Abortions drop 61% when.............

[SemiAuto]

Of course the government should not have to take the responsibilities of parents who refuse to take care of their children.

But we live in world of reality, where thousands of people have babies and do not provide for them.

What to do?

Let the kids starve and go without shelter, refuse to educate them.

Thats just not going to happen in America. It my be the norm in third world countries, but not here

Unlimited free contraceptives solve many problem, BEFORE they become problems.

They're not free.

There is the problem of what to do with children of irresponsible parents but the idea that government and taxes is the only responsible solution is narrow minded. So one can be pro life and against the government taking over as parent. I don't always agree with what they propose but let's not pretend it is something it is not.

[Grindelwald]

I can't possibly see how it's the governments job to tell women what they can or can't do with their bodies.

[SemiAuto]

I can't possibly see how it's the governments job to tell women what they can or can't do with their bodies.

Sure. And along the same lines I can't possibly see how it's the government's job to tell me I have to purchase contraceptives for complete strangers. That is a personal responsibility.

[BlandFood]

I can't possibly see how it's the governments job to tell women what they can or can't do with their bodies.

They can slash their wrist if they like as long as it isn't TAXPAYERS that puts them back together.

[Grindelwald]

Sure. And along the same lines I can't possibly see how it's the government's job to tell me I have to purchase contraceptives for complete strangers. That is a personal responsibility.

Birth control saves taxpayer money.

[The Eternal White Belt]

Sure. And along the same lines I can't possibly see how it's the government's job to tell me I have to purchase contraceptives for complete strangers. That is a personal responsibility.

Would you rather pay for the $10 a month birth control or the hundreds of dollars a month that welfare will cost us?

Parents with unplanned pregnancies are more likely to end up on welfare and stay on it longer. It's not really rocket science.

No need to respond though your answer is going to be "I don't want to pay for any of it." That's all well and good, but sorry to inform you - that ain't going to happen.

[Mom49of4]

Would you rather pay for the $10 a month birth control or the hundreds of dollars a month that welfare will cost us?

Parents with unplanned pregnancies are more likely to end up on welfare and stay on it longer. It's not really rocket science.

No need to respond though your answer is going to be "I don't want to pay for any of it." That's all well and good, but sorry to inform you - that ain't going to happen.

First of all government should not be in the business of charity.

Wow - I never heard that one before about unplanned pregnancies. How many of us were truly planned?

Government is too big and taxes too high.

[Grindelwald]

Government is too big and taxes too high.

When have taxes been lower than what they are now?

[SemiAuto]

Birth control saves taxpayer money.

If the government is handing it out it costs taxpayers money. Please do not use one government intrusion to justify other government intrusions. Contraception is person choice/responsibility.

[gonzoliberal]

Birth control saves taxpayer money.

Byngo.

Reality bites.

Don't get in the way.

The REALITY is that there are people to whom you refer as "garbage".
For various reasons, some of them are incompetent.
Of these, some can be "saved", some can't.
Since we (yet) don't euthanize for indigence, we feed and house these folks, repeatedly sending in underpaid "social workers" to assist in keeping them alive and culling out those appearing sentient enough for education and advancement.

What would you have America do to or for those "indegents" who cannot be saved?

What about those that CAN, who respond appropriately to education and opportunity? If they're "bastards" do we cut them off?

Oh to live in such a world where all complicated problems are simple and solutions more so.

...but that would be fantasy.

[Grindelwald]

If the government is handing it out it costs taxpayers money. Please do not use one government intrusion to justify other government intrusions.

You know birth control is only "handed out" to those who can't afford it right? That's probably less than 1% of your taxes. Although I do agree birth control is something that should be payed for by whoever is needing it. But there are much bigger issues.

[SemiAuto]

Would you rather pay for the $10 a month birth control or the hundreds of dollars a month that welfare will cost us?

Parents with unplanned pregnancies are more likely to end up on welfare and stay on it longer. It's not really rocket science.

No need to respond though your answer is going to be "I don't want to pay for any of it." That's all well and good, but sorry to inform you - that ain't going to happen.

Then you'll simply perpetuate the problem. When your only two options are 'government' or 'more government' then from my point of view you have already failed.
If you want to sleep around but not have kids then contraceptives are readily available to you. You've got no right to charge me for it. People need to be responsible for their actions and that includes unfortunate or unplanned consequences.

[SemiAuto]

Byngo.

Reality bites.

Don't get in the way.

The REALITY is that there are people to whom you refer as "garbage".
For various reasons, some of them are incompetent.
Of these, some can be "saved", some can't.
Since we (yet) don't euthanize for indigence, we feed and house these folks, repeatedly sending in underpaid "social workers" to assist in keeping them alive and culling out those appearing sentient enough for education and advancement.

What would you have America do to or for those "indegents" who cannot be saved?

What about those that CAN, who respond appropriately to education and opportunity? If they're "bastards" do we cut them off?

Oh to live in such a world where all complicated problems are simple and solutions more so.

...but that would be fantasy.

Instead we live in a world of massive government debts fueled, in part, by a welfare state that is unsustainable. The choice between 'government' or 'more government' is going to end badly.

[gonzoliberal]

Instead we live in a world of massive government debts fueled, in part, by a welfare state that is unsustainable. The choice between 'government' or 'more government' is going to end badly.

And thus by clinging to an untenable position, you implicitly refuse to consider realistic solutions.

What would you do with these people?

[BlandFood]

And thus by clinging to an untenable position, you implicitly refuse to consider realistic solutions.

What would you do with these people?

We sterilize dogs and cats don't we?

[gonzoliberal]

We sterilize dogs and cats don't we?

So we wish to give them free, cheap birth control.

You'd propose forced sterilization?

Among other things, it ain't cheap.

[SemiAuto]

And thus by clinging to an untenable position, you implicitly refuse to consider realistic solutions.

What would you do with these people?

The untenable position is that of those defending the welfare state.

What to do?
Things like contraceptives are a personal, not a state, responsibility. They are NOT free.

Welfare is the last and worst possible option. If you want to sleep around then buy your own damn birth control. Convince the parents to do their job and raise their kids. If that won't do it then try to get family members to do it. Then charity. Massive welfare is a really bad answer.

Will personal responsibility go badly for some people? Yes. There is no perfect solution because there is no perfect world. Dragging everyone down with a welfare state is simply clinging to an untenable position.

[BlandFood]

So we wish to give them free, cheap birth control.

You'd propose forced sterilization?

Among other things, it ain't cheap.

Do you think many of them are smart enough to remember to take it? You think many won't fall in heat every other day only to fall out of it after the damage is done and cooking in the oven?

[gonzoliberal]

Do you think many of them are smart enough to remember to take it? You think many won't fall in heat every other day only to fall out of it after the damage is done and cooking in the oven?

You're carefully avoiding answering the question directly.

Should I be surprised?

After all, you're cowardly enough to call America's first black preznit "Bobo" and "monkey"...

Sometimes though, you do a good job of imitating the rational.

Which is it today?

[The Eternal White Belt]

First of all government should not be in the business of charity.

You will never, ever, in your lifetime or your children's lifetime get away from government, taxpayer-funded welfare. It's just not going to happen. No amount of complaining will ever remove it. EVER. It will only get worse if the status quo is continued. There are ways to encourage behavior that can have a positive impact on our economy and our tax bill... and this is one way we can do it.

There is also the line of thought that reducing unwanted children has had a dramatic impact on the crime rate in the US.

http://www.freakonomics.com/2005/05/...d-you-believe/

Wow - I never heard that one before about unplanned pregnancies. How many of us were truly planned?

Really? Never heard that one before huh? It's seems pretty obvious to me... have kids when you aren't financially ready, and there is a greater risk of government dependence.

Government is too big and taxes too high.

Great. Now let's find realistic, innovative solutions to help reduce that problem over time. Hint: "Slash everything" is neither realistic, nor innovative.