(July 15, 2015 at 3:09 pm)Nope Wrote: More reasons why it makes no sense for someone like Chad to support programs that reduce poverty
Quote: Forty-two percent of women obtaining abortions have incomes below 100% of the federal poverty level ($10,830 for a single woman with no children).
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html
A lot of pro life individuals(not everyone) are against programs that help the poor.
So, Chad, are you for things like free birth control or a comprehensive, non abstinence based sex education for students? What about free day care for poor women who decide to not have abortions but would like to work or go to school?
Many who label themselves as "pro-life" are actually more accurately described as "forced-birthers" since they want to force women to have kids but don't give a rat's arse about what happens to the kids, or their parents, after they're born. Hence, as we see among many conservative politicians, they're against abortion but also undermine or remove the support structures for the poor, those more likely to have abortions because they can't support their families as it is.
Many are also against birth control, sex education, and any attempts to lift the struggling people out of poverty - just look at their fights against raising the minimum wage.
But when confronted, they don't actually answer the questions or charges put to them, they just post more soundbites and quotes, lay more charges, and attempt to muddy the discussion more.
Right, Woots?
Dying to live, living to die.
