleased to be here two days after the 32nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade, a landmark decision that struck a blow for freedom and equality for women. Today Roe is in more jeopardy than ever, and I look forward to working with all of you as we fight to defend it in the coming years. I'm also pleased to be talking to people who are on the front lines of increasing women's access to quality health care and reducing unwanted pregnancy -- an issue we should be able to find common ground on with people on the other side of this debate.

We should all be able to agree that we want every child born in this country and around the world to be wanted, cherished, and loved. The best way to get there is do more to educate the public about reproductive health, about how to prevent unsafe and unwanted pregnancies.

My own views of family planning and reproductive rights are heavily influenced by my travels as First Lady. I saw firsthand the costs to women when the government controls their reproductive health decisions.

In pre-democratic Romania, they had a leader named Ceausescu, a Soviet style Communist dictator, who decided it was the duty of every Romanian woman to bear five children so they could build the Romanian State. So they eliminated birth control, they eliminated sex education, and they outlawed abortions.

Once a month, Romanian women were rounded up at their workplaces. They were taken to a government-controlled health clinic, told to disrobe while they were standing in line. They were then examined by a government doctor with a government secret police officer watching. And if they were pregnant, they were closely monitored to make sure you didn't do anything to that pregnancy.

If a woman failed to conceive, her family was fined a celibacy tax of up to 10 percent of their monthly salary. The terrible result was that many children who were born were immediately abandoned, and left to be raised in government-run orphanages.

Now go to the other side of the world and the opposite side of this debate. In China, local government officials used to monitor women's menstrual cycles and their use of contraceptives because they had the opposite view -- no more than one child. If you wanted to have a child in China, you needed to get permission or face punishment. After you had your one allotted child, in some parts of China, you could be sterilized against your will or forced to have an abortion.

So whether it was Romania saying you had to have children for the good of the state, or China saying you can only have one child for the good of the state, the government was dictating the most private and important decisions we make as families and as women. Now with all of this talk about freedom as the defining goal of America, let's not forget the importance of the freedom of women to make the choices that are consistent with their faith and their sense of responsibility to their family and themselves.

I heard President Bush talking about freedom and yet his Administration has acted to deny freedom to women around the world through a global gag policy, which has left many without access to basic reproductive health services.

This decision, which is one of the most fundamental, difficult and soul searching decisions a woman and a family can make, is also one in which the government should have no role. I believe we can all recognize that abortion in many ways represents a sad, even tragic choice to many, many women. Often, it's a failure of our system of education, health care, and preventive services. It's often a result of family dynamics. This decision is a profound and complicated one; a difficult one, often the most difficult that a woman will ever make. The fact is that the best way to reduce the number of abortions is to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies in the first place.

As many of you know, I have worked on these issues throughout my career and I continue to work on them in the Senate. One of the most important initiatives I worked on as First Lady and am proud to continue to champion in the Senate is the prevention of teen pregnancy. I worked alongside my husband who launched the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy in the mid-1990s. This organization, which has proven to be a tremendous success, was really was born out of my husband's 1995 State of the Union address, which declared teenage pregnancy to be one of the most critical problems facing our country. We set a national goal of reducing unwanted pregnancies by one-third over the decade. We knew, though, that this goal could not be reached with a government-only effort. That's why we invited private sector sponsors to join the board and use their organizations to send a powerful message to teens to be responsible about their futures.

Now back when the National Campaign was getting off the ground, I actually came to New York City and gave a speech before high-profile members of the media -- essentially challenging the media to embrace this issue and use its power to send strong, clear messages to teenagers to be responsible. Back then I used the phrase "teenage celibacy" over and over. Of course, no one talks about "teenage celibacy" anymore, but the message remains relevant and necessary today. I think it's a synonym for abstinence.

The good news is that the National Campaign, which has nourished many new and fruitful partnerships like those with Time Warner and with the faith community, has helped achieve the goal that my husband set in his State of the Union in 1995. Between 1991 and 2003, the teen birth rate fell 32.5 percent to a record low. The National Campaign has also conducted and disseminated some critical research on the important role that parents can play in encouraging their children to abstain from sexual activity.

So I'm very proud of the work of the National Campaign. We'll be celebrating its 10th anniversary this year and I will continue working with them to keep the number of unwanted pregnancies among our teenagers falling until we get to zero. But we have a long road ahead.

Today, even with the recent decline, 34% of teenage girls become pregnant at least once before their 20th birthday, and the U.S. has the highest teen pregnancy rate of any industrialized country. Children born to teen moms begin life with the odds against them. They are more likely to be of low-birth weight, 50 percent more likely to repeat a grade, and significantly more likely to be victims of abuse and neglect. And girls who give birth as teenagers face a long, uphill battle to economic self-sufficiency and pride. Clearly we do have our work cut out for us.

Research shows that the primary reason that teenage girls abstain is because of their religious and moral values. We should embrace this -- and support programs that reinforce the idea that abstinence at a young age is not just the smart thing to do, it is the right thing to do. But we should also recognize what works and what doesn't work, and to be fair, the jury is still out on the effectiveness of abstinence-only programs. I don't think this debate should be about ideology, it should be about facts and evidence -- we have to deal with the choices young people make not just the choice we wish they would make. We should use all the resources at our disposal to ensure that teens are getting the information they need to make the right decision.

We should also do more to educate and involve parents about the critical role they can play in encouraging their children to abstain from sexual activity. Teenagers who have strong emotional attachments to their parents are much less likely to become sexually active at an early age.

But we have to do more than just send the right messages and values to our children. Preventing unwanted pregnancy demands that we do better as adults to create the structure in which children live and the services they need to make the right decisions.

A big part of that means increasing access to family planning services. I have long been a strong supporter of Title X, the only federal program devoted solely to making comprehensive family planning services available to anyone interested in seeking them. Each year, approximately 4.5 million people receive health-care services at Title X-funded clinics. Nearly two-thirds of Title X clients come from households with incomes below the poverty level. And just to remind you, the poverty level is currently set for a family of three at $15,620. So where do these two-thirds of Title X clients go to receive the services they need? Unfortunately, despite the Clinton Administration working to obtain a 58% increase during the 1990s, the Bush Administration proposed level funding for Title X at $265 million for the 2003 and 2004 budgets, and Congress appropriated only $275 million in 2003. So even as our population has grown and the need has increased, the funding has remained stagnant. In fact, if Title X funding had increased at the rate of inflation from its FY 1980 funding level of $162 million, it would be at approximately $590 million now, but because its been held flat and we don't even know yet what the next budget holds for Title X funding. Title X cannot keep pace with basic services, let alone meet the growing cost of diagnostic tests and new forms of contraception.

It's also important that private insurance companies do their part to help reduce unwanted pregnancies. That is why I am a proud co-sponsor of the Equity in Prescription Insurance and Contraceptive Coverage -- the so-called EPICC. The legislation would require private health plans to cover FDA-approved prescription contraceptives and related medical services to the same extent that they cover prescription drugs and other outpatient medical services. This bill simply seeks to establish parity for prescription contraception. Thanks to so many of the people in this room and the advocates, the EPICC law is now in effect in New York State having been passed and signed in 2002. It's a real role model for the nation. And it's about equal rights and simple justice. After all, if insurance companies can cover Viagra, they can certainly cover prescription contraceptives.

Contraception is basic health care for women, and the burden for its expense cannot fall fully on all women, many who after all live below that poverty rate, and in many instances above it, but not by very much and have a hard time affording such prescriptions. Just think, an average woman who wants two children will spend five years pregnant or trying to get pregnant, and roughly 30 years trying to prevent pregnancy. As I said earlier, and you know so well, the U.S. has one of the highest rates of unintended pregnancy in the industrialized world. Each year, nearly half of the six million pregnancies in this country are unintended, and more than half of all unintended pregnancies end in abortion.

The use of contraception is a big factor in determining whether or not women become pregnant. In fact, this is a statistic that I had not known before we started doing the research that I wanted to include in this speech, 7% of American women who do not use contraception account for 53% of all unintended pregnancies. So by preventing unintended pregnancy, contraception reduces the need for abortion. Improving insurance coverage of contraception will make contraception more affordable and reduce this rate of abortion. And expanding coverage and resources for Title X will do the same.

Another form of family planning that should be widely available to women is "Plan B," Emergency Contraception. I agree with the scientists on the Food and Drug Administration's Advisory Panel who voted overwhelmingly that Plan B is safe and effective for over the counter use. And I worked to launch a GAO investigation into the process of denying Barr Laboratories' application because I believe the decision was influenced more by ideology than evidence.

I am hopeful that the FDA will come to its senses and announce a new policy making Plan B available. Information about Plan B should be available over the counter, which is exactly what the FDA's Advisory Committee recommended. It should also be made available -- automatically -- to women who are victims of sexual assault and rape. I have to confess that I never cease to be surprised but last week, I joined with 21 of my colleagues in sending a letter to the Director of the Office on Violence Against Women -- that's the name of the office at the Department of Justice -- urging the Director to revise the newly-released first-ever national protocol for sexual assault treatment to include the routine offering of emergency contraception. Right now, this 130-page, otherwise comprehensive document fails to include any mention of emergency contraception, a basic tool that could help rape victims prevent the trauma of unintended pregnancies, avoid abortions, and safeguard their reproductive and mental health. Every expert agrees that the sooner Plan B is administered, the more effective it is. Once a woman becomes pregnant, emergency contraception obviously will have no effect.

Yet nowhere does the DOJ Protocol mention emergency contraception or recommend that it be offered to sexual assault victims. According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, there are 15,000 abortions a year from rape. How is it possible that women who have been so victimized by violence can be victimized again by ideology? And how can we expect to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies if we lose this most obvious opportunity to help women who may have had an unwanted pregnancy physically forced upon them?

I hope that whatever one believes or whatever side of the aisle one is, in either the NY State Legislature or the Congress, or anywhere in our country, we all at least agree that the Department of Justice must immediately revise its protocol to include strong recommendations about emergency contraception.

And the final building block of our effort to increase women's health includes ensuring that once women become pregnant, they have access to high-quality pre-natal care so that they can bring healthy children into the world.

One bill that provides a comprehensive approach to the problem of unintended pregnancies encapsulates many of these efforts. It's called "The Putting Prevention First Act." It provides a roadmap to the destination of fewer unwanted pregnancies -- to the day when abortion is truly safe, legal, and rare. The Putting Prevention First Act, which I was proud to co-sponsor in the last Congress, increases funding for Title X; expands Medicaid family-planning services to provide access for more low-income women; ensures that health plans that cover prescription drugs also cover prescription contraceptives; funds emergency contraception public-education campaigns for doctors, nurses and women; ensures that hospital emergency rooms offer emergency contraception to victims of sexual assault; and establishes the nation's first-ever federal sex-education program.

A very similar version of the Putting Prevention First Act is being introduced today, one of the first bills introduced by Minority Leader Harry Reid, to lay out the Democratic plan for women's reproductive healthcare. I am proud to be a co-sponsor of this bill and I will work very hard to see that it is enacted. Because I know we can make progress on these issues; the work of the Clinton Administration and so many others saw the rate of abortion consistently fall in the 1990's. The abortion rate fell by one-fourth between 1990 and 1995, the steepest decline since Roe was decided in 1973. The rate fell another 11 percent between 1994 and 2000, from about 24 to 21 abortions for every 1,000 women of childbearing age.

But unfortunately, in the last few years, while we are engaged in an ideological debate instead of one that uses facts and evidence and commonsense, the rate of abortion is on the rise in some states. In the three years since President Bush took office, 8 states saw an increase in abortion rates (14.6% average increase), and four saw a decrease (4.3% average), so we have a lot of work still ahead of us.

I think it's important that family planning advocates reach out to those who may not agree with us on everything to try to find common ground in those areas where, hopefully, emergency contraception, more funding for prenatal care and others can be a point of common ground.

As an advocate for children and families throughout my life, as a lawyer who occasionally represented victims of sexual assault and rape, as a mother, as a wife, as a woman, I know the difference that good information, good education, and good health care can make in empowering women and girls to make good decisions for themselves.

So in addition to the work that lies ahead of us here at home I would just put in a word for the work that we should be doing around the world. It has been tragic to see so much of the good work that provided family planning assistance and resources to physicians and nurses to deliver to women in places where there was no family planning, where in fact abortion was the only means of contraception. But during the 90's we reached out to women and girls in other parts of the world. When my husband rescinded the global gag rule we began to work on behalf of women's health, though the infant mortality and maternal mortality rate is way too high in so many parts of the world. When I was in Afghanistan last year, I met with a group of women and their number one plea was what can the United States Government do to help save the lives of Afghan women who have one of the highest rates of maternal mortality in the world? Is there some way that more education could be brought in so that women could possibly have more control over their own lives? In places I've traveled I've cut the ribbons on clinics - that were partially funded by money from our government and money from private givers in our country -- that for the first time would provide the full range of health services to women and girls. Because of the reinstatement of the global gag rule under President Bush that work has stopped. Those resources have dried up. The lives of so many women and girls have been put at risk. We can do better not only here at home but around the world.

Yes we do have deeply held differences of opinion about the issue of abortion. I for one respect those who believe with all their hearts and conscience that there are no circumstances under which any abortion should ever be available. But that does not represent even the majority opinion within the anti-abortion community. There are exceptions for rape and for incest, for the life of the mother. Those in the pro-choice community who have fought so hard for so many years, not only to protect Roe v. Wade and the law of the land, but to provide the resources that would effectuate that constitutional right, believe just as strongly the point of view based on experience and conscience that they have come to. The problem I always have is what is the proper role of government in making this decision? That is why I started with two stories about Romania and China. When I spoke to the conference on women in Beijing in 1995 -- ten years ago this year -- I spoke out against any government interfering with the reproductive rights and decisions of women and families.

So we have a lot of experience from around the world that is a cautionary tale about what happens when a government substitutes its opinion for an individual's. There is no reason why government cannot do more to educate and inform and provide assistance so that the choice guaranteed under our constitution either does not ever have to be exercised or only in very rare circumstances. But we cannot expect to have the kind of positive results that all of us are hoping for to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies and abortions if our government refuses to assist girls and women with their health care needs, a comprehensive education and accurate information.

So my hope now, today, is that whatever our disagreements with those in this debate, that we join together to take real action to improve the quality of health care for women and families, to reduce the number of abortions and to build a healthier, brighter more hopeful future for women and girls in our country and around the world.

Thank you very much.


http://clinton.senate.gov/~clinton/speeches/2005125A05.html
Arneoker
QUOTE(Salute_Liberty @ Feb 11 2005, 01:26 PM)
Nope, absolutely not. We MUST NOT be blackmailed to give up our own principles and discipline that all human beings are equal and be given the same liberty as the powerful majority. To go along for the sake of hypocrisy is selling our souls to the devil.
*

Are you saying that anyone here is proposing that we go along with hypocrisy or give up principles? If you are, can you specifically show how?

We are talking about various noncoercive methods that make it easier for a woman to choose not to have an abortion. Is there a problem with that? If there is, what would the problem be?
blueState08
O.K. I have not read all the posts but I'm not sure if everyone is getting it.
For the Christian Right it's not the right to choose, it's murder (that's them not me). Let's say the Republicans were letting People kill three-year old children (I know Bush kills three-year old Iraqi children daily) and showing you pictures of the bodies in church and school every time you meet. It would not matter if you are poor or sick you would do all you can to stop it.
As Democrats we can only say that this is not murder but very few will listen. We can also say that there was less abortion under Clinton than Bush but if we can't prove it's Bushes fault, we're still the murderers and they will go out in droves to unseat every democrat in every office they can until they stop the (so called) killing. You would to if it were three-year olds.
Salute_Liberty
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Feb 11 2005, 12:02 PM)
I don't think we should.

Out every hypocrite who has had scandal, or affairs...everyone of them

If they are so moral, show the world what that means.

Dirt with dirt-take the gloves off
*


I would love to know why Elizabeth Taylor left the Moonie lover, Rep. Sen. John Warner! lol.gif lol.gif
Arneoker
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Feb 11 2005, 01:32 PM)
I don't think we should.

Give an inch, soon they will cut off the whole thing
*

What inch is anyone saying we should give up? (Let's put aside the parental notification and late-term abortion issues for now. Those are side issues to the central question being discussed here. And those are difficult issues in themselves that we've already discussed. I'll allow that you don't think that the Democrats should budge on those, I want to focus on what else is being talked about here. Even without change there, I would hope that the Democrats appeal on this issue in other ways.)
Arneoker
QUOTE(blueState08 @ Feb 11 2005, 01:34 PM)
O.K. I have not read all the posts but I'm not sure if everyone is getting it.
For the Christian Right it's not the right to choose, it's murder (that's them not me). Let's say the Republicans were letting People kill three-year old children (I know Bush kills three-year old Iraqi children daily) and showing you pictures of the bodies in church and school every time you meet. It would not matter if you are poor or sick you would do all you can to stop it.
As Democrats we can only say that this is not murder but very few will listen. We can also say that there was less abortion under Clinton than Bush but if we can't prove it's Bushes fault, we're still the murderers and they will go out in droves to unseat every democrat in every office they can until they stop the (so called) killing. You would to if it were three-year olds.
*

But you're assuming that everyone with pro-life attitudes is part of a monolithic group of close-minded Christian Righists. I just don't think that is the case. Yes, there will always be a hard-core that you cannot reach, I don't think that anyone is denying that.
Salute_Liberty
QUOTE(blueState08 @ Feb 11 2005, 12:04 PM)
O.K. I have not read all the posts but I'm not sure if everyone is getting it.
For the Christian Right it's not the right to choose, it's murder (that's them not me).
*

If the so-called holier-than-thous are so concerned about the murders of emryos, why aren't they calling for a law to prevent poverty? Poverty causes crimes and murders. By voting for tax-refunds, that could be used to clean up poverty, is itself an act that will lead the devastated into crimes and murders. The same would scream murder? What hypocrites? Hypocrites who distort the Christian faith!
tazvil04
QUOTE(Salute_Liberty @ Feb 11 2005, 10:56 AM)
Nope, absolutely not. We MUST NOT be blackmailed to give up our own principles and discipline that all human beings are equal and be given the same liberty as the powerful majority. To go along for the sake of hypocrisy is selling our souls to the devil. The story of the parting Red Sea has taught us that no man should be held in bondage. Jesus' death has shown us that we have to follow our own conscience to free ourselves and ALL for universal goodness.  His own disciples even betrayed him because they left him to be arrested after the Last Supper. Peter and Judas were the worst hypocrites.

If you want to be refreshed about all the betrayals from His own disciples:

http://www.textweek.com/art/denial.htm

It's a lesson learned that some of the religious leaders could betray us too. Be strong and not be swayed away from your own conscience and fight that ALL men will achieve equal treatment. No laws by a few should control the hearts, minds and bodies of human beings to do what they will. Allowing that is allowing one man to do what he wants to another and allows the victim no grounds for escape.

P.S. I will not sell my soul to Satan and will stand against those religious pundits who are determined to betray Jesus and lead me on a path to crucify any human being just because they are different from the way we think. Jesus thought different from the orders of his time. If we really love Jesus, we should help, not be part of those who are set to destroy the lives of our neighbors and those who walk among us!
*



QUOTE(Arneoker @ Feb 11 2005, 11:03 AM)
Are you saying that anyone here is proposing that we go along with hypocrisy or give up principles?  If you are, can you specifically show how?

We are talking about various noncoercive methods that make it easier for a woman to choose not to have an abortion.  Is there a problem with that?  If there is, what would the problem be?
*


Well said.
Mass
QUOTE(Salute_Liberty @ Feb 11 2005, 12:14 PM)
If the so-called holier-than-thous are so concerned about the murders of emryos, why aren't they calling for a law to prevent poverty? Poverty causes crimes and murders. By voting for tax-refunds, that could be used to clean up poverty, is itself an act that will lead the devastated into crimes and murders. The same would scream murder? What hypocrites? Hypocrites who distort the Christian faith!
*



That was exactly the point of this thread. Nothing more.
graham4anything
The radical right doesn't want birth control ,sex education, or any talk about it at all. So how can we compromise?

What real way?

There should be MORE money not less given for education and birth control.
Use birth control, you don't have unwanted babies 98 percent of the time.

This is a money issue. The upper middle and rich class will always get one when needed.
Those in the liberal states will always have the right.

This needs to once again come down to a black and white issue.
Give a kid up for adoption?

Get real. If you are white, there are many takers.
if you are black there are not.

If you are poor, and there are too many restrictions you can die in a back alley again

So tell me in real life, how can we compromise in any way that is really meaningful?

Of course, we can just wink wink say we are moving right. But in reality how? Without giving in to them.
tazvil04
QUOTE(Salute_Liberty @ Feb 11 2005, 11:14 AM)
If the so-called holier-than-thous are so concerned about the murders of emryos, why aren't they calling for a law to prevent poverty? Poverty causes crimes and murders. By voting for tax-refunds, that could be used to clean up poverty, is itself an act that will lead the devastated into crimes and murders. The same would scream murder? What hypocrites? Hypocrites who distort the Christian faith!
*


This is why we can make this issue ours.

The Clinton economy reduceed abortions.

The Bush economy has increased abortions for the first time in years.

The right does not want to acknowledge this reality but it is true.

Democratic policies favor Christian issues more than Republican policies. This is a fact.

All we need to do is tell the truth. We are not talking about selling souls here.

We are not talking about changing our position on abortion.

We are merely talking about helping people to decide not to have an abortion if they choose not to have one - and we are talking about retaining access to abortions for all those who continue to choose to have them.
Mass
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Feb 11 2005, 12:17 PM)
The radical right doesn't want birth control ,sex education, or any talk about it at all. So how can we compromise?

What real way?

There should be MORE money not less given for education and birth control.
Use birth control, you don't have unwanted babies 98 percent of the time.

This is a money issue. The upper middle and rich class will always get one when needed.
Those in the liberal states will always have the right.

This needs to once again come down to a black and white issue.
Give a kid up for adoption?

Get real. If you are white, there are many takers.
if you are black there are not.

If you are poor, and there are too many restrictions you can die in a back alley again

So tell me in real life, how can we compromise in any way that is really meaningful?

Of course, we can just wink wink say we are moving right. But in reality how? Without giving in to them.
*



May be you could read the original thread, before you rant.

It was not about the radical right. It was betweem "prolifer" and "prochoice"in the Democratic party.
Beamer
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Feb 11 2005, 09:17 AM)
The radical right doesn't want birth control ,sex education, or any talk about it at all. So how can we compromise?



People who believe that ALL abortion should be banned are in the minority. I don't know the statistics, but it's true. Most people believe in having abortion for certain circumstances, and that is where the compromise will take place. We will never win over the radical right, and I don't think that's the goal. The goal is to reach the people who don't like the idea of unlimited abortion or abortion as birth control, but want to keep abortion legal.
graham4anything
If we can't have anything that is considered murder, let's outlaw war.

Let's outlaw smoking. It kills and anyone around who breathes it can get sick too. Why is it still legal?

Exactly how does it happen.

I would make RU486 over the counter as it should be, same as condoms are. If you don't want a kid, you cannot say don't have sex.

(and it is not only teenagers, you know. It is all age groups. People tend to forget this.
blueState08
QUOTE(Salute_Liberty @ Feb 11 2005, 11:14 AM)
If the so-called holier-than-thous are so concerned about the murders of emryos, why aren't they calling for a law to prevent poverty? Poverty causes crimes and murders. By voting for tax-refunds, that could be used to clean up poverty, is itself an act that will lead the devastated into crimes and murders. The same would scream murder? What hypocrites? Hypocrites who distort the Christian faith!
*

This is not the fault of their followers, it's our fault as Democrats because we are not making a better argument for the virtues of the Democratic party. We can't just be the decent ones, we must prove it.
Beamer
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Feb 11 2005, 09:21 AM)
If we can't have anything that is considered murder, let's outlaw war.

Let's outlaw smoking. It kills and anyone around who breathes it can get sick too. Why is it still legal?

Exactly how does it happen.

I would make RU486 over the counter as it should be, same as condoms are. If you don't want a kid, you cannot say don't have sex.

(and it is not only teenagers, you know. It is all age groups. People tend to forget this.
*



You're going off on a tangent.
tazvil04
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Feb 11 2005, 11:17 AM)
The radical right doesn't want birth control ,sex education, or any talk about it at all. So how can we compromise?

What real way?

There should be MORE money not less given for education and birth control.
Use birth control, you don't have unwanted babies 98 percent of the time.

This is a money issue. The upper middle and rich class will always get one when needed.
Those in the liberal states will always have the right.

This needs to once again come down to a black and white issue.
Give a kid up for adoption?

Get real. If you are white, there are many takers.
if you are black there are not.

If you are poor, and there are too many restrictions you can die in a back alley again

So tell me in real life, how can we compromise in any way that is really meaningful?

Of course, we can just wink wink say we are moving right. But in reality how? Without giving in to them.
*


We compromise by introducing the Adoption and Pro-Life Assistance Act of 2005 which establishes tax credits for people who bring their babies to term and place them up for adoption, more money for day care centers, more money for sex education, and money to provide health insurance to all women during the term of their preganancy and afterwards for they and their children.

We state that it is hyporcritical for the right to oppose abortion, but then advance policies which do not care about the mother or child after the birth occurs.

Our democratic society teaches us to advance the cause of life, liberaty and the pursuit of happiness.

Republican policies that do not advance health care for all women and children are an affront to these principles for these individuals.
blueState08
QUOTE(beamer619 @ Feb 11 2005, 11:21 AM)
People who believe that ALL abortion should be banned are in the minority.  I don't know the statistics, but it's true.  Most people believe in having abortion for certain circumstances, and that is where the compromise will take place.  We will never win over the radical right, and I don't think that's the goal.  The goal is to reach the people who don't like the idea of unlimited abortion or abortion as birth control, but want to keep abortion legal.
*

You don't need a majority of the country, just of the voters.
graham4anything
QUOTE(beamer619 @ Feb 11 2005, 12:22 PM)
You're going off on a tangent.
*

tell me specific how we can do this?You are in California, right? California like NY NJ will never ban it.(It is a states issue, not federal if they overturn Roe v. Wade, it goes back to states and does not disappear.)

What specific steps (opposed from talk) would everybody suggest
Give 5 each to debate on
tazvil04
QUOTE(blueState08 @ Feb 11 2005, 11:22 AM)
This is not the fault of their followers, it's our fault as Democrats because we are not making a better argument for the virtues of the Democratic party. We can't just be the decent ones, we must prove it.
*


Exactly - let's build a blue nation.
starrygalore
Let me tell you all a story.

A good friend of mine got his high school girlfriend pregnant when she was 16. She was from Texas and came from a ultra-conservative, politically well-connected family. She was struggling with her decision so she decided to seek the counsel of her pastor. Ultimately, she decided to have an abortion. When the pastor learned of this, he freaked out and told her parents. Her parents lost it. She was sent away to a Christian pregnant girl camp in Arizona and was forced to have the child and give it up for adoption. After she had the kid, her parents sent her off to Alaska until she was 18. Then, her parents tried to blackmail my friend's parents into giving the dad campaign donations to keep the whole incident "quiet". They refused, and the dad went ballastic. Long story short there--he had to have a body guard at his own graduation for protection from the girls parents. The girl has never gotten over the whole thing. She calls the adoptive family once a week and is desperatly trying to see the child. The adoptive parents don't know what to make of it. The girl is completely tormented and has actually resorted to being an "escort" so she can earn money to make the trip to Arizona. Had this girl's parents not intervened, I would bet serious money that her life would have turned out completely different.

That is a reason against parental consent.
Arneoker
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Feb 11 2005, 01:51 PM)
If we can't have anything that is considered murder, let's outlaw war.

Let's outlaw smoking. It kills and anyone around who breathes it can get sick too. Why is it still legal?

Exactly how does it happen.

I would make RU486 over the counter as it should be, same as condoms are. If you don't want a kid, you cannot say don't have sex.

(and it is not only teenagers, you know. It is all age groups. People tend to forget this.
*

Graham, I want to say that I respect your opinions on this issue, although we have some big disagreements.

I remember the debate a while ago that we participated in on parental notification and late-term abortion. Again we had disagreements there (especially on the first), but I went away from that respecting what you said. You dealt with opposing opinions fairly and respectfully.

But here, I have to say that you are just not responding to most of what is being said.
graham4anything
QUOTE(tazvil04 @ Feb 11 2005, 12:25 PM)
We compromise by introducing the Adoption and Pro-Life Assistance Act of 2005 which establishes tax credits for people who bring their babies to term and place them up for adoption, more money for day care centers, more money for sex education, and money to provide health insurance to all women during the term of their preganancy and afterwards for they and their children.

We state that it is hyporcritical for the right to oppose abortion, but then advance policies which do not care about the mother or child after the birth occurs.

Our democratic society teaches us to advance the cause of life, liberaty and the pursuit of happiness.

Republican policies that do not advance health care for all women and children are an affront to these principles for these individuals.
*



that is a good idea about tax credits, of course, we need people to have insurance in the first place which won't happen under Bush and the right
They don't as you say care as afterwards it is not an issue.

And-what the rightwing moral people will say-you are creating another system rewarding poor (read this as what the neo-cons will tell their people "blacks") you are giving benefits for blacks to sit around having a baby mill going...
THAT IS NOT MY VIEW-DON'T CALL ME A RACIST, I AM WRITING WHAT THEY WILL SAY
tazvil04
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Feb 11 2005, 11:29 AM)
that is a good idea about tax credits, of course, we need people to have insurance in the first place which won't happen under Bush and the right
They don't as you say care as afterwards it is not an issue.

And-what the rightwing moral people will say-you are creating another system rewarding poor (read this as what the neo-cons will tell their people "blacks") you are giving benefits for blacks to sit around having a baby mill going...
THAT IS NOT MY VIEW-DON'T CALL ME A RACIST, I AM WRITING WHAT THEY WILL SAY
*


Well - the Republicans are the one who support women staying home and not working - look at the Bush women - they can't have it both ways, but I was also talking about providing day care too so that they could work.

You mak ean important point about health insurance and Bush - that it won't happen - but I believe if we couch things in terms of fighting against the incidence of abortion by providing health insruance it might sell to Repuboicans and if it doesn't then shame on them and we can make this a huge issue.

If the Rs balk at the money it would cost - we can say - wait a second - the life of the fetus is an important issue to you - but protecting it costs too much?

I would love to be able to make that argument with Bush - he wiould lose the support of the Christian coalition so fast his head would spin.

But then again this has always been my belief about the religious right - they raise millions of dollars to support the repubs - if they spent that money on education and health care and counselling and helping people with their decisions they could probably cut the incidence of abortion in half in this country. They are the worst hypocrits - granted Bush uses them - but they allow themselves to be used and haven;t the courage to really address the problem.
Arneoker
QUOTE(starrygalore @ Feb 11 2005, 01:57 PM)
Let me tell you all a story.

A good friend of mine got his high school girlfriend pregnant when she was 16.  She was from Texas and came from a ultra-conservative, politically well-connected family.  She was struggling with her decision so she decided to seek the counsel of her pastor.  Ultimately, she decided to have an abortion.  When the pastor learned of this, he freaked out and told her parents.  Her parents lost it.  She was sent away to a Christian pregnant girl camp in Arizona and was forced to have the child and give it up for adoption.  After she had the kid, her parents sent her off to Alaska until she was 18.  Then, her parents tried to blackmail my friend's parents into giving the dad campaign donations to keep the whole incident "quiet".  They refused, and the dad went ballastic.  Long story short there--he had to have a body guard at his own graduation for protection from the girls parents.  The girl has never gotten over the whole thing.  She calls the adoptive family once a week and is desperatly trying to see the child.  The adoptive parents don't know what to make of it.  The girl is completely tormented and has actually resorted to being an "escort" so she can earn money to make the trip to Arizona.  Had this girl's parents not intervened, I would bet serious money that her life would have turned out completely different.

That is a reason against parental consent.
*

But apparently they would have learned about this anyway, law or not. And I think that most parents would handle things better than these ding-dongs. The only remedy to this sort of thing would be a law forbidding the self-important rich and politically connected from having children.
graham4anything
QUOTE(tazvil04 @ Feb 11 2005, 12:32 PM)
Well - the Republicans are the one who support women staying home and not working - look at the Bush women - they can't have it both ways, but I was also talking about providing day care too so that they could work.
*



That's the thing-they play all sides against each other
To the ones where "a" works they say "a"
To the ones where "b" works, they say "b"

We need to expose more the hypocracy between this issue and stem cell research too

I am trying to make you guys see that whatever we do, they will still say we are either flipflops, we are lying, and they will ignore it anyhow

Our people will vote for our people
Theirs will vote for theirs

We can say we don't want abortions often, but they will say we do

Jenna should come out for it.
Barbara Bush(mother) should remind people she was pro-choice
(don't we have old clips of her saying it?)
Arneoker
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Feb 11 2005, 02:06 PM)
That's the thing-they play all sides against each other
*

I think that what people are talking about is doing our own version of this, but in a good way by promoting some humane, progressive policies.
Arneoker
QUOTE(graham4anything @ Feb 11 2005, 02:06 PM)
I am trying to make you guys see that whatever we do, they will still say we are either flipflops, we are lying, and they will ignore it anyhow
*

Of course they will. The point is not to convince the Republicans to agree with us. The point is to appeal to independent and open-minded voters who are concerned about this issue and show the hypocrisy of the Republicans.
jgoutwest
QUOTE(tazvil04 @ Feb 11 2005, 11:25 AM)
We compromise by introducing the Adoption and Pro-Life Assistance Act of 2005 which establishes tax credits for people who bring their babies to term and place them up for adoption, more money for day care centers, more money for sex education, and money to provide health insurance to all women during the term of their preganancy and afterwards for they and their children.

We state that it is hyporcritical for the right to oppose abortion, but then advance policies which do not care about the mother or child after the birth occurs.

Our democratic society teaches us to advance the cause of life, liberaty and the pursuit of happiness.

Republican policies that do not advance health care for all women and children are an affront to these principles for these individuals.
*




Nice plan - but tell me - what in the constitution guarauntees that OTHER PEOPLE have to pay for YOUR pursuit of Life, liberty, etc.?? WHY do other people have to pay for "your" choice to get pregnant?

WHY does the gov't, which means US, have to pay for everything, and so 'sanction' certain behavior?

For instance, you can get cheap birth control in any drug store...why force the gov;'t to supply it? I think this is the problem repubs have with federally sponsored programs like birth control, abortion etc. It sanctions behavior they might not agree with.
tazvil04
QUOTE(Arneoker @ Feb 11 2005, 11:43 AM)
Of course they will.  The point is not to convince the Republicans to agree with us.  The point is to appeal to independent and open-minded voters who are concerned about this issue and show the hypocrisy of the Republicans.
*


Exactly.

Denocrats are known for our ideas and our solutions - republicans are known for rhetoric and tax cuts and defense.

I am just suggesting we use our mastery of ideas and solutions to put together an effective plan to reduce the incidence of abortions by providing women with the support - financial and statutory to make the choice that is best for them.

If economics is partially responsible for the choice of aboriton - then let's eliminate that as a factor as much as we can.

If the stigma of getting pregnant and bringing a bay to term and giving it up for adoption is an issue - then let's eliminate that as much as we can.

Let the repubs keep up with their rhetoric...

We can even say this legislation is needed more than ever because abortions have increased for the first time in the US during Bush's term has president since the 1970s.
Salute_Liberty
Promote Viagra, and you'd be promoting sexual promiscuity among me. We sure live in a nation of paradox, created by our Congress and our Society! Turn rapists into eunachs, and women are freed from many unwanted pregnancies and unwanted abortions! Maybe, the Christians and Congress reps. prefer to protect their own Christian rapists, lest they or their own sons are among them.
tazvil04
QUOTE(jgoutwest @ Feb 11 2005, 11:50 AM)
Nice plan - but tell me - what in the constitution guarauntees that OTHER PEOPLE have to pay for YOUR pursuit of Life, liberty, etc.??  WHY do other people have to pay for "your" choice to get pregnant?
*


Everything done in our society is a balancing of priorities.

We decide what is important.

Is life important - then we act.

If not - we don't.

Obviously corporate welfare is a priority - we do enough for that. wink.gif

We have also identified as lack of health insurance as a major stifling emplotyers and individuals.

Kerry can;t get his plan through as is - but maybe he can get part of it through as an anti-abortion effort - and later it can be expanded when more money is available.

Granted there has to be a limit and affordability issue - maybe in some instances like they did with welfare I believe limiting the amount of welfare you could collect and not allowing you to collect it if you had more children...

If you have a child while on welfare - then you get health insurance - and you must put it up for adoption.

I don't know - details have to be worked out - but I believe solutuions can be achieved.
Arneoker
QUOTE(jgoutwest @ Feb 11 2005, 02:20 PM)
Nice plan - but tell me - what in the constitution guarauntees that OTHER PEOPLE have to pay for YOUR pursuit of Life, liberty, etc.??  WHY do other people have to pay for "your" choice to get pregnant? 

WHY does the gov't, which means US, have to pay for everything, and so 'sanction' certain behavior?

For instance, you can get cheap birth control in any drug store...why force the gov;'t to supply it?  I think this is the problem repubs have with federally sponsored programs like birth control, abortion etc.  It sanctions behavior they might not agree with.
*

So I guess "unsanctioned" abortion would just be hunky-dory, or for that matter, "unsanctioned" poverty.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2009 Invision Power Services, Inc.