ABORTION (Page 4): So very true -also in the past when a fellow got a girl pregnant he stepped and took responsibility - not shrug her and the child off and move on.

Harvey Loc: Pioneer, CA

So very true -also in the past when a fellow got a girl pregnant he stepped and took responsibility - not shrug her and the child off and move on.

Twardlow wrote:

Worse than that, it is not a blame issue, but a decision. In today’s economy, women often can’t afford to have children because their paycheck is mandatory, and an accidental pregnancy can be a disaster.

In the old days, when the man provided and the woman ran the home, things differed. Not so, now.

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

Twardlow wrote:

Worse than that, it is not a blame issue, but a decision. In today’s economy, women often can’t afford to have children because their paycheck is mandatory, and an accidental pregnancy can be a disaster.

In the old days, when the man provided and the woman ran the home, things differed. Not so, now.

At current birth rates we're headed for an overpopulation/climate/resource disaster. 11 billion by 2050, we've known this for decades and yet the Catholics still forbid contraception.

Elaine2025 Loc: Seattle, Wa

Harvey wrote:

Your post has unlimited reasons why so many youth of today are so ignorant of a decent family way of life - in fact I only see it getting worse as it has over the past 70 yrs - I am 81 and have seen the changes - few have and care- when I see what my grand kids and great grand kids have today - some is good but lots of it is detrimental to the "family life"

I agree.

Harvey Loc: Pioneer, CA

Gotta look at what happened in China when they tried the "one" child law and in many countries where they are doing gender selection abortions - one was to try to reduce population and the other is to either have a boy to work and help support the family or a girl to "sell" there is so much controversy on this subject and no real answers to how the world is going to support the out of control population growth.

Texcaster wrote:

At current birth rates we're headed for an overpopulation/climate/resource disaster. 11 billion by 2050, we've known this for decades and yet the Catholics still forbid contraception.

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

Harvey wrote:

Gotta look at what happened in China when they tried the "one" child law and in many countries where they are doing gender selection abortions - one was to try to reduce population and the other is to either have a boy to work and help support the family or a girl to "sell" there is so much controversy on this subject and no real answers to how the world is going to support the out of control population growth.

The exodus from the climate affected and diminishing resource world is only getting started.

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

Texcaster wrote:

The exodus from the climate affected and diminishing resource world is only getting started.

I don’t get your point: “The exodus from the...world is only getting started?”

Please clarify....

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

Twardlow wrote:

I don’t get your point: “The exodus from the...world is only getting started?”

Please clarify....

The developed world is now seeing only a trickle of the coming flood of desperate humanity.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

Elaine2025 wrote:

little thommie you and I have zero in common, you are an idiot who supports murder and is willing to accept money that does not belong to you and you call that a win. You have the lack of morals of a wild animal.

You're probably right that we have little in common, unless you're right that I'm an idiot. I have no idea if you'll understand what I'm saying.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

Texcaster wrote:

We sort of agree on something but there's a lot to be said for ... "seen but not heard."

No, don't tell me you just said Elaine should be seen but not heard. Oh well, sexist as it may sound, I agree with you on the not heard part. What I dislike the most about her is she pushes me to say things I would look down on others for saying. I would thank her for making me humble, but I find myself comparing myself to her, and I no longer feel humble.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

As effective as she probably would be, I believe Elaine could make some pretty good money as an abortion rights poster child. I know she'll protest, but I wonder if she will look into it. See, I should be embarrassed, but somehow I won't be.

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

thom w wrote:

As effective as she probably would be, I believe Elaine could make some pretty good money as an abortion rights poster child. I know she'll protest, but I wonder if she will look into it. See, I should be embarrassed, but somehow I won't be.

At the moment, Ma does very well running security at the free whisky tent shows and selling the confiscated cameras and guns.

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

Texcaster wrote:

The developed world is now seeing only a trickle of the coming flood of desperate humanity.

Ah,,, yes, thank you, and I absolutely agree.

(Sometimes I’m a little slow....)

PinOakEO Loc: NA

Frank T wrote:

This is close to the dumbest question that as ever been posted here.
Since you apparently want to control a woman's reproductive system, I would ask you, what laws should be placed upon men's reproductive systems?

Any male criminal should have a Vesectomy!!

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

PinOakEO wrote:

Any male criminal should have a Vesectomy!!

Especially the pot smokers and the people that don't pay their traffic fines?

Conservatives wanting to control men's bodies is a novel approach. Who knew? Are the women winning?

lenben Loc: Seattle

Part of the platform of the anti-abortion crowd is to eliminate funding for birth control (BC). BC is probably the principal reason that the abortion rate is dropping significantly. Their justification is that a fertilized egg is equivalent to a human being. If that is true, since over
80% of fertilized eggs pass without implantation, who is responsible for that abortion equivalent happenstance. The man upstairs ? ? What do you think?