BF2S Forums Pro-Life American Taxpayer? If so, then get mad...

SenorToenails wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

burnzz wrote:

and, the inverse too - how if someone's against abortion, how they can be for capital punishment.

The baby did nothing except come into existence.  A criminal on death row?  There is a difference.

Except the fetus isn't really a baby yet.  If the fetus can't survive outside the womb, is it really 'alive'?

Don't argue that shit.  You get two murder count for killing a pregnant lady.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

It's me paying for somebody's abortion that I have a problem with.  Killing babies due to it being an inconvenience to Mommy is disgusting.  I don't want to pay for that.

You willing to personally adopt their offspring then or pay for the upkeep of orphanages? Frankly, the kids that would come out of a home where the parents would've aborted their kid if they could afford it, don't really have a happy future ahead of them. Who has abortions? Poor people mostly, or people who would become poor if they had a kid. What do kids of poor parents generally grow up to be? Poor people themselves.

No & Yes I donate to charities.  Where's your statistic on the comparison?  Besides you are comparing a murdered non-existence to an imaginary future.  How about in order to have the abortion, they have to get fixed as a stipulation?  My tax money right?  One and done.  You don't want kids?  Fine.  I'd just like to know when does one's sense of personal responsibility kick in?

I thought about that last night when this topic was started. I wouldn't be opposed in the slightest to forced sterilization if you have an abortion.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

All this uproar about taxes involving abortion should also include the fact that it costs taxpayers a lot more money to pay for the upkeep of orphanages and for families on welfare than it does to pay for an abortion.

So, make up your minds pro-life taxpayers.  Is this really an issue of cost or of morals?

If it's cost, then support abortion, because it's cheaper.

If it's morals, then support social programs.

You can't have it both ways.

It's me paying for somebody's abortion that I have a problem with.  Killing babies due to it being an inconvenience to Mommy is disgusting.  I don't want to pay for that.

That's understandable, but you might want to explain to your fellow conservatives that the only alternative involves paying more for social programs -- something most of them seem to be against.

And before anyone mentions it, charity could not handle all of it by itself.  That was proven before the New Deal.

Last edited by Turquoise (2009-12-21 12:33:10)

SenorToenails wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

I thought about that last night when this topic was started. I wouldn't be opposed in the slightest to forced sterilization if you have an abortion.

What a horrid intrusion on the rights of others!  Using abortions as a method for birth control is irresponsible, but how could that stipulation even be remotely acceptable?

For every action there should be a reaction. For every negative action taken by others that affects society as a whole there need to be repercussions. Their stupidity and uncaring behavior should receive more than just a slap on the wrist when it is my money paying for it. Fair is fair because nothing would stop them from having 75 abortions if they so desired. Forced sterilization, perhaps of five years or so (if this could be worked out by our lovely pharma companies), would be a proper punishment.

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

What a horrid intrusion on the rights of others!  Using abortions as a method for birth control is irresponsible, but how could that stipulation even be remotely acceptable?

For every action there should be a reaction. For every negative action taken by others that affects society as a whole there need to be repercussions. Their stupidity and uncaring behavior should receive more than just a slap on the wrist when it is my money paying for it. Fair is fair because nothing would stop them from having 75 abortions if they so desired. Forced sterilization, perhaps of five years or so (if this could be worked out by our lovely pharma companies), would be a proper punishment.

Rather than make it a punishment, I think it would be better to simply do something like offer incentives (like tax breaks) to abortion clinics to mandate their own policies of sterilization in exchange for an abortion.

That would make the policy more practical and non-oppressive.

Thinking like a liberal again Fuck trickery, shove it down their throats.

Turquoise wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

All this uproar about taxes involving abortion should also include the fact that it costs taxpayers a lot more money to pay for the upkeep of orphanages and for families on welfare than it does to pay for an abortion.

So, make up your minds pro-life taxpayers.  Is this really an issue of cost or of morals?

If it's cost, then support abortion, because it's cheaper.

If it's morals, then support social programs.

You can't have it both ways.

It's me paying for somebody's abortion that I have a problem with.  Killing babies due to it being an inconvenience to Mommy is disgusting.  I don't want to pay for that.

That's understandable, but you might want to explain to your fellow conservatives that the only alternative involves paying more for social programs -- something most of them seem to be against.

And before anyone mentions it, charity could not handle all of it by itself.  That was proven before the New Deal.

Pretty Sure St. Jude's Hospital runs on 100% donations...

SenorToenails wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

For every action there should be a reaction. For every negative action taken by others that affects society as a whole there need to be repercussions. Their stupidity and uncaring behavior should receive more than just a slap on the wrist when it is my money paying for it. Fair is fair because nothing would stop them from having 75 abortions if they so desired. Forced sterilization, perhaps of five years or so (if this could be worked out by our lovely pharma companies), would be a proper punishment.

How is an abortion anything but a personal decision?  It has nothing to do with you, nor should it.  As for tax dollars getting spent on it, see Ken's post up above.

Forcing sterilization for something that isn't even a crime is in itself criminal.

^^ This tbh

I'll wager the aftermath of having an abortion is punishment enough ...

SenorToenails wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

For every action there should be a reaction. For every negative action taken by others that affects society as a whole there need to be repercussions. Their stupidity and uncaring behavior should receive more than just a slap on the wrist when it is my money paying for it. Fair is fair because nothing would stop them from having 75 abortions if they so desired. Forced sterilization, perhaps of five years or so (if this could be worked out by our lovely pharma companies), would be a proper punishment.

How is an abortion anything but a personal decision?  It has nothing to do with you, nor should it.  As for tax dollars getting spent on it, see Ken's post up above.

Forcing sterilization for something that isn't even a crime is in itself criminal.

Since the act of procreation is so easily inhibited, ignoring the easy access to birth control and then forcing the issue to become the problem of others is no different than a mugger on the street reaching into your pocket and taking your wallet. The person having the abortion could've taken birth control pills or used condoms but chose not to. The mugger could've worked at a job but chose not to. Both are taking my money from me against my will because of the poor life choices they made.

SenorToenails wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Since the act of procreation is so easily inhibited, ignoring the easy access to birth control and then forcing the issue to become the problem of others is no different than a mugger on the street reaching into your pocket and taking your wallet. The person having the abortion could've taken birth control pills or used condoms but chose not to. The mugger could've worked at a job but chose not to. Both are taking my money from me against my will because of the poor life choices they made.

Actually, this is far more akin to someone who lives on welfare, not a mugger.  Do you propose punishment to them too?

Yes, it is foolish to ignore responsible birth control, but accidents happen and forcing arbitrary punishment of that sort is terrible.

So you suggest no penalty then?

(I view welfare as theft as well btw.)

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2009-12-21 13:08:03)

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

How is an abortion anything but a personal decision?  It has nothing to do with you, nor should it.  As for tax dollars getting spent on it, see Ken's post up above.

Forcing sterilization for something that isn't even a crime is in itself criminal.

Since the act of procreation is so easily inhibited, ignoring the easy access to birth control and then forcing the issue to become the problem of others is no different than a mugger on the street reaching into your pocket and taking your wallet. The person having the abortion could've taken birth control pills or used condoms but chose not to. The mugger could've worked at a job but chose not to. Both are taking my money from me against my will because of the poor life choices they made.

This argument only works for consensual sex.  Rape is an obvious flaw in this argument.

Well yes, I'm excluding rape. I figured that was obvious

And danger to the mother too.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2009-12-21 13:12:05)

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Since the act of procreation is so easily inhibited, ignoring the easy access to birth control and then forcing the issue to become the problem of others is no different than a mugger on the street reaching into your pocket and taking your wallet. The person having the abortion could've taken birth control pills or used condoms but chose not to. The mugger could've worked at a job but chose not to. Both are taking my money from me against my will because of the poor life choices they made.

This argument only works for consensual sex.  Rape is an obvious flaw in this argument.

Well yes, I'm excluding rape. I figured that was obvious

To account for rape and the other extenuating circumstance of the mother facing a high likelihood of dying during childbirth, certain amendments would need to be made to the policies we've discussed.

Last edited by Turquoise (2009-12-21 13:13:13)

King_County_Downy wrote:

I've paid for both of mine. $680/ea

And that was with the low-income sliding scale thing...

I can't imagine how much more my life would suck today (financially) had I not convinced them we were not fit for parenting. In fact, I'd probably be in jail right now for killing their motthers. Stupid twats. (Liars tbh... "yeah I took my pill")

Should've worn a condom fucktard.