Reply With Quote
You won't get any argument from me. Does it do any good to throw facts in peoples faces who wish not to acknowledge them?
You won't get any argument from me. Does it do any good to throw facts in peoples faces who wish not to acknowledge them?
I intended the humor to be found in the very similarity you described. Some got it; others did not. I didn't think it was quite that subtle, but I don't feel the need to further explain it either.
YOu saying chump owns anyone on postings. Why don't you explain the similarity of my post and chumps jargon if you find the humor so appealing you post twice with the quote.
Minority women cons ute only about 13% of the female population (age 15-44) in the United States, but they underwent approximately 36% of the abortions.
According to the Alan Guttmacher Ins ute, black women are more than 5 times as likely as white women to have an abortion
On average, 1,876 black babies are aborted every day in the United States.
This incidence of abortion has resulted in a tremendous loss of life. It has been estimated that since 1973 Black women have had about 16 million abortions. Michael Novak had calculated "Since the number of current living Blacks (in the U.S.) is 36 million, the missing 16 million represents an enormous loss, for without abortion, America's Black community would now number 52 million persons. It would be 36 percent larger than it is. Abortion has swept through the Black community like a scythe, cutting down every fourth member."
You may as well endorse eugenics as well...
That is a good point. There are more poor white people in total but not in urban areas that planned parenthood are located and spending their advertisement budget.
Not quite sure I'm following your logic. Do you mean, aborting babies who have deformities? I'm sure some will argue for that. If I knew my child was going to be severely handicapped, would I think about abortion? Probably. Would I do it? Hard to say unless you're in that situation.
I think I agree with spursncowboys on this one. why does plan parenthood want to waste time in poor and predominantly minority neighborhoods. Those areas don't need access to cheap or free birth control...
"Incorrectly" by who's standards? If a child will then be perceived not to be as desired, that's the basis for eugenics now, isn't it?mothers who don't raise their children correctly
The morally consistent view would be that it does not matter how the woman conceived, but we all know it is a political issue and not a moral one for most politicians on both sides.
Incorrectly in the sense that the mother won't view the child as a blessing, but rather as a burden, and therefore not raise the child in a healthy manner. I think we can both agree that there are actions that can definitely affect the upbringing of a child in a negative way. Is it better for a potential mother to abort the child, or to raise the child in a negative light?
I lean against abortion in most cases, but I'm not adamant enough to be a pro-lifer.
Well said. To be morally consistent, if a baby fetus is considered a human being, then whether or not the mother is raped really shouldn't play into the value of the fetus' life.
But it does have real-world implications, which is what I alluded to in my earlier posts.
Fur is murder...
There are more than enough people who want to adopt babies. There should be no reason for an abortion past the first trimester, unless there is a real health issue to the mother.
I'm Ok with things like the morning after pill. Just not abortion. I am adamant that it is killing innocent life, especially after the first trimester.
I would be fine with a ban after first trimester, except when the baby threatened the life of the mother.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
