First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Post Reply GOP legislation against abortion
177 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
47 / M
Offline
Posted 1/30/17
Wow are you people missing the point. On demand any time abortions without any criteria is just bad for society. Low birth rates are bad. When you have an existing population that is growing older and looking to enjoy the same level of benefits as the previous generation then you not only need younger generations to pay for those benefits you need a growing population to ensure the continuous flow of taxes to support every one of the programs that are expected. Germany and Japan are both in that situation right now. Germany is trying to import refugees to augment their population but they are causing more problems than an abortion ban. Democrats are trying to legalize illegals to make up for the lower birth rate in America.

All of the issues of future society benefits and necessary growth need to be filled with native born citizens to cause the least amount of problems. Banning abortions is just one way to encourage women to cultivate meaning relationships and effective birth control measures.
24120 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Oppai Hell
Online
Posted 1/30/17

loganthered wrote:

Wow are you people missing the point. On demand any time abortions without any criteria is just bad for society. Low birth rates are bad. When you have an existing population that is growing older and looking to enjoy the same level of benefits as the previous generation then you not only need younger generations to pay for those benefits you need a growing population to ensure the continuous flow of taxes to support every one of the programs that are expected. Germany and Japan are both in that situation right now. Germany is trying to import refugees to augment their population but they are causing more problems than an abortion ban. Democrats are trying to legalize illegals to make up for the lower birth rate in America.

All of the issues of future society benefits and necessary growth need to be filled with native born citizens to cause the least amount of problems. Banning abortions is just one way to encourage women to cultivate meaning relationships and effective birth control measures.


I think it is dangerous to assume a simple solution as ban abortion should be sought instead of targeting why a culture may be facing a population crisis, such as Japan. If you read the data I posted there is a bit of truth to what you're saying, but my response to it really "There are a million other side fixes that fix this, from me impregnating Japanese school girls to something like an abortion ban, but why create such a restriction that clearly is not overly responsible for the lower rates of birth overall?

I believe on demand any time abortions are a bit of a misnomer. I believe most states have banned 3rd trimester abortions and placed heavy restriction on the 2nd trimester, with 1st Trimester (1-8 weeks) having the least restriction. I think in Roe V Wade certify the legality of such restrictions and left it to the states to determine appropriate measures.

Though honestly...why? The US population is clearly growing in strides even without the influx of immigration. We aren't in any danger of going extinct. I cannot imagine this being the reason that democrats would support this. Perhaps it is to grow their voter base with a growing minority?


Banning abortions is just one way to encourage women to cultivate meaning relationships and effective birth control measures.


This is what I have the most problem with, as it seems to indicate the support of the government attempting to socially engineer certain factors in our society, that would not magically work, (Good mothers don't arise because they have children) and is a restriction of what can be considered a liberty all for the sake of changing women culture. Honestly? This is a pretty risky scenario, not only in the thousands of illegal abortions (After all, people will effectively evade the ban) but because it might have other negative social changes.
9300 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / F
Offline
Posted 1/30/17

octorockandroll wrote:

Fuck these people. It's not bad enough to introduce a bunch of restrictions that benefit nobody and have no effect aside from making abortions harder, they have to outright remove the possibility of getting one through legitimate means? Oh wait, not even that is bad enough. They have to also completely remove a service that has helped an inumerable number of americans with becoming parents because they dared to perform completely legal operations that you dont like 4% of the time.

Fuck this garbage. This hateful tirade has no basis in science, logic and especially not in the american constitution. It's completely off-base. Idiocy in its purest form.


100% agreed I am so fucking tired
15240 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 1/30/17

loganthered wrote:

Wow are you people missing the point. On demand any time abortions without any criteria is just bad for society. Low birth rates are bad. When you have an existing population that is growing older and looking to enjoy the same level of benefits as the previous generation then you not only need younger generations to pay for those benefits you need a growing population to ensure the continuous flow of taxes to support every one of the programs that are expected. Germany and Japan are both in that situation right now. Germany is trying to import refugees to augment their population but they are causing more problems than an abortion ban. Democrats are trying to legalize illegals to make up for the lower birth rate in America.

All of the issues of future society benefits and necessary growth need to be filled with native born citizens to cause the least amount of problems. Banning abortions is just one way to encourage women to cultivate meaning relationships and effective birth control measures.


You are missing the point too. Population growth isn't an end-all-be-all or a silver bullet. You are simplifying things so much that you are missing literally all of the other variables that factor into it.

As I said, the financial state of the family is of critical importance. According to the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee, the US spent over $60,000 in 2011 per family in poverty. Now, I wouldn't be surprised if those numbers were at least somewhat inflated, but regardless, that figure is well over what these families are paying in taxes (which is probably very low because of their low income).

If the problem you are trying to address is the National Budget, increasing the amount of families in poverty pushes us much further towards the red than the black (aka, its not good). When 42% of women having abortions live below the poverty line and another 27% live within 200% of the poverty line, it should be clear that making abortion illegal will create many more economically challenged families who have to rely on government assistance than middle upper class families who pay into the system.

Sources:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/over-60000-in-welfare-spent-per-household-in-poverty/article/657889
http://prospect.org/article/demographics-abortion-its-not-what-you-think
177 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
47 / M
Offline
Posted 1/30/17
No. The issue with western type countries is that in order to maintain the same amount of benefits for whatever program you need tax payers. Since roe v wade was signed there have been an estimated 55 million abortions for whatever reason. That is 55 million citizens. With baby boomers retiring at an accelerated rate and an influx of illegals that don't pay taxes and still access benefits there is much more of a burden on the system than if we would have had even half of those aborted children. Just saying that they would automatically have been a burden on the system is wrong. Assuming that no life is better than a poor one is wrong.

Just ask a well known child from a single parent home if he would have never been born. His name is Barack Obama. He even had to live with his grandparents when his mom died and his father was never around.
21428 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Leanbox, Gameindu...
Offline
Posted 1/30/17

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


kevz_210 wrote:


mxdan wrote:


Advicepuppy wrote:

Just making it illegal after the start of brain activity would be the smartest thing. Before that we know it's not a person. After that, we can't be certain. We don't know what makes us "us" and conscious, but we know it resides in the brain. After brain activity starts, we have no way (for now, at least) of knowing if the only difference between it and an infant is location.


That's been my stance on the issue since around 2008 or so. I just can't for the life of me understand the mentality of banning potential rather than sentience. I mean by that view masturbation should also be illegal.


Being a moderate that is what I also feel on the issue. While I am personally against it in most cases, I also accept that in early pregnancy whether or not one is truly alive is up for debate and therefore the choice still lies with the individual. That being said the current standard of almost 24 weeks is far too lax since at that point you are past not only brain and heart development, but also the viability milestone.

In the meantime I hope that most of us can get on board with making birth control widely available, having sex ed that covers different types of birth control options (not just abstinence only which is unrealistic for many), and hopefully increasing their effectiveness, which in turn will hopefully also lower the number of abortions.



They teach abstinence here in Virginia, or at least in my high school. We had like 9 girls pregnant. (I was responsible for 8).

If only they taught me safe sex...


86866 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
45 / M / WA
Offline
Posted 2/2/17 , edited 2/2/17
I know no federal funds go directly to abortions, but they should still fund those activities themselves; if you truly care about their mission or the poor after birth, fund it yourself. Don't use the taxpayer so you can feel good. Abortion and health services is a state, not a Federal issue. If it is okay for government funds to go to Planned Parenthood, then it is okay for the government to fung churches ...as long as funds don't go directly to missionary activities.
1284 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/2/17
Getting rid of legal access to abortions doesn't stop abortions anymore than abstinence education stops people from having sex; they just make it more dangerous and more people end up hurt.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.