Anti-choicers are ridiculous

They always scream about preserving life, but their socio-economic policy is horrible. If a poor child gets sick and doesn't have healthcare, they could die. Or if a child's parent loses his or her job do to Republican outsourcing, that child could go hungry. I could go on and on, but I know others here can add to this and show the hypocrisy of the anti-choice crowd. Not one anti-choicer I've seen supports universal healthcare or decent wages.

he explains this very, very well. It may not seem logical, but if you study the neoconservative worldview, it makes complete sense.

It's worth the ten bucks or so to get a copy.

Unless you are an embryo, or a fetus, you are useless.

Once you are born, you are on your own.......sucker!

They will do everything in their power to make you miserable and hasten your demise.

Desperate parents accept slavery wages to feed thier children they cannot afford,could not abort.

The "family" has been a tool of nostagic sentamentalism to exploit humanity shacling people with thier own hearts and biology in an untenable but very profitable kind of social arragement.As has been"marriage".
Family values only serves to keep the elitists wealthy and the sentiments and nostalgia and power trip of parenthhod soothes the insecure true believer sheep.Because if daddy can't kick the boss for exploiting him he can beat his wife and kids since he fancies himself lord and"breadwinner.

The"nuclear" family is a curse upon the majority of non wealthy humanity and especially hard on children.(children grow up to be"workers" and to blame themselves for not suceeeding in a system stacked against them.. Home is where the hurt is because too often family is forced by the demands of the"job" to be an island..forced to struggle being a self reliant unit..In a worldd that is not like this.

and produce minimum wage workers. All for the corporate bottom line profits. Keep them women poor, barefoot, and pregnant. Corporations love those states that will force women to bear children who will be glad to earn a wage enough to qualify them for food stamps. Walmart employees up and coming. The "New" America.

It seems like the Southern states have found their soulmates with Walmart types.

They love the unborn because they can speak for them without having to take responsibility for them. That's the same reason they loved Terri Schaivo--she couldn't speak for herself. Her "supporters" were free to project their own fantasies onto her, and on to her husband (the bad guy of their fantasies) as well.

These folks do not live in the real world. If they wanted to stop abortion, they would be pressuring drug companies to come up with easier, more effective forms of birth control (ever notice how primitive birth control is? Barrier methods in 2006?), and making sure every child has adequate information about sex.

But refuses to help in medical care or education. They don't give a damn if she was raped, or had no access to contraception. They simply don't care.

the solution is adoption. If you look at the demographics of abortion in the US between 85% and 90% are preformed on healthy, young, white women who are more often than not,- middle class. What seems to be underlying this is creating a more "desirable" group of adoptable children. This is not their only reason, but I believe it is an important one.

What are you talking about? Are you willing to force them to carry the child against their will? Women will bear children to be adopted out?

A much better choice would be, if it was their choice, for society to help keep the mother and the child together.

Your post also leaves out any responsibility/accountability of the father.

S/he was merely expressing an opinion as to the motives of the anti-choicers, not agreeing with them.

It would be far better for the mother and child to be kept together, but in many cases this is not possible (which is why the woman wants to have an abortion in the first place). If the anti-choicers truly cared about keeping them together they'd do more to support social programs that allowed mother and child to stay together. Instead they stress adoption as opposed to abortion, which is what the previous post was getting at.

There seems to be a concerted effort to first force women who "commit the sin of fornication" to first bear(?) a child they don't want to and then give women the "choice" of raising their children in poverty or giving them up--some chioce.

are also big on adoption (gotta keep those christian soldiers coming from somewhere) and right now due to the fact that abortion is available and women that choose to have a baby are keeping those babies whether or not married the supply of adoptable children is low, If you compound that with the demographic that I pointed out, what you have is what are generally considered the most desirable children (healthy, white infants) is quite low, Maybe I should have added that there could be a racist element to the "pro-birth" movement. As far as responsibility of the fathers that doesn't come into play unless the mother decides to raise the baby herself and could a topic all it's own.
BTW why do you think they're cutting social programs? Couldn't be to make raising those babies as difficult as possible, could it?

It's closer to 54 or 55% now for the total abortions had by white women. They've changed the wording of the race question now and it's more accurate as to the race. However, yes, white women are still in the majority.

Prior to the rewording it was said that it was 63 or 64% of the total abortions were had by white women.

I got my numbers from planned parenthoods MN site. The figures you state are world wide not US.

They rely on this theme of Man and Woman equals Child. And that's bullshit.

The truth is you have male sperm, plus female egg, plus WILLING WOMB, and that equals child. It ain't TWO things, it's THREE.

Now, a clever BIDNIZMAN like George Bush would tell you, that anyone holding sixty six percent of the shares in an enterprise has the deciding vote. Thus, the owner of the egg and the womb make the call. Now, that in vitro crap is another story, but I am talking plain, straight up, ninty nine percent of the time...the owner of the egg and the womb are the same soul. Thus, they have the deciding vote, owing to their greater investment.

Anything else is just bullshit. Unless and until you can implant the embryo in the male, a la ARNOLD in that tacky movie, without excessive surgical intervention that exceeds a termination, the one with the womb is the one who holds the marbles. JMO and YMMV...

Don't lump everyone into the same ball of coal, my friend. I think abortion should be outlawed. By the same token, I am also against capital punishment. I have a reverence for life, all life. What you are saying, in your post, is that you think that those who don't believe abortion should be legal ALSO don't believe that we should have a decent healthcare system in this country, etc., etc., etc. Don't take a page out of the neo-con playbook, my friend. People think differently about the different issues. You are doing yourself, and your cause, a disservice by making these assumptions.

Like He will reach his hand down from the heavens and put food on your table and pay your bills and medical expenses. I haven't heard that line in awhile but I still do now and then.

they'll "pray" for it . . . that's their "compassion" . . .

Not everyone who opposes abortion also opposes all progressive ideas like universal healthcare and other social safety nets. Some people simply oppose abortion on spiritual grounds, independent of any particular overall political philosophy.

quick to put to death these same fetuses when they grow up....