Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Quote:I think America lacks the social floor needed to adequately support 56 million unwanted children, largely thanks to the conservative right.
I've read a lot of ignorant, just plain stupid, comments on this board. This one is a finalist.
Quote:Abortion a leftist cash cow? While I cannot claim to be an expert on the economics of abortion, this seems to be a stretch. If we treat unwanted children in base terms, removing the human qualities of the argument, the cost of raising them on a societal level far exceeds whatever profits could be made from abortions. Even if you take into account racially targeting impoverished minorities who are not given a real shot at the American Dream and are profiled for placement in a "for profit" prison system.
Planned Parenthood alone made $165 million on ~329,500 abortion in 2011. That's 40% of the abortions performed in the US that year. The centers,staff and physicians who perform these "services" are raking in the cash on the bodies of America's children. Abortion services are the only self-sustaining services provided by these clinics, so 3 to 6% of the total services provided pay for more than half of the clinics income annually.
The breakdown for PP in 2011:
Clinic Income: $321 million (again, half of that is from abortion income)
Private donations: $223 million (funds used to provide "free health services" (abortions) to "low income women" (ie poor minorities))
Medicaid funds: $ $487 million
Total abortion procedures: ~329,500
Total abortion pill kits distributed: ~1.4 million
In sum, abortion services are a billion dollar a year business for the entity that provides 40% of the services in our country each year (half coming from the taxpayer btw). So...2.5 billion or so total on extrapolation.
Cash cow.
The average cost to raise a child is about $240K. If parents do not want these kids, just taking the 329,500 you mention, who pays the $79,080,000,000? If we are strictly looking at the economics of unwanted children and removing all sense of morality and humanity, the fact that you may despise it and dislike which type of people are indeed turning a profit from it, does not negate that they are providing an in demand service which saves taxpayers money.
Quote:The average cost to raise a child is about $240K. If parents do not want these kids, just taking the 329,500 you mention, who pays the $79,080,000,000? If we are strictly looking at the economics of unwanted children and removing all sense of morality and humanity, the fact that you may despise it and dislike which type of people are indeed turning a profit from it, does not negate that they are providing an in demand service which saves taxpayers money.
The abortionists aren't fighting for the economics of society, their fighting for their own gravy train.
Quote:The abortionists are fighting for the economics of society, their fighting for their own gravy train.
Bingo. They couldn't care less what the economic impact is to the individual.
Quote:Bingo. They couldn't care less what the economic impact is to the individual.
Man, I'm a registered democrat and I haven't seen any of this baby-killing money, I wonder if I need to renew my membership or something.
Quote:Man, I'm a registered democrat and I haven't seen any of this baby-killing money, I wonder if I need to renew my membership or something.
It only takes 12 years of medical education or a decent business plan that a venture capitalist would see as profitable for you to get started.
Quote:Man, I'm a registered democrat and I haven't seen any of this baby-killing money, I wonder if I need to renew my membership or something.
Are you an abortionist? If not, maybe you should get with the program and do your civic duty. Those undesirables you democrats are looking to get rid of don't abort themselves.
Quote:The abortionists aren't fighting for the economics of society, their fighting for their own gravy train.
I am simply pointing out that there is a real economic impact, a service which is in demand and a solution which is being provided. Some would argue the $74B for profit prison system is more offensive. And who would pay the trillions it takes to raise all of these unwanted kids? That's just dollars. Who would actually raise, teach and love them?
Quote:I am simply pointing out that there is a real economic impact, a service which is in demand and a solution which is being provided. Some would argue the $74B for profit prison system is more offensive. And who would pay the trillions it takes to raise all of these unwanted kids? That's just dollars. Who would actually raise, teach and love them?
I bet the anti-abortion lobbyists make more money than all the abortion clinics in the world.
Cash cow.
Quote:
Gotta love the liberals and their disdain for anything remotely resembling personal responsibility.
Who the hell are those evil conservatives to think a person should be responsible for a life that they just made.
Oh, that's right. obama is your daddy now......
sure seems that way.
Quote:It's interesting that a liberal would want to fund birth control, but they fight tooth and nail to prevent funding for the one proven method to avoid pregnancies, STDs, and other unwanted implications. You know, the other A word....abstinence.
Interesting/ hypocritical/ liberal/.....potato/ potahto....tomato/tomahto....
Spending millions to fund an "abstinence only" program, to me, is ludicrous. For starters, it does not work. As mentioned before, premarital sex is not going away whether you attach a stigma of shame to it or not. These programs also do not equip young people with the knowledge they need when they do inevitably engage in sexual activity. Better to enforce abstinence as the only effective way to prevent unwanted pregnancies and STDs in sex ed, than to ignore all other methods of birth control.
Quote:Spending millions to fund an "abstinence only" program, to me, is ludicrous. For starters, it does not work. As mentioned before, premarital sex is not going away whether you attach a stigma of shame to it or not. These programs also do not equip young people with the knowledge they need when they do inevitably engage in sexual activity. Better to enforce abstinence as the only effective way to prevent unwanted pregnancies and STDs in sex ed, than to ignore all other methods of birth control.
School's shouldn't be teaching any sex practice that's not their role. Abstinence, birth control, sex education it's all wasteful. That's the role of the parents not the schools, half our problems are we want to substitute parental roles to government authority.
What about parents who only teach abstinence? When children of these parents do inevitably have premarital sex, doesn't it increase the chance of an unwanted pregnancy if they are not educated on birth control options? I agree parents should have the right to remove their kids from such programs if they want, but I gotta tell you, seeing some of those STD pictures left an impression that inspired many students to abstain. For a little while at least.
Quote:What about parents who only teach abstinence? When children of these parents do inevitably have premarital sex, doesn't it increase the chance of an unwanted pregnancy if they are not educated on birth control options? I agree parents should have the right to remove their kids from such programs if they want, but I gotta tell you, seeing some of those STD pictures left an impression that inspired many students to abstain. For a little while at least.
Some parents will be responsible and some won't but that changes nothing. It's the same as when you try to legislate morality, values isn't something government can put a line on and say this is good this is bad. This is the right way this is the wrong way, values like morality are going to vary from family to family.
Sex education was about teaching the biological reproductive process, now it's about programing kids on approved ways to have "safe sex", that's not the schools role.
Quote:But it's an observation on a hypothetical theory that is impossible to observe, it's an off hand lazy comment implying men are only against abortion because they physically can't understand a women's reason to seek an abortion.
It's not that they don't understand it, they don't care for that aspect of it as much as they would if it directly affected them.
Quote:Only in the fairy tale world that libertarians live in do all parents sit their kids down for the "birds and the bees" talk. There are millions of parents that either don't know enough about safe sex practices or don't care enough about safe sex practices to educate their kids on the issue. Should those millions of kids be subject to STDs simply because they had crappy parents that didn't discuss the risks of unsafe sex?
How many times do you have to be told? If parents want to raise ignorant, dangerous, uneducated and religiously indoctrinated children who impact the world society around them negatively, then Goddamnit, that's their RIGHT!
Quote:How many times do you have to be told? If parents want to raise ignorant, dangerous, uneducated and religiously indoctrinated children who impact the world society around them negatively, then Goddamnit, that's their RIGHT!
Now you're starting to get it (/sarcasm), when did it become governments role to raise children? Show me the constitutional authority the government has to raise children.........
Quote:Only in the fairy tale world that libertarians live in do all parents sit their kids down for the "birds and the bees" talk. There are millions of parents that either don't know enough about safe sex practices or don't care enough about safe sex practices to educate their kids on the issue. Should those millions of kids be subject to STDs simply because they had crappy parents that didn't discuss the risks of unsafe sex?
I guess you would support legislation teaching children how to handle firearms in school as well? I mean some parents don't know or understand firearms well enough to teach children how to properly handle them, same principle right?
Quote:It's not that they don't understand it, they don't care for that aspect of it as much as they would if it directly affected them.
Well being it take a male and female to create a life, I'd say abortions do directly affect males.
Quote:Now you're starting to get it (/sarcasm), when did it become governments role to raise children? Show me the constitutional authority the government has to raise children.........
I guess you would support legislation teaching children how to handle firearms in school as well? I mean some parents don't know or understand firearms well enough to teach children how to properly handle them, same principle right?
The government's rights in any area are only limited by the desires of those in government.'
The constitution gives practically limitless ability for the government to do just about anything in the interests of the General Welfare.
Intentionally trying to raise children to be ignorant and superstitious should probably be categorized as child abuse.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11