Republicans and Abortion

It's not going to be a rant, rather a fix to the issue going forward I hope.  I'm a republocan

It's not going to be a rant, rather a fix to the issue going forward I hope.  I'm a republocan in the sense of fiscal policy.  How can we though, as Republicans stand for less intrusive government and then tell women what to do with their own body.  I think this is the ultmate intrusion in any sense. On abortion, I feel it is morraly wrong but that's my opinion, it should not take government to manage this.  What I think as a man on this issue in fact should only be limited to me and my spouse and in that case I'm outnumbered 1 to 1.  In fact as a party we need to back away from this issue if we wish to go forward as a viable strong party!  We keep getting cornered on this one isue so many times and most Republicans I talk with agree, it's a moral issue not a party or government issue.

Look Dem's, we are not going to reverse Roe vs Wade.  We are not going to push grany off the cliff.  But as a party I think the main issue going forward is reducing defict spending, cutting some programs, and reducing taxes.  I see the Democratic party as moving towards socialism and for females if you are worried about government intrusion regarding your body, well, let's just see how the next 4 years goes.  I hope better.

Yeah baby, let's crank it up today, rips and rants welcome but before you tear into me, read paragraph 1 again!

 I'm a republocan in the sense of fiscal policy.  How can we though, as Republicans stand for less intrusive government and then tell women what to do with their own body.

I am not great at expressing myself on political topics and especially something as emotional as this one but here goes.

The term Pro-Choice has always been interesting to me because if the choice is death of the fetus then there really are no choices left at all.

If the choice is life there is a whole world of opportunities. Keep the baby or adoption and through adoption you can open up even more choices: choose the family then open or closed adoption, how often do you want to visit, or not visit at all, letters from adoptive family and the list goes on.

You know, there have been some events in my life that have shaped my feelings on this topic and when it comes time to vote I can not separate them. Adopting my two children for one thing and knowing that at least one of their birth mothers was taken to the abortion clinic 2 times but could not go through with it. Now this little life that was spared is singing and dancing in my house at this very minute.

So, I can not look at these little faces and do anything but vote for LIFE.

You know, there have been some events in my life that have shaped my feelings on this topic and when it comes time to vote I can not separate them. Adopting my two children for one thing and knowing that at least one of their birth mothers was taken to the abortion clinic 2 times but could not go through with it. Now this little life that was spared is singing and dancing in my house at this very minute.

So, I can not look at these little faces and do anything but vote for LIFE.

I am not great at expressing myself on political topics and especially something as emotional as this one but here goes.

The term Pro-Choice has always been interesting to me because if the choice is death of the fetus then there really are no choices left at all.

If the choice is life there is a whole world of opportunities. Keep the baby or adoption and through adoption you can open up even more choices: choose the family then open or closed adoption, how often do you want to visit, or not visit at all, letters from adoptive family and the list goes on.

You know, there have been some events in my life that have shaped my feelings on this topic and when it comes time to vote I can not separate them. Adopting my two children for one thing and knowing that at least one of their birth mothers was taken to the abortion clinic 2 times but could not go through with it. Now this little life that was spared is singing and dancing in my house at this very minute.

So, I can not look at these little faces and do anything but vote for LIFE.

That 1st point just isn't true...the 2nd one is debatable.  Step One:  appoint conservative SC Justices...Step Two, overturn roe v. wade.  once it's a states right issue with roe wade gone, those who can afford it will cross state lines to have it done...the poor won't, or will resort to back alley abortions.  

I've put the offer out there before, and I'll put it out there again...all the pro-life folks who want to end a woman's right to choose, I tell ya what, sign your name on the list.  We'll force all the girls and women getting pregnant to carry their fetuses full-term.  Once the kids are born, we randomly select a pro-life family off the list and require they raise the child.  Of course, we don't want to encourage any government dependency, so we'll make ya take the kid with no financial support from the government...of course, you'll likely have to deal with higher than average rates of "issues" as the girls/women having unplanned pregnancies tend not to have the greatest pre-natal care and/or desire to provide what's best for the fetus.  

I consider myself pro-life...pro quality of life.  To say folks who have unplanned pregnancies should have thought of being a parent before having unprotected sex just don't get it in my opinion.  Why are folks so insistent upon wanting to require people who behave irresponsibly or who are not ready to raise a child, to raise children?  (it's a rhetorical question...I respect non pro-choice folks' opinions...it's a free country, luckily the majority is pro-choice)  

Freakonomics author Levitt explains it best:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zk6gOeggViw

That 1st point just isn't true...the 2nd one is debatable.  Step One:  appoint conservative SC Justices...Step Two, overturn roe v. wade.  once it's a states right issue with roe wade gone, those who can afford it will cross state lines to have it done...the poor won't, or will resort to back alley abortions.  

I've put the offer out there before, and I'll put it out there again...all the pro-life folks who want to end a woman's right to choose, I tell ya what, sign your name on the list.  We'll force all the girls and women getting pregnant to carry their fetuses full-term.  Once the kids are born, we randomly select a pro-life family off the list and require they raise the child.  Of course, we don't want to encourage any government dependency, so we'll make ya take the kid with no financial support from the government...of course, you'll likely have to deal with higher than average rates of "issues" as the girls/women having unplanned pregnancies tend not to have the greatest pre-natal care and/or desire to provide what's best for the fetus.  

I consider myself pro-life...pro quality of life.  To say folks who have unplanned pregnancies should have thought of being a parent before having unprotected sex just don't get it in my opinion.  Why are folks so insistent upon wanting to require people who behave irresponsibly or who are not ready to raise a child, to raise children?  (it's a rhetorical question...I respect non pro-choice folks' opinions...it's a free country, luckily the majority is pro-choice)  

Freakonomics author Levitt explains it best:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zk6gOeggViw

That 1st point just isn't true...the 2nd one is debatable.  Step One:  appoint conservative SC Justices...Step Two, overturn roe v. wade.  once it's a states right issue with roe wade gone, those who can afford it will cross state lines to have it done...the poor won't, or will resort to back alley abortions.  

I've put the offer out there before, and I'll put it out there again...all the pro-life folks who want to end a woman's right to choose, I tell ya what, sign your name on the list.  We'll force all the girls and women getting pregnant to carry their fetuses full-term.  Once the kids are born, we randomly select a pro-life family off the list and require they raise the child.  Of course, we don't want to encourage any government dependency, so we'll make ya take the kid with no financial support from the government...of course, you'll likely have to deal with higher than average rates of "issues" as the girls/women having unplanned pregnancies tend not to have the greatest pre-natal care and/or desire to provide what's best for the fetus.  

I consider myself pro-life...pro quality of life.  To say folks who have unplanned pregnancies should have thought of being a parent before having unprotected sex just don't get it in my opinion.  Why are folks so insistent upon wanting to require people who behave irresponsibly or who are not ready to raise a child, to raise children?  (it's a rhetorical question...I respect non pro-choice folks' opinions...it's a free country, luckily the majority is pro-choice)  

Freakonomics author Levitt explains it best:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zk6gOeggViw

 Sorry CD. That is so far out there, it's silly. Kind of like me saying that those in love with UHC should be put on a list and billed for it instead making all of us pay for it. Heck, you all in for the Dem agenda? Sign em up and let them pay for it and let those against it pay nothing. That won't work will it? 

Is this supposed to sound like a negative? I'm pretty sure I paid about 20 grand to get my name on a list to do just what you described . My son was born in birth mothers apartment then dropped off at CSS. Prenatal care was slim to none. I never gave a second thought to what kind of issues we might encounter. Is there a family that does not have issues? While we are no longer officially waiting to adopt another child, if my phone rang today about a baby needing a home you can be guaranteed that I would be happy to do this all over again.

It's not going to be a rant, rather a fix to the issue going forward I hope.  I'm a republocan in the sense of fiscal policy.  How can we though, as Republicans stand for less intrusive government and then tell women what to do with their own body.  I think this is the ultmate intrusion in any sense. On abortion, I feel it is morraly wrong but that's my opinion, it should not take government to manage this.  What I think as a man on this issue in fact should only be limited to me and my spouse and in that case I'm outnumbered 1 to 1.  In fact as a party we need to back away from this issue if we wish to go forward as a viable strong party!  We keep getting cornered on this one isue so many times and most Republicans I talk with agree, it's a moral issue not a party or government issue.

Look Dem's, we are not going to reverse Roe vs Wade.  We are not going to push grany off the cliff.  But as a party I think the main issue going forward is reducing defict spending, cutting some programs, and reducing taxes.  I see the Democratic party as moving towards socialism and for females if you are worried about government intrusion regarding your body, well, let's just see how the next 4 years goes.  I hope better.

Yeah baby, let's crank it up today, rips and rants welcome but before you tear into me, read paragraph 1 again!