Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 48
  1. #21
    ODN Administrator

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rural Southern Indiana
    Posts
    5,285
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixAlive View Post
    If a woman is working, then she would have enough money for birth control pills, eliminating the need for abortion.
    There are many ways to acquire low- to no-cost birth control for both men and women which aren't entirely publicly funded.

    If a woman consents to sex, she accepts the possibility of pregnancy, and assumes the responsibility of dealing with the pregnancy in whatever way she decides. If she elects to have an abortion, that is her choice and her money, not mine, should pay for it.
    I agree with every word of this. I just want you to know that before I make my next point.

    Also, it is a woman's right to take paid maternal leave. There is government assistance for people who cannot work. Ultrasounds and medical treatment are all free.
    This isn't entirely accurate.

    First, I can't imagine how, by virtue of being a woman, I am magically endowed with a "right" to be paid by an employer when I'm not working. Nor do I understand how my peers (fellow tax payers) could be held liable for the same should my employer not provide such a "right." If it's not your intention to argue whether or not this should be the case, feel free to ignore this paragraph completely. Otherwise, I'm interested in the justification behind this "right" as you perceive it.

    Second, yes, Medicaid for pregnancy allows women who are pregnant and find themselves in financial hardship to receive prenatal care at no cost out of pocket to them, individually. However, this is not free. You pay for this as a tax payer in the same way you would be paying for the abortions you mentioned in your OP: taxes. Not only that, but if the child's father is ever declared, in the state of Indiana at least, the father of that child is billed for half of the birthing expense.

    The reason I bring this up is that I don't quite understand how you can go from "taxes to pay for abortion is wrong because I shouldn't be held responsible for your actions" can be held true while one also holds true "taxes to pay for pregnancy and delivery is ok." Either it's wrong to use tax monies on the grounds that uninterested parties shouldn't be punished for irresponsible actions of others or it isn't. Otherwise we'd be employing special pleading... unless you have a really super-fabulous reason for exempting one and not the other...
    "And that, my lord, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped." ~ Monty Python


  2. #22
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    42
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by ladyphoenix View Post
    There are many ways to acquire low- to no-cost birth control for both men and women which aren't entirely publicly funded.

    I agree with every word of this. I just want you to know that before I make my next point.

    This isn't entirely accurate.

    First, I can't imagine how, by virtue of being a woman, I am magically endowed with a "right" to be paid by an employer when I'm not working. Nor do I understand how my peers (fellow tax payers) could be held liable for the same should my employer not provide such a "right." If it's not your intention to argue whether or not this should be the case, feel free to ignore this paragraph completely. Otherwise, I'm interested in the justification behind this "right" as you perceive it.
    Pasted from official Human Resources Government Website:

    "Maternity leave is now covered and protected in the labour/employment standards legislation of every Canadian jurisdiction, and in most collective agreements. It is designed to give expectant mothers the possibility of withdrawing from work in the later stages of their pregnancy and to allow them some time to recuperate after childbirth. Maternity leave clauses represent one of the key practices with respect to work and family balance.

    Although they sometimes only reiterate basic legislated guarantees, maternity leave provisions in collective agreements often provide additional benefits. Typically, they indicate: the number of weeks (possibly including extensions) of leave of absence that can be taken and under what conditions; which employment benefits will be continued; how seniority will be calculated; and the procedure upon return to work. More generous agreements also provide income-replacement mechanisms to supplement employment insurance benefits and may include additional safeguards to ensure the employment of pregnant employees and new mothers is adequately protected."

    On another note, it is illegal for a woman to be fired or laid off because of pregnancy.

    So, a woman's employment may not be terminated if she becomes pregnant, she may take a leave with the guarantee that her job will still be there when she gets back, and she retains all benefits, and qualifies for employment insurance while she is on leave.

    By following through with the pregnancy, she does not face the risk of poverty or loss of employment.

    Quote Originally Posted by ladyphoenix View Post
    Second, yes, Medicaid for pregnancy allows women who are pregnant and find themselves in financial hardship to receive prenatal care at no cost out of pocket to them, individually. However, this is not free. You pay for this as a tax payer in the same way you would be paying for the abortions you mentioned in your OP: taxes. Not only that, but if the child's father is ever declared, in the state of Indiana at least, the father of that child is billed for half of the birthing expense.

    The reason I bring this up is that I don't quite understand how you can go from "taxes to pay for abortion is wrong because I shouldn't be held responsible for your actions" can be held true while one also holds true "taxes to pay for pregnancy and delivery is ok." Either it's wrong to use tax monies on the grounds that uninterested parties shouldn't be punished for irresponsible actions of others or it isn't. Otherwise we'd be employing special pleading... unless you have a really super-fabulous reason for exempting one and not the other...
    Simply, I believe that the government should cover all necessary medical costs.

    Prenatal and delivery medical care is necessary for the physical health and survival of the mother and infant.

    Elective abortion is not necessary for the physical health of the mother.

  3. #23
    ODN Administrator

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rural Southern Indiana
    Posts
    5,285
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixAlive View Post
    Pasted from official Human Resources Government Website:

    "Maternity leave is now covered and protected

    (snipped because it doesn't answer my question)
    I think you're missing the point somewhat. I know what is, currently. I have an 11 month old daughter. I very recently took time off of work for exactly this reason. I'm asking you to explain to me why it should be that someone (anyone, let's not limit this to women, per se) should be paid (i.e. is entitled to payment) while they are not "working," by either their employer or by the state.

    Simply, I believe that the government should cover all necessary medical costs.

    Prenatal and delivery medical care is necessary for the physical health and survival of the mother and infant.

    Elective abortion is not necessary for the physical health of the mother.
    So your argument can be boiled down to the following:

    I shouldn't be obligated to pay (through taxes) for your irresponsibility, unless that irresponsibility happens to threaten your life (or the life of an unborn child).

    Can you think of a reason why I might find that difficult to accept?
    "And that, my lord, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped." ~ Monty Python


  4. #24
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    42
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by ladyphoenix View Post
    I think you're missing the point somewhat. I know what is, currently. I have an 11 month old daughter. I very recently took time off of work for exactly this reason. I'm asking you to explain to me why it should be that someone (anyone, let's not limit this to women, per se) should be paid (i.e. is entitled to payment) while they are not "working," by either their employer or by the state.
    I apologize for the misunderstanding. I was originally just stating the fact that this is how things work in our society, not arguing that it should be this way.

    However I do agree with the current policy, because no-one should face poverty if they are unable to work. Poverty breeds disease and death, and these are the things that our taxes should guard people from.

    Quote Originally Posted by ladyphoenix View Post
    So your argument can be boiled down to the following:

    I shouldn't be obligated to pay (through taxes) for your irresponsibility, unless that irresponsibility happens to threaten your life (or the life of an unborn child).

    Can you think of a reason why I might find that difficult to accept?
    I can see why you might believe that it is cruel. However, I don't think that tax money should be wasted on unnecessary surgeries in the place of keeping all of our citizens in good health.

  5. #25
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,707
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by ladyphoenix View Post
    I'm asking you to explain to me why it should be that someone (anyone, let's not limit this to women, per se) should be paid (i.e. is entitled to payment) while they are not "working," by either their employer or by the state.
    One reason is that we value children being born in this society. If we didn't give maternity leave it would be a disincentive for working women to get pregnant and see it through.

  6. #26
    ODN Administrator

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rural Southern Indiana
    Posts
    5,285
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixAlive View Post
    I apologize for the misunderstanding. I was originally just stating the fact that this is how things work in our society, not arguing that it should be this way.
    No problem. I just wanted to make sure I understood what you were actually arguing.

    However I do agree with the current policy, because no-one should face poverty if they are unable to work. Poverty breeds disease and death, and these are the things that our taxes should guard people from.
    I don't necessarily agree with that. I believe that people should either be held accountable for their actions or they shouldn't. Picking and choosing which cases/instances in which we hold them responsible seems to be disingenuous at best. If a person should be held responsible for a single consequence of "consenting to having sex," they should be held equally accountable for all potential consequences for the same. The current policy, in my opinion, is flawed in that it encourages the very sort of irresponsiblity that you, yourself, find morally questionable... at least partially anyhow. Why should I ever seek provide for my own healthcare? My own food? My own housing? Why should I care enough to plan for the future, period, if the state will take care of me in the event that I "can't work?"

    I can see why you might believe that it is cruel. However, I don't think that tax money should be wasted on unnecessary surgeries in the place of keeping all of our citizens in good health.
    You're mistaken. I don't think it's cruel at all. I think it's logically inconsistent. You seem to be holding two contrary beliefs as true, simultaneously.

    1) People should be held (financially) accountable for their actions.
    2) People should be not be held (financially) accountable for their actions.

    Two women, both wholly aware of the potential consequences of sexual intercourse, neither prepared for those consequences prior to participating in a sexual act, and in both cases, these women have consequently become pregnant. You justify withholding tax money to pay for the choices of the first woman, citing justification #1 above. You justify giving tax money to the second woman, citing justification #2 above.

    Either your reason for not giving money to the first woman is based on something other than the fact that you don't appreciate being held accountable for her (irresponsible) actions, or you're guilty of employing logically unsound reasoning here. Why does the second woman get a pass?

    ---------- Post added at 02:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:28 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    One reason is that we value children being born in this society. If we didn't give maternity leave it would be a disincentive for working women to get pregnant and see it through.
    Interesting. But since the question was based entirely on the perception that PhoenixAlive was arguing that this should be the case, and we have since found out that it wasn't PhoenixAlive's intention to make such an argument, I don't care to derail the topic unnecessarily by hashing out issues I have with your argument.
    "And that, my lord, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped." ~ Monty Python


  7. #27
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    42
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by ladyphoenix View Post

    You're mistaken. I don't think it's cruel at all. I think it's logically inconsistent. You seem to be holding two contrary beliefs as true, simultaneously.

    1) People should be held (financially) accountable for their actions.
    2) People should be not be held (financially) accountable for their actions.

    Two women, both wholly aware of the potential consequences of sexual intercourse, neither prepared for those consequences prior to participating in a sexual act, and in both cases, these women have consequently become pregnant. You justify withholding tax money to pay for the choices of the first woman, citing justification #1 above. You justify giving tax money to the second woman, citing justification #2 above.

    Either your reason for not giving money to the first woman is based on something other than the fact that you don't appreciate being held accountable for her (irresponsible) actions, or you're guilty of employing logically unsound reasoning here. Why does the second woman get a pass?[COLOR="red"]
    I suppose that I take less issue with the fact that I am paying for her actions, than with the fact that I am paying for her unnecessary surgery.

  8. #28
    ODN Administrator

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rural Southern Indiana
    Posts
    5,285
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixAlive View Post
    I suppose that I take less issue with the fact that I am paying for her actions, than with the fact that I am paying for her unnecessary surgery.
    Then you've answered all the questions I have. Thanks.
    "And that, my lord, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped." ~ Monty Python


  9. #29
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,220
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixAlive View Post
    A medically necessary abortion is one that, were it not performed, would lead to severe medical health risks for the mother.

    If a woman is working, then she would have enough money for birth control pills, eliminating the need for abortion.

    If a woman consents to sex, she accepts the possibility of pregnancy, and assumes the responsibility of dealing with the pregnancy in whatever way she decides. If she elects to have an abortion, that is her choice and her money, not mine, should pay for it.

    Also, it is a woman's right to take paid maternal leave. There is government assistance for people who cannot work. Ultrasounds and medical treatment are all free.
    If she can afford birth control, it doesn't mean she can afford an abortion. Abortions are expensive.

    Are you saying that if a woman cannot afford her abortion it's her own tough luck for having sex ?
    Should she work harder to pay for her abortion?
    What if she used contraception and it failed? Should we punish her and prevent her from having an abortion when she did all she could to prevent a pregnancy?

    ---------- Post added at 10:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:54 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Gonzo View Post
    The thing is, I can replace abortion for rhinoplasty in your scenario, one for one. You are loudly declaring your "right" to have an abortion, and one payed for by the tax payers no less, but your post is little more than a whine when compared to another elective procedure.

    Abortions of "convenience," that is to say, an abortion for a non-life threatening, non-fetal birth defect, non-rape pregnancy, are cosmetic procedures. Having a big nose could lead to being picked on and terrible low self esteem, so it can equal "unwanted" pregnancy on an emotional level. And a big, ugly nose is genetic - there is no way to avoid having one other than rhinoplasty, whereas a pregnancy can be avoided by simply not having sex... unless, you are suggesting you believe in virgin birth? I'm saying: An "unwanted" pregnancy is still the fault of the mother, minus those exceptions listed above. Why should my tax dollars go to fix your mistake? Weren't you the one railing on against a girl who went yachting against good advice, and now she (or her family) should pay for her rescue? The very rescue she herself didn't even ask for??? Do you see the disconnect?

    If I say "Sex can lead to pregnancy," why does pregnancy enjoy a free ride, yet if I say "Yachting in the Indian Ocean in the winter can be dangerous," you attack the girl (more like, her somewhat wealthy family) who just did that and say she is responsible for paying for her rescue?

    So, why don't you fight with such vehemence to have free cosmetic surgery provided by the government? You said you "wouldn't really care if cosmetic surgery was funded by the government," but you went out of your way to fight for abortions.

    Why?
    You would have a case about the rhinoplasty if I was opposed to funding cosmetic surgery. I don't have an issue with it being funded, provided it is within reason - if someone wants to look like a barbie doll, then I'd draw the line.

    The difference with Abby Sunderland and abortion is that the woman often tries to prevent a pregnancy, by using contraception. Abby didn't try to prevent anything. The woman acts responsibly by using contraception, Abby did nothing that was even remotely responsible.

    Abortion is a different issue besides. It's hardly the same as getting your nose done. It's about a womans right to choose, and her right not to end up an incubator at the will of others.
    Frozen In Time Yearning Forbidden Wishes Damned And Divine
    Scars Of My Broken Kisses What Will Follow If Tomorrow's Blind? My Eternal Night.

  10. #30
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    42
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tarja View Post
    If she can afford birth control, it doesn't mean she can afford an abortion. Abortions are expensive.

    Are you saying that if a woman cannot afford her abortion it's her own tough luck for having sex ?
    Should she work harder to pay for her abortion?
    What if she used contraception and it failed? Should we punish her and prevent her from having an abortion when she did all she could to prevent a pregnancy?
    That's exactly right. If she chooses to have an unnecessary abortion, then she should pay for it, just as she would have to pay for any other unnecessary operation. Whether or not she used protection is irrelevant to my argument.

    However, I don't see how you view this as a "punishment". Generally, a pregnant woman is able to work throughout her pregnancy, and is able to attain paid leave. In my country all of her medical bills are paid for. She does not lose anything, and at the end of her pregnancy she has the choice to keep or give up the baby for adoption. I think that many people forget that there are hundreds of thousands of couples waiting to adopt.
    Source: http://statistics.adoption.com/infor...-to-adopt.html

    Also, this also does not completely destroy the woman's chances of attaining an elective abortion if she wishes to have one. She can take out a loan, get a credit card, borrow from family, etc. However, I and all of the other citizens opposed to elective abortion will not have to pay for it through our taxes.
    Last edited by PhoenixAlive; June 22nd, 2010 at 03:48 PM.

  11. #31
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Where ever you tell me, Drill Sergeant!
    Posts
    2,201
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tarja View Post
    You would have a case about the rhinoplasty if I was opposed to funding cosmetic surgery. I don't have an issue with it being funded, provided it is within reason - if someone wants to look like a barbie doll, then I'd draw the line.
    Why would a barbie doll be over the line? Why is there a distinction? And, further, why do you go out of your way to defend "free and available" abortions, but don't do so for cosmetic surgery (or any of the other things I mentioned earlier)?

    The difference with Abby Sunderland and abortion is that the woman often tries to prevent a pregnancy, by using contraception. Abby didn't try to prevent anything. The woman acts responsibly by using contraception, Abby did nothing that was even remotely responsible.
    Are you claiming every woman in the history of the world with an "unwanted" pregnancy used protection? Are you saying you think just being a woman is inherently responsible?

    Abortion is a different issue besides. It's hardly the same as getting your nose done. It's about a womans right to choose, and her right not to end up an incubator at the will of others.
    Nobody says a woman doesn't have a right to choose. She also has a right to pay for it her damn self. Just like I have a right to choose to have another, different elective surgery, I can likewise pay for it.

    That's right - elective. If that thing in her womb isn't killing her (and for the same of argument, if it's retarded or some kind of developmentally deformed), then it is a choice. And some could argue that it was her choice to be exposed to pregnancy by having sex. One could even go as far as saying the woman was consenting to becoming pregnant by engaging in the very act that, guess what, CAUSES PREGNANCY.

    If she can afford birth control, it doesn't mean she can afford an abortion. Abortions are expensive.
    Aww. You know what else is expensive? Having a car. Should we ensure everyone in the world has a car just so it's "not fair" that rich people do and people who can't afford them don't?

    Are you saying that if a woman cannot afford her abortion it's her own tough luck for having sex ?
    YES

    Should she work harder to pay for her abortion?
    YES

    What if she used contraception and it failed? Should we punish her and prevent her from having an abortion when she did all she could to prevent a pregnancy?
    What do you mean by "punish" exactly? If I ran into a mailbox in my car, doing everything in my power to keep the car in good shape and drive it well, but an accident happened anyway, am I not responsible for what happened when I was behind the wheel? But, what if I can't afford to pay for an accident?!? THEN I SHOULDN'T BE DRIVING, DON'T YOU AGREE?

    If a woman is really at the point where a pregnancy would absolutely destroy her life, AND she's so broke she can't afford a somewhat simple procedure (or get a loan, which isn't all that hard to do), then maybe, just maybe, she shouldn't be running the risk.

    Risk. Pay close attention to that word.

    Main Entry: 1risk
    Pronunciation: \ˈrisk\
    Function: noun
    Etymology: French risque, from Italian risco
    Date: circa 1661

    1 : possibility of loss or injury : peril
    2 : someone or something that creates or suggests a hazard
    3 a : the chance of loss or the perils to the subject matter of an insurance contract; also : the degree of probability of such loss b : a person or thing that is a specified hazard to an insurer c : an insurance hazard from a specified cause or source
    4 : the chance that an investment (as a stock or commodity) will lose value

    Possibility. Hazard. Loss. Chance. RISK.

    If we're not talking about rape, no one made her have sex. That's just a fact. If a woman chooses to have sex, she is assuming the personal risk of becoming pregnant, because no contraception in the world has "100% effective" written on it anywhere. Do you agree?

    What you are doing is saying I should help pay to cover her risk. Well, maybe you should pay part of my car insurance. How about that?
    The Signature Religion is the one true religion. I know this is true, because it says so right here in this signature.

  12. #32
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    I'm not from here, NV
    Posts
    2,267
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Yes, I believe that abortions should be funded by the government. Absolutely 100%.


    Quote Originally Posted by Gonzo
    As to your "too poor for an abortion, too poor to raise a child" scenario, there are waiting lists to adopt. There are people in this world with the means to raise a child and the desire to do so.

    Yep, those people are waiting for that newborn child. There are plenty of children who are needing to be adopted and aren't. Let's take care of that FIRST before adding more to the pool. If you want to adopt, great. Here's your 10 year old child that has been sitting in the foster care system for 3 years. Congrats!

    Do you also agree then that we should summarily execute all prisoners currently serving life sentences? That would be cheaper than caring for them in the prison system, wouldn't you agree?
    Ah putting people to death in the United States is not cheap. In fact it's more expensive. Regardless, $400.00 abortion, or a mother on welfare, or a child sitting in the foster care system for a couple of years.

    But this also makes me beg the question - how much does it cost to not have sex? And how much are condoms? Or the pill? And if a woman had enough money to squander on birth control, and god forbid it fails, why does the cost of an elective surgery need to fall on me, the taxpayer, and not on her, the one who decided to have sex and run the risk of becoming pregnant? Why does she get to have the fun and also not have to pay for it?
    How are we defining pay for it? The emotional trauma of abortion and adoption? Or, the continual struggle the mother and child for the next 18 years? Perhaps purely financial?

    Why does abortion deserve it's own category of defense? I understand a lot of the same people arguing for government-funded abortions are the same people who support a universal health care system, but why don't these same people start or support threads about certain other programs, like free glasses, or free dental, or free mammograms, or free prostate exams, or any kind of free exam that supports early cancer detection, or free osteoporosis scans, or free diabetes tests, or free lipid panels, or free genetic testing?
    There are free clinics all over the place that provide most, if not all, of these tests for free. You are absolutely 100% able to use free clinics for preventative care and yearly exams. Anecdote, I was 15 and was diagnosed with Tuberculosis. I received all my treatment from a free clinic.

    The reason people are so passionate about abortion, for or against, stems from the emotion surrounding the topic. I'm not sure you find people blowing up an Opthamologist's office because they offer LASIK.
    "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." ~Bertrand Russell

  13. #33
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,220
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixAlive View Post
    That's exactly right. If she chooses to have an unnecessary abortion, then she should pay for it, just as she would have to pay for any other unnecessary operation. Whether or not she used protection is irrelevant to my argument.

    However, I don't see how you view this as a "punishment". Generally, a pregnant woman is able to work throughout her pregnancy, and is able to attain paid leave. In my country all of her medical bills are paid for. She does not lose anything, and at the end of her pregnancy she has the choice to keep or give up the baby for adoption. I think that many people forget that there are hundreds of thousands of couples waiting to adopt.
    Source: http://statistics.adoption.com/infor...-to-adopt.html

    Also, this also does not completely destroy the woman's chances of attaining an elective abortion if she wishes to have one. She can take out a loan, get a credit card, borrow from family, etc. However, I and all of the other citizens opposed to elective abortion will not have to pay for it through our taxes.
    Oh. I see. So a woman who cannot afford an abortion must take out a loan - thus putting herself in debt - in order to pay for her termination, and then, somehow, work to pay the money back.

    You are also speaking of things in your own country - this isn't the case in all countries. Canada doesn't place any restrictions on abortions.

    Do you think that if the woman decides to have the baby she should give it up for adoption? If she can't afford the abortion, then she can't afford to keep it, so you'd make her bond with her unborn baby, then force her to give it up?

    Would you pay for her medical bills? If you want her to have that baby so badly, you'd pay her bills to ensure she gives birth to a healthy child. Would you pay her rent and her bills while she is unable to work in the later stages of her pregnancy? Or would you step back, say 'tough luck' and expect her to take out a loan to cover the costs?

    Why do you want to punish women for having sex?

    ---------- Post added at 02:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:39 PM ----------

    Gonzo - if a woman doesn't ever want a baby, should she remain a virgin her entire life so she doesn't have any chance at all of falling pregnant?

    If she would abort if she became pregnant, perhaps she should become a nun. The very suggestion that we punish women for having sex - which is NOT automatic consent to pregnancy, is ridiculous.
    Frozen In Time Yearning Forbidden Wishes Damned And Divine
    Scars Of My Broken Kisses What Will Follow If Tomorrow's Blind? My Eternal Night.

  14. #34
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Where ever you tell me, Drill Sergeant!
    Posts
    2,201
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamie View Post
    Yep, those people are waiting for that newborn child. There are plenty of children who are needing to be adopted and aren't. Let's take care of that FIRST before adding more to the pool. If you want to adopt, great. Here's your 10 year old child that has been sitting in the foster care system for 3 years. Congrats!
    How would eliminating the newborn adoptee population help the older kids get adopted when you already said nobody wants to adopt an older kid? Please clarify how you think a dearth of newborns would somehow increase the desirability of older children already in the system.

    Ah putting people to death in the United States is not cheap. In fact it's more expensive. Regardless, $400.00 abortion, or a mother on welfare, or a child sitting in the foster care system for a couple of years.
    Caring for someone during the possible 40, 50, 60, 70+ years of a life sentence cannot be more expensive than the drugs used in a lethal injection and the hour or so paid to a doctor to set up and administer... unless we inject our inmates with solid molten gold or something.

    Do abortions only cost $400? That's about what I pay for four months of car insurance. Do you know anyone who has an abortion every four months? Perhaps we should come up with something like abortion insurance. Or, wait... better idea - my car insurance should be payed for by the government!

    How are we defining pay for it? The emotional trauma of abortion and adoption? Or, the continual struggle the mother and child for the next 18 years? Perhaps purely financial?
    I was arguing against the specific point of abortion being a cheaper alternative to the burden placed on the state to help raise the child. In regards to that, please answer this question: How much does it cost to not have sex?

    You see, I came up with an even cheaper alternative.

    There are free clinics all over the place that provide most, if not all, of these tests for free. You are absolutely 100% able to use free clinics for preventative care and yearly exams. Anecdote, I was 15 and was diagnosed with Tuberculosis. I received all my treatment from a free clinic.
    Neato. Can you also get a nose job at one of these free clinics?

    The reason people are so passionate about abortion, for or against, stems from the emotion surrounding the topic. I'm not sure you find people blowing up an Opthamologist's office because they offer LASIK.
    I completely agree. I also think the emotions and passion lead people to ignore things like facts and logic. Fact - abstinence is free, and 100% effective contraception. Do you agree?

    ---------------------------------------------------

    Quote Originally Posted by Tarja View Post
    Oh. I see. So a woman who cannot afford an abortion must take out a loan - thus putting herself in debt - in order to pay for her termination, and then, somehow, work to pay the money back.
    YES

    Do you think that if the woman decides to have the baby she should give it up for adoption? If she can't afford the abortion, then she can't afford to keep it, so you'd make her bond with her unborn baby, then force her to give it up?
    Nobody is saying she has to "bond with her unborn baby," that is, no one is saying she shouldn't have the choice to abort, only that I shouldn't have to help her pay for it (not if I wasn't the one who knocked her up, anyway). It's a woman's decision, and if she wants to do it, fine. But it is one of many options, and while it could be considered an expensive one, it's no different than dealing with any other personal mistake that anyone else could make. Didn't want to get pregnant? Oops! That's a mistake. So, please justify to me why the burden of helping to "correct" that mistake should fall on me.

    Would you pay for her medical bills? If you want her to have that baby so badly, you'd pay her bills to ensure she gives birth to a healthy child. Would you pay her rent and her bills while she is unable to work in the later stages of her pregnancy? Or would you step back, say 'tough luck' and expect her to take out a loan to cover the costs?
    First of all, many parents awaiting adoption are willing to do this, for the sake of the to-be-born child. But that's still not the over-all point - the fact is, the pregnancy happened as a result of the woman's actions (again, for the sake of argument, we are assuming non-rape and non-developmentally disabled fetus). Why should someone else help pay for the mistake?

    Why do you want to punish women for having sex?
    Why do you insist it's a sort of punishment? Paying for a wanted procedure is making the personal choice to have the procedure, and then paying for a desired service rendered. Again, if you are the pregnant woman who wishes to become un-pregnant, why should anyone else have to pay for the service being provided to you?

    Gonzo - if a woman doesn't ever want a baby, should she remain a virgin her entire life so she doesn't have any chance at all of falling pregnant?
    No one is saying that! You are equivocating that if abortions aren't free (that is, payed for by the taxpayer) that is somehow taking away the right to have one! Nothing could be further from the truth. It is, however, still a service, much like paying someone else to fix your car, or paying a company to insure that car.

    If she would abort if she became pregnant, perhaps she should become a nun. The very suggestion that we punish women for having sex - which is NOT automatic consent to pregnancy, is ridiculous.
    Is there, or is there not, a risk of becoming pregnant when having sex? (I'll give you a hint, the answer is "Yes")

    How is making people pay for cleaning up accidents in their own inherently risky behavior a punishment? If someone gets slapped with a fine for drunk driving, THAT is a punishment. The court costs (and lawyer fees, if you wish to go that route) are quite expensive, and could also be considered part of the punishment. But that is the predetermined consequence of getting a DUI. Having an abortion, on the other hand, is not a predetermined consequence to getting pregnant, or having sex for that matter.

    Making people pay for an elective (that literally means "something one elects or chooses to do") procedure as a result of a willful act that carries an inherent risk is not a punishment. I'm not consenting to getting in an accident by driving a car, yet there is an inherent risk of getting in a car accident while in a car. Does this mean I am being punish by having to pay for car insurance?
    The Signature Religion is the one true religion. I know this is true, because it says so right here in this signature.

  15. #35
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    I'm not from here, NV
    Posts
    2,267
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gonzo
    How would eliminating the newborn adoptee population help the older kids get adopted when you already said nobody wants to adopt an older kid? Please clarify how you think a dearth of newborns would somehow increase the desirability of older children already in the system.
    My point is that there are plenty of children waiting to be adopted, but, older children are overlooked for new babies. All these people waiting for babies could very well be adopting toddlers, tweens, teenagers, ect. . .

    Caring for someone during the possible 40, 50, 60, 70+ years of a life sentence cannot be more expensive than the drugs used in a lethal injection and the hour or so paid to a doctor to set up and administer... unless we inject our inmates with solid molten gold or something.
    Not to play the link game, but this website lays it out pretty well. .

    http://www.deathpenalty.org/article.php?id=42

    Do abortions only cost $400? That's about what I pay for four months of car insurance. Do you know anyone who has an abortion every four months? Perhaps we should come up with something like abortion insurance.
    From my understanding the prices range from $400.00-$1500.00 depending on your trimester. Logically, at least to me, abortion would be cheaper in the first trimester, which is when most abortions take place.

    Neato. Can you also get a nose job at one of these free clinics?
    I would absolutely support free nose jobs if there was a medical reason for it.

    Fact - abstinence is free, and 100% effective contraception. Do you agree?
    Sure, but that isn't the point. People have sex, married couples have sex, single people, teenagers, crack heads, politicians, and clegery all have sex. Mistakes happen. Sometimes the measures we take to avoid accidents fail. Sometimes, people are too young/immature/drugged up to think about the long term consequences of their actions.

    Or, wait... better idea - my car insurance should be payed for by the government!
    Let's imagine the insurance company as the government, and our payments are taxes. My premiums go up because of irreponsible drivers. Where's the outrage? The government requires that we have car insurance in some capacity in all states, if I recall. Do you have the same view point about car insurance as you do abortion?
    "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." ~Bertrand Russell

  16. #36
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    It really comes down to what sort of society we wish to live in. The more we rely on govt, mandates, and regulation to account for our behavior, the less privacy and right to our independent decisions we get to have. After all, if I have to pay for other people's abortions, shouldn't I get a greater say on how those people live their lives. Perhaps, if there is a link between alcohol and drug use we should make it illegal for anyone who has a state-sponsored abortion to buy or drink alcohol. Shouldn't I, as a the person who is paying for other people's abortions get to pass a law which mandates that we sterilize anyone who receives a state-sponsored abortion? I mean, hey, for those who feel its a woman's right to choose, that's all well and good. Isn't it, though, my right to protect my own self-interests and curb the wasteful use of public money and govt resources?

    Can those who support state-sponsored abortions, can you also support punishments/corrections for engaging in such risky behavior? Isn't this your argument as I have been reading it? We sponsor abortion because its better than letting their potential hoodlum grow to maturity where he'll likely be a burden if not a downright menace to society. If this is your defense of public sponsored abortion, then aren't they just as guilty as anyone who is perpetrating some violent offense upon society?

    Personally, I'd prefer to not have to give two cents how many bastard and unwanted children the skank down the street has decided to output. It is between her and her johns, boyfriends, out of work father, whatever. I exaggerate and am being overly crude to make a point. I have no desire to be the moral judge of other people's behavior, but when their behavior has a direct impact upon me, I am left with no choice. So, sponsor your favorite elective surgeries at your own expense.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  17. #37
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    I'm not from here, NV
    Posts
    2,267
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd
    After all, if I have to pay for other people's abortions, shouldn't I get a greater say on how those people live their lives.
    In equal amounts. How much of your tax money would you anticipate going towards abortions? Are you funding the entire abortion?

    Shouldn't I, as a the person who is paying for other people's abortions get to pass a law which mandates that we sterilize anyone who receives a state-sponsored abortion?
    Does your view point extend to who can drive on the road ways, or a teachers syllabus? Just curious. Would you extend this to the man who willingly got someone pregnant who chose to have an abortion? Or just the girl, cause she's the only one going through the act?


    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd
    Can those who support state-sponsored abortions, can you also support punishments/corrections for engaging in such risky behavior?
    I'm going to go out on a limb and say for the sake of this discussion we are excluding rape, incest and violent crimes resulting in an unwated pregnancy. I guess it depends on what you consider a punishment. My assumed perception of what it would feel like after an abortion, both physically and emotionally would be enough punishment. I'm trying to stay away from spending extra money.

    Ultimately, I wouldn't mind having a system where we have clinics that put women (and the men involved!) on payment plans, or garnish their wages in small increments to pay back the government.
    "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." ~Bertrand Russell

  18. #38
    ODN Administrator

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rural Southern Indiana
    Posts
    5,285
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamie View Post
    Sure, but that isn't the point. People have sex, married couples have sex, single people, teenagers, crack heads, politicians, and clegery all have sex. Mistakes happen. Sometimes the measures we take to avoid accidents fail. Sometimes, people are too young/immature/drugged up to think about the long term consequences of their actions.
    If I'm reading this correctly, you're saying, effectively: people guilty of lack of foresight (for whatever reason) should be rescued from the consequences of their actions by virtue of being guilty of lack of foresight.

    How does this drive people to consider consequences before they act? Do you really think that an immediate, feel-goody bandaid sort of solution is going to produce the lasting effect you're looking for? Or are you not looking for a lasting effect... like people actually thinking before boning...?

    Let's imagine the insurance company as the government, and our payments are taxes. My premiums go up because of irreponsible drivers. Where's the outrage? The government requires that we have car insurance in some capacity in all states, if I recall. Do you have the same view point about car insurance as you do abortion?
    Here's the difference... I don't get to choose who I drive on the road with. I get to choose (assuming we're not talking about rape here) who I have sex with.

    ---------- Post added at 09:50 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:45 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamie View Post
    Ultimately, I wouldn't mind having a system where we have clinics that put women (and the men involved!) on payment plans, or garnish their wages in small increments to pay back the government.
    Make them THINK AHEAD by enrolling in this "program" in advance, and you have "abortion insurance." Wow, I wonder if there's a market for that...
    "And that, my lord, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped." ~ Monty Python


  19. #39
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    I'm not from here, NV
    Posts
    2,267
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by LP
    If I'm reading this correctly, you're saying, effectively: people guilty of lack of foresight (for whatever reason) should be rescued from the consequences of their actions by virtue of being guilty of lack of foresight.
    I personally do not see abortion as a form of rescue. What I am saying is that people who do not want their children should be able to seek out a government funded abortion because in the long term, it's better for society.

    How does this drive people to consider consequences before they act? Do you really think that an immediate, feel-goody bandaid sort of solution is going to produce the lasting effect you're looking for? Or are you not looking for a lasting effect... like people actually thinking before boning...?
    Before I answer this, I just need clarification. Are you claiming an abortion is a feel-goody bandaid sort of solution? Sure am looking at the long term effects. Welfare mother gives birth, raises child on welfare, statistics show that said child will continue the cycle. Or, we can dish out an abortion that costs significantly less and be done with it. It would be interesting to see if I could find statistics about repeat abortions. So far all I am coming up with are sites from pro-life organizations.

    Here's the difference... I don't get to choose who I drive on the road with. I get to choose (assuming we're not talking about rape here) who I have sex with.
    But we have the choice to get onto the road.

    Make them THINK AHEAD by enrolling in this "program" in advance, and you have "abortion insurance." Wow, I wonder if there's a market for that...
    Unfortunately we can't make anyone do anything they don't want to do. I wouldn't be opposed to abortion insurance either. I'd add it onto my policy if it were available.
    "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." ~Bertrand Russell

  20. #40
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should Abortions be funded by the Government?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamie View Post
    In equal amounts. How much of your tax money would you anticipate going towards abortions? Are you funding the entire abortion?
    Each and every abortion spends some of my tax money. Over time, I'd imagine it adds up.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamie View Post
    Does your view point extend to who can drive on the road ways, or a teachers syllabus? Just curious. Would you extend this to the man who willingly got someone pregnant who chose to have an abortion? Or just the girl, cause she's the only one going through the act?
    Drivers who act irresponsibly are prohibited from driving and can even be put on probation which prevents them from legally drinking or driving after a certain time. I'd be willing to extend all punishments to both participants of the sexual act which led to the abortion. Sounds fair to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamie View Post
    I'm going to go out on a limb and say for the sake of this discussion we are excluding rape, incest and violent crimes resulting in an unwated pregnancy.
    Absolutely.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamie View Post
    I guess it depends on what you consider a punishment. My assumed perception of what it would feel like after an abortion, both physically and emotionally would be enough punishment. I'm trying to stay away from spending extra money.
    Apparently, the threat of abortion isn't enough to curb the behavior of those having an abortion, so I'd suggest stronger measures are needed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamie View Post
    Ultimately, I wouldn't mind having a system where we have clinics that put women (and the men involved!) on payment plans, or garnish their wages in small increments to pay back the government.
    Now, that would be an improvement, but if you're talking about giving people a loan, why include the govt at all? Then, we're back to the starting point which is where I'd rather see us reside anyhow.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

 

 
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Social Programs and the Proper role of government
    By WhoamI in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: September 1st, 2009, 10:49 AM
  2. Libertarian Philosophy
    By GoldPhoenix in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 77
    Last Post: June 16th, 2009, 09:06 AM
  3. Replies: 25
    Last Post: January 14th, 2007, 02:42 PM
  4. Where are you, politically?
    By starcreator in forum ODN Polls
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: February 4th, 2006, 06:48 PM
  5. Religion and America
    By Feefer in forum Religion
    Replies: 331
    Last Post: January 8th, 2005, 10:24 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •