Contraception use fell and Medicaid births rose after Texas defunded Planned Parenthood.

[keith99]

Rape accounts for less than 1% of the abortions performed. We really need to stop bringing those up when talking about ending abortion. Most restrictive laws ultimately would have exceptions in place for cases of rape, incest or quite possibly danger to the mother.



This is not a thread to discuss whether God is a good God or not. Let's get off that trend.

If one is arguing that abortion should be forbidden because the fetus is a human being how does that change because of rape or incest?

 

[Mayzoo]

You can get birth control pills over the counter. Plus yes there are condoms and they do work. If the man does not want to wear one then he does not get any. Simple. Men and women have to take responsibility for sex and the risks that come with it. There are other places that give out free or cheap std testing and birth control. PP is not the only place for those services.

Well, those places need to make themselves better known since BC use is down and unplanned pregnancies are on the rise in Texas for the first time in a while from what I read. Ironically, that correlates with the defunding of PP. But, we are all certain those are not relevant to each other.

BC is over the counter now? Please post the name of the over counter version or a source for this one. I worked in pharmacy for over 20 years, and no birth control pill was over the counter in the US during that whole time, and I still keep up. I have yet to hear of one going over the counter, so I would love to read your source for this one.

The punishment for pregnancy predominantly falls to the woman and the aborted babies, which it just so happens Texas should have more of those now--isn't that just great?? I bet the goal is to make Texas just the beginning....let's increase those abortions nationwide....ooooopppps, I mean let's shut down the horrible PP nationwide.

Young guys are underemployed or unemployed quite frequently. So, they are usually not a factor in the punishment so many wish they could dole out. So, women/unborn babies have to accept the responsibility and the punishment for having sex. Why make bc easy and affordable to get when that negates the punishment, right?

 

[PreachersWife2004]

If one is arguing that abortion should be forbidden because the fetus is a human being how does that change because of rape or incest?

For me? It doesn't, actually. I would prefer it if no woman ever got an abortion for any reason.

But for many, it's the bitter pill (no pun intended) they feel they can swallow in order to see abortion illegal.

 

[Mayzoo]

If one is arguing that abortion should be forbidden because the fetus is a human being how does that change because of rape or incest?

According to some here, it does not. Neither does the imminent death of one or both mother and child. They will have least both died while the docs tried to save them.

 

[Larniavc]

This is not a thread to discuss whether God is a good God or not. Let's get off that trend.

Fair enough.

 

[loveofourlord]

The other problem with adoption is the agencies often especially catholic have their idea of what families should adopt AKA good christian catholic families.

 

[Kersh]

Are you willing to apply the same reasoning to the military? Many find the majority of U.S. military actions since WW II beyond morally questionable.

I don't think that it is practical to say that we would do away with the military completely. However, I do believe that the military is terribly overfunded to meet its sole legitimate purpose of protecting US citizens from foreign attack. At present, our military serves more as a means of forcing other nations to do as we think they ought than as a means of protecting US citizens and their interests. But, that is a topic for another thread.

If the military were limited to its legitimate purpose, I think the comparison would be apples and oranges. Government spending in a manner that benefits everyone in a manner that individuals could not do for themselves (e.g., roads, infrastructure, and legitimately limited military) is different than government purchasing goods and services for individuals who don't want them or believe that they cannot afford them.

 

[Mayzoo]

For me? It doesn't, actually. I would prefer it if no woman ever got an abortion for any reason.

But for many, it's the bitter pill (no pun intended) they feel they can swallow in order to see abortion illegal.

I would love to see abortion completely disappear except in the extreme and rare exceptions. I am all for anything that will reduce the number of abortions. In this day and age, that means low cost, easy access birth control. This is the only solution, in this day and age, that has proven to reduce abortion numbers.

Those who oppose the only solution known to reduce abortion, are not, in my opinion against abortion. When they actively stop that which reduces abortions, they become a huge part of the equation that leads to abortions.

IMO, no one should say they are pro-life when they are actively trying to stop or greatly reduce the only known means of the times that actually reduces abortions.

 

[Kersh]

Not so sure about that. Admit don't touch the stuff, but have seen what happens when people grow and sell it en masse.
very dangerous career. Nah, it is not victimless. There's way more to it, than just sittin around your living room,passin it around getting stoned. .
Tha damage that Maryjane does to the human brain, has been more than proven. The, I wouldn't call it addiction, as much as I would call it..the need to get higher comes about, not necessary, ludes,lsd,heroine, meth and all that jazz.. Which I can open the doors for that to...but the need to get the better bud. I've seen guys get their butts tore up, over a good bud.
Yeah, there are victims. Just not like you'd normally see. There not out in the open. Then again, a police officer getting shot because He happen to pull over a car with about 7 keys in it...No, he's not a victim.
Haven't there been some problems in those states that have already legalized it?
I admit the revenue from the sales of it..is astronomical.
But because it's legalized, and a so called controlled substance, won't stop people from getting hurt from it.

Because it's off topic, I'll simply agree to disagree.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

The other problem with adoption is the agencies often especially catholic have their idea of what families should adopt AKA good christian catholic families.

I had my idea of what kind of family I wanted my baby to go to, too. Doesn't it make sense that a Christian organization, much like a Christian person, would prefer that the children they are servicing are going to Christian families?

 

[PreachersWife2004]

I would love to see abortion completely disappear except in the extreme and rare exceptions. I am all for anything that will reduce the number of abortions. In this day and age, that means low cost, easy access birth control. This is the only solution, in this day and age, that has proven to reduce abortion numbers.

Those who oppose the only solution known to reduce abortion, are not, in my opinion against abortion. When they actively stop that which reduces abortions, they become a huge part of the equation that leads to abortions.

IMO, no one should say they are pro-life when they are actively trying to stop or greatly reduce the only known means of the times that actually reduces abortions.

The issue I have with this is that I don't think people who aren't married should be having sex, and that people who aren't ready for children shouldn't be having sex. So I go back to those roots, not whether someone has cheap or free birth control.

Birth control is not 100% effective, no matter what kind or in what combination you're using them. But even then, birth control is already free and cheap in many places, without government funding.

If people only had sex when they knew they were ready for children, the need for abortions would decrease on a large scale.

 

[Kersh]

And the millions that don't get adopted.

The children who don't get adopted or who languish in the system for years are generally older children, who were removed from their homes, due to allegations of abuse, criminality, or neglect. Babies, especially healthy babies whose birth mothers placed them for adoption, rarely spend much time at all waiting for an adoptive family. Many, if not most, leave the hospital with their adoptive parents.

The abundance of children in foster care in the US is an indictment of the church (if every church in America adopted one or two children from foster care, there would be no more children in foster care), but it is not in any way related to the abortion issue.

 

[Mayzoo]

The issue I have with this is that I don't think people who aren't married should be having sex, and that people who aren't ready for children shouldn't be having sex. So I go back to those roots, not whether someone has cheap or free birth control.

Birth control is not 100% effective, no matter what kind or in what combination you're using them. But even then, birth control is already free and cheap in many places, without government funding.

If people only had sex when they knew they were ready for children, the need for abortions would decrease on a large scale.

Yes, I completely agree. However, our refusing to fund birth control so the youth are forced to suffer the consequences has proven to not work in reducing premarital sex. That time has passed, if it ever really existed. From what I can tell, there have always been out of wedlock pregnancies, but the number is greater now.

I can dream and hope the young do not have premarital sex, which has been proven a colossal failure. Or, I can advocate for what I know works to reduce abortions, which is cheap, easy to get BC.

I prefer to advocate for what I know works rather than watch the abortions continue while I dream.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

The children who don't get adopted or who languish in the system for years are generally older children, who were removed from their homes, due to allegations of abuse, criminality, or neglect. Babies, especially healthy babies whose birth mothers placed them for adoption, rarely spend much time at all waiting for an adoptive family. Many, if not most, leave the hospital with their adoptive parents.

The abundance of children in foster care in the US is an indictment of the church (if every church in America adopted one or two children from foster care, there would be no more children in foster care), but it is not in any way related to the abortion issue.

I wish our church folks could adopt all of the children - but the system is full of red tape and bureaucrats, and "private" adoptions (not through the foster care system) are far too expensive.

We would definitely adopted children if we could've. We just can't afford the fees.

 

[Kersh]

I had my idea of what kind of family I wanted my baby to go to, too. Doesn't it make sense that a Christian organization, much like a Christian person, would prefer that the children they are servicing are going to Christian families?

There are non-Christian adoption agencies that have their own missions as well. For example, where I live there is an agency called "Homes for Black Children". While this agency does not rule out non-black homes, it is clear that they have a very strong preference for adopting black children to black families. Even though I am white, and this was a factor in this agency choosing not to place a child with us, I applaud them for what they do.

 

[Kersh]

I wish our church folks could adopt all of the children - but the system is full of red tape and bureaucrats, and "private" adoptions (not through the foster care system) are far too expensive.

We would definitely adopted children if we could've. We just can't afford the fees.

My wife and I adopted sibling group of 3 kids, about 5 years ago, from the foster care system. Sure, there were some hoops, but they were not unmanageable.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Yes, I completely agree. However, our refusing to fund birth control so the youth are forced to suffer the consequences has proven to not work in reducing premarital sex. That time has passed, if it ever really existed. From what I can tell, there have always been out of wedlock pregnancies, but the number is greater now.

I can dream and hope the young do not have premarital sex, which has been proven a colossal failure. Or, I can advocate for what I know works to reduce abortions, which is cheap, easy to get BC.

I prefer to advocate for what I know works rather than watch the abortions continue while I dream.

We could also stop referring to pregnancy as "suffering the consequences".

I want more resources for women and parents who are having these babies, too. I don't want mothers feeling as though they have to abort their baby because they think they can't afford it. We have a small system here in my town where a bunch of us just trade stuff back and forth. We were able to give away most of our baby stuff to expectant or new mothers, some young, but all poor, and they didn't have to worry about affording that stuff. These ranged from basics like cribs to fancy car seats. Because people were generous to us, we wanted to to be generous to others.

I don't believe welfare is the answer to that, but I believe a good strong solid support system needs to be in place, so these mothers know they have places to turn to.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

My wife and I adopted sibling group of 3 kids, about 5 years ago, from the foster care system. Sure, there were some hoops, but they were not unmanageable.

Not every case is the same. We used to be licensed foster care providers, and we've never gotten children in our home. We were supposed to be on the foster-adopt end of things, but because the children in the system aren't the type of children the system wants to give us, we don't get them. We let our license lapse because at this point in time, we can't afford any more children period with the way the economy is, and how much we seem to be just giving back into the system. It's unfortunate, really, but we make enough to take care of the children we have now, and not much else, so it would be irresponsible of us to take on more.

 

[Mayzoo]

We could also stop referring to pregnancy as "suffering the consequences".

I want more resources for women and parents who are having these babies, too. I don't want mothers feeling as though they have to abort their baby because they think they can't afford it. We have a small system here in my town where a bunch of us just trade stuff back and forth. We were able to give away most of our baby stuff to expectant or new mothers, some young, but all poor, and they didn't have to worry about affording that stuff. These ranged from basics like cribs to fancy car seats. Because people were generous to us, we wanted to to be generous to others.

I don't believe welfare is the answer to that, but I believe a good strong solid support system needs to be in place, so these mothers know they have places to turn to.

Yeah, I get the "suffering the consequences" idea from what I have read here. More people here seem far more interested in punishing the women than they seem interested in stopping abortion. Hence the huge need to stop easy access to BC. Easy access to BC stops the punishment they so eagerly wish to dole out.

I have always seen children as a blessing, whether in or out of wedlock, but from reading here, this does not seem to be the prevailing opinion. Out of wedlock, children are to be consequences and punishment to the woman. They are a precious life in the womb, but once born, they are a punishment and consequence for irresponsible actions.

My 17 year old niece just had a child. I am helping her in every way I know how, and I would have adopted the baby in a heartbeat had she wished that. She wants to make this work, so support is all I can do now. I want her to be the best person she can be despite the challenges she has now caused herself.

I have no interest in the child being a punishment for her. What a horrible way to view and raise a child. But to many here, that is exactly how they seem to view a child born out of wedlock. I find it repulsive, but it seems to be the prevailing opinion here.

 

[Kersh]

Not every case is the same. We used to be licensed foster care providers, and we've never gotten children in our home. We were supposed to be on the foster-adopt end of things, but because the children in the system aren't the type of children the system wants to give us, we don't get them. We let our license lapse because at this point in time, we can't afford any more children period with the way the economy is, and how much we seem to be just giving back into the system. It's unfortunate, really, but we make enough to take care of the children we have now, and not much else, so it would be irresponsible of us to take on more.

Each state is different. I do, however, wish that States would stop promoting foster-to-adopt. I think it's unfair to both the children and the birth parents. I have seen too many times where the State pushes a termination of parental rights when the parents are more than willing and able to learn to care for their children, because the State wants to "reward" the foster-to-adopt placement with an adoption. I have even seen cases where children are removed on very weak allegations, because a child meets the desires of a particular fta placement. The system definitely needs to be changed, so that children do not go into foster care unless their parents truly are unable or unwilling to safely and appropriately care for them. And children should never be adopted unless the birth parents voluntarily surrendered their rights without any coercion or have been shown to be completely unwilling or unable to address the issues that led to abuse or neglect in the first place. The fact that a foster home would like to adopt a child should never be a reason to terminate a parent's rights.

In saying this, I mean no disrespect or judgment to fta parents. I believe that most do not know that that the system often steals children from other parents to "reward" good foster homes. I also tend to think (or at least hope) that the majority of placements to fta parents are not like that.