Just read that Jeb's grandfather, Sen. Prescott Bush was PP's first treasurer and his name was on fundraising letters.

Oh he certainly was heavily involved with PP.

It does make you wonder if all this eugenics hype is a lot of nothing and the real issue is about women's health and control over their own bodies. Remember, back then abortions were done in back alleys and even information about contraception was illegal.

"It does make you wonder if all this eugenics hype is a lot of nothing "

Tell that to the black ministers who are trying to remover her likeness from the Smithsonian. Spence, is there any evidence that she didn't support eugenics? Just because that would help your personal agenda, that doesn't make it evidence.

"the real issue is about women's health and control over their own bodies"

Oh, it's not about killing babies, but "women's health"? Spence, why are so many women opposed to abortion? These women, like Carly Fiorina, are opposed to their own health? Do you honestly believe that?

More evidence that it's not about "womens health" - the bill to de-fund Planned Parenthood, would divert every single cent that currently goes to Planned Parenthood, to other "women's health" organizations that don't do the things that Planned Parenthood does. If the goal was to diminish women's health, why doesn't the bill propose to cut funding to women's health by a single cent? And why was the bill proposed by a female US Senator?

Do you ever get tired of ignoring the facts and trying to dishonestly demonize the other side? I guess it's easier than responding to what we are actually saying.

Fortunately we have plenty of good homes for those unwanted babies. The foster care in Auburn is a perfect example.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Don't know what you are referring to, I guess you are being sarcastic.

But at least you aren't referring to any horsebleep about "women's health". Now you are saying this is for the good of the baby?

We also have people who wait for years to adopt babies. Years. What that means, is that there are more people who want babies, than there are babies that are available.

Sea Dangles, would you rather be slaughtered, or put in a foster home?

If they need to raise my taxes to provide better care for neglected kids, I have zero issue with that. Tax away!

If I am going to be tortured in a foster home please kill me first. You know less than you think Jim.and you prove it consistently
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well Sea Dangles, (1) given the years-long waiting lists for people desperate to adopt a baby, I think it's safe to say that not many babies end up unwanted and in foster care as you depicted...that's mostly older kids who find themselves in a lousy deal. And (2) given that kids in foster homes are not committing suicide in huge numbers, I think I can make a pretty compelling case that those people feel their lives are, in fact, worth living. So, let's be honest and not suggest that abortion is doing these babies a favor.

Read the news Jim. I am well aware of the adoption process. My good friends just took three trips and 100k. Cash to Moscow. Where did I suggest it was doing favors?
Google foster care in Auburn.
I am pro abortion, you are not.i wont try to convert you and if you were smart you would do the same. I am predicting you wont though.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Where did I suggest it was doing favors?"

Come now. You suggested that, when you said you woul drather be killed than go to foster care.

"I am well aware of the adoption process"

If you claim that large numbers of surrendered newborns would end up in foster care, then I'd challenge your statement that you know a lot about this.

"Google foster care in Auburn"

you google it. One lousy foster care situation, does not meen that all those kids would be better off having never been born.

I'm not trying to convert you, just trying to correct your false statements.

Fixed.

Without Down's syndrome.


Double fixed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So what happens to all the imperfect babies that anti-abortion people give up for adoption? Do they all die in the streets? Are they all tortured to death in foster homes?

More misdirection on your part. A small % of abortions are selected because of medical problems of the baby. The vast majority of abortions are done for sheer convenience, nothing else. You can talk about women's health and babies with medical issues, but thats not the heart of the issue. Most abortions are performed on moms who simply don't want to go through pregnancy.

Sorry, jut saw that you also brought race into it.

What evidence do you have, that black babies that get put up for adoption, have miserable lives? Are there huge, institutional orphanages for these kids, that no one ever told me about>

If we need to take better care of these kids, I will happily pay my share of that. To say that they'd be better off to never exist, is quite a leap, and I can't fathom how you feel qualified to make that call.

In the latest PP video released, a former technician at a place that procures fetal tisue, on her experiences dealing with aborted babies at Planned Parenthood.

I ahve no idea if she's telling the truth. But what she says, is she witnessed an aborted baby outside the womb, whose heart was possibly still beating, and they cut through th eface o fthe baby to get the brain tissue. This happened, I guess, at Planned Parenthood.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/christi...ased-n2040909#!

Maybe I'm a radical, but I don't want my tax dollars going to that place.

Jim, do you know how many of your tax dollars have gone to killing people? I'd wager a guess that your tax dollars go to killing people in foreign wars to the tune of 99.98% vs 0.02% that might end up at PP
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I have no doubt that more of my $$ goes to help our military kill people than goes to PP.

Here's the difference. Our military kills really bad people. PP kills unborn babies.

Apples and oranges, dont you think?

Here's the rub. Look up how many innocent Iraqi civilians were killed by errant air strikes, misguided small arms fire, etc... We're those people "bad"?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No, they are not all bad, but that's an unavoidable reality of war. It's tragic.

Slaughtering our own unborn, simply because it's easier than accepting the responsibilities of our actions, is not inevitable.

In any event, I shouldn't have to pay for it.

I'm about to be totally tasteless but if a single mom chooses not to have an abortion and then goes off of welfare to the tune of $30 grand a year or what ever it pays out... You will end up paying a hell of a lot more then. There's that tasteless saying that the GOP stops caring for you the moment you are born.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't think that's tasteless, I think it's a fair point. My response would be, I would love to pay more taxes to take care of babies saved by outlawing abortion, and I am certain that a huge % of anti-abortion folks would feel the same way. Conservatives don't claim that we shouldn't pay taxes, we just don't want to pay for useless, wasteful things. I'm happy to pay to take care of people in need.

That tasteless saying about the GOP not caring after you are born is a great bumper sticker, but it's demonstrably false. A study called "Who Really Cares" showed conculsively that conservatives are actually more charitable than liberals. Not that liberals are stingy, because they aren't. But to suggest that Republicans don't care? That's nonsense. That sayong isn't tasteless, but it sure is thoughtless. Again, deigned to demonize the opposition, instead of responsing to what we are actually saying.

I think you are an exception to the mass of GOP party who think welfare is the tool of the devil.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

At least Jim admitted to being radical which he described as slander when I accused him of being Taliban. He has his point of view and I don't expect that to change. I am not opposed to abortion for convenience, it is a personal choice that one has to live with forever. There are many babies born to troubled parents that have serious disablities, they are special children that require great expense and care. Thank goodness there are some willing to accept this burden. Life is too short to not be happy, I simply don't believe that a mistake should be reason to deal with the stigma that is attached to being a single Mom.
To someone like Jim I am sure this makes me a savage but I don't expect that to change. And I still consider him to be extreme to the point of Taliban. In my opinion society would benefit from less Jims.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Look at what happens in China with their 1 child rule.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Maybe you are correct? Tough to measure. In my experience, conservatives are happy to help people who genuinely need help. What we are opposed to (as I bet you are also opposed to) is giving welfare to people who could easiy be working, and I am opposed to (as I bet you are) welfare programs that cripple recipients my making them addicted to welfare.

Lots of conservatives are Christians, and Christians put a very, very high emphasis on charity. Not all of us are good Christians, of course, but you get my meaning.

"At least Jim admitted to being radical "

In which "radical" means I don't support the wholsale slaughter of millions of unborn babies for sheer convenience. I feel that if you choose to engage in an activity, then you are responsible to face the music for the ramifications. Is that such a radical notion to you?

"Thank goodness there are some willing to accept this burden"

On that we agree 100%. Special place in heaven for those souls.

"I simply don't believe that a mistake should be reason to deal with the stigma that is attached to being a single Mom"

First, i don't think there is any stigma (anymore) with being a single Mom in our culture. And living with that burden is not necessary, because adoption is always an option. Always.

As to your characterization of me as Taliban...well, as we all know, the Taliban feel justified in slaughtering the innocent for their own personal benefit. Now, on this issue, does that position sound more like you, or more like me? Who has more in common with them?

"In my opinion society would benefit from less Jims"

A wee bit harsh, but you are entitled to that opinion...maybe you meant society would benefit from less "gyms"?

Gay men make great adoptive parents! I'll make a liberal out of you yet Jim :hihi:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Hey, I'm pro gay marriage (wasn't always, but came around), and I have no problem with gays adopting as long as they are vetted and checked out. I know lots of heterosexuals who are terrible parents. Being able to create kids, doesn't automatically bestow anyone with the ability to love them. And love is 99% of what a kid needs.

"I'll make a liberal out of you yet Jim" Not gonna happen, but you do know how to debate with respect and an open mind.

How me supporting a right to choose benefits me is lost here Gym. I simply support the right to choose. You feel this should not be a persons right. Why not just say allah akbar?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

" i simply support the right to choose"

To choose WHAT? Why do pro-abortion folks always just say "right to choose"? Are we talking about the right to choose to root for the Red Sox? Are we talking about the right to choose to wear pants instead of a skirt? If you support abortion, why do you all bend over backwards to avoid stating what it is exactly, that you support the right to choose? If you are so uncomfortable saying it, why do you support it?

You support the right of one person to slaughter a perfectly innocent baby, for convenience. That position, to me, sounds like something the Taliban woiuld embrace. My stance, that all life is too precious to be snuffed out for another's convenience, is clearly contrary to the Taliban agenda.

Try making that wrong.

When uncle touch too much knocks up his 14 year old niece, there should be a right to choose. When you know you have a baby with horrible birth defects, there should be a right to choose. When a girl is gang raped after someone slipped her a roofie at the frat house, there should be a right to choose.
Its really quite simple.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device