Do so called "Christians" have any standards at all?

Says the leftist libtards who support the massacre of millions of babies each year

75% of women accessing abortion are low income. Do you honestly want to support those births through to adulthood?

Then pay for their incarceration, pay through increased crime, increased police force and a return to the crime levels we had before Roe v Wade?

I also seriously doubt you want a sharp increase in the black births that would result.

Be careful what you wish for.

Outlawing abortion is an unfunded mandate that would cost us trillions a year.

the unaware,bobblehead hypocrisy is absolutely staggering

I can completely understand your anger.

On the right, the thought that this would cost a boatload of money, really bothers the hell out of a lot of them!

1. It's not free

2. The majority of births would be on the taxpayer. That's just fact.

3. Fine, make it illegal but be prepared for what it costs.

4. If you think I'm a sorry excuse for a human being, what do you think about the hypocrites who appose abortion but don't want to take the responsibility for paying for all the additional mouths to feed?

Americans have done it.
Why do you choose to list non-rational people?

Rationalized dropping the bombs on Japan.
Rationalized removing Sadam from power.
Rationalized removing Democratically elected Prez's from power all over the world who were doing great things for their countries.

I think......

I think YOU'RE worried my rationalization is a factual rationalization that anyone, even pro-lifers have to admit to.

and totally ignores the inherent philosophical inconsistencies born out of your own straw man argument.

you can't accuse someone of making a non-sensical argument by responding with your own non-sensical argument.

my argument isn't even really an argument.
it is an observation of semantics.
that's all.

you are projecting a ton of crap onto a simple observation.
disagree with the observation? totally fair.
but to say it is an "argument"?
not even close.

"Not wanting to kill the unborn DOES NOT impute responsibility FOR those unborn onto those who don't wish to kill them. That's not how it works."

Impute: "assign (a value) to something by inference from the value of the products or processes to which it contributes"

If 75% of women accessing abortion are low income, how does that NOT impute a likely cost onto the society those births enter into?

What happens when we increase the poverty level in America for a family of 4 from 32k to 33.5k a year? Doesn't that put millions of people into poverty, costing American taxpayers more yearly in welfare to families to raise them again out of poverty?

I know traditional Republicans rail at such changes! They know there is a direct relationship between the two. You increase the output, you increase the costs. Sure, some will make it on their own but with wages stagnant for 35yrs, with higher upward mobility found in the UK than in America, the chances of that aren't great, especially with another mouth to feed in the household, if there even is a household.

You imply that 75% is too high but go with it, that some/many/most of these individuals may be low income but only most/many/some will actually draw from welfare programs. That these numbers are variable and in all cases likely sway in your direction and the problem is not as I describe. That these people wouldn't be a drain on our system.

Then the best part, you suggest that these children would, "support" their ailing parents in old age.
Are you joking?
Have you looked at the cost of nursing homes?

Children are MORE likely to pull their parents money out of their savings accounts, put it in their OWN name, so that the financial cost is reduced through the use of medicare and the money lasts longer or they get an inheritance before the money is used up!

Anyone could counter your argument and state that it is highly likely an individual could save a lot more money over their working life if they did NOT have children!

That's only half of it:

Then, you proceed to claim that the entire middle class has seen stagnant wages for 35yrs due to 3% of the population. That illegal aliens are a huge, "drain on our resources" and are at fault. Your words not mine.

Some/many/most of those illegals actually DO pay income taxes
Some/many/most of them actually DO pay into SS yet will NEVER draw from that system!

You really need to save the overarching problems like these to minds like my own and just stay in the weeds where you belong. You are way in over your head.

In 2015 there were 638,169 abortions. 75% of those women were low income. That's 478,627 needing government assistance for birth and child care. The average cost of birth in America is $10,800. That's over 5 billion just for birthing.

A single parent can expect to receive up to $35,000 a year in gov assistance, over an above child birth.

1. If abortion is illegal, what is the yearly cost to keep these low income moms home, raising unloved children and the cost of the lost productivity of these women?
2. What is the yearly additional cost in food, hospital care, daycare and housing?
3. What is the long term cost in increased policing, prison space, loss of life, drug use, lifelong welfare?
4. What is the lifelong costs associated with pregnancies women would have chose to terminate due to non-viability/unrealistic life expectations, but are now required by law to have? ie, children hooked up to machines and in permanent lifelong care due to debilitating issues?

1 trillion a year is not unrealistic over the span of 10yrs with no abortion.

Well.....

That's the argument in a nut shell isn't it?

Why people are split 50/50 on abortion and probably always will be.

Some consider them alive already, some do not. You nor I will change anyones opinion.

Don't kill the messenger. Ending abortion would be incredibly expensive and on top of all the other expenses we already have for the people who have already been born.

Well, we've basically done exactly what I've stated for nearly 50yrs without blurring that line or even hinting at going down the road you suggest we would.

That hasn't happened. Not even close.

Kevorkian?

Seriously? You're trying to tell me Kevorkian is known today because of abortion?

You've got absolutely NO proof what you say is true. It's simply your personal opinion.

Planned Parenthood targets people who need help. They are not targeting minorities.

That's not what I'm saying.

1. The reality is that anti-abortion is mainly a right issue.
2. People on the right also don't like welfare
3. The right certainly doesn't like welfare for minorities
4. They don't like minorities in general because they vote left
5. Therefore, it should be a positive on the right

Crime is much, much lower than it was in the 80's.
Violent crime is slightly lower since Roe v Wade.

The cheapening of life argument doesn't work in relation to crime or suicide.

Suicide has gone up due to 35yrs of stagnant wages.

Last I checked we still got tons of your pet 'blacks' that you so adamantly champion.

Of course abortion is not administered to anyone else, just them Negroids?

1. Discount and brush aside, not even using similar language
2. Discount and brush aside
3. Discount and brush aside
4. Discount and brush aside
5. Discount and brush aside

What kind of horrifying world do I live in where the societal influencers tell you that's true...?

One where white men gather and scream, "the jews will not replace us"
One where a white male runs down a woman with his car, killing her and injuring multiple others because they were supporting anti-hate

YOU don't know a single person "on the right" who is in favor of the wholesale slaughter of entire ethnicities because it "saves money."?

Oh you don't? You know what's horrifying about that statement?
You likely know the people I've just mentioned, they support Trump, made the news and they all did what they did just because they want to maintain a white majority race!

"I do, however, know a far amount of people on the Left who do."

Oh yes, for sure you have to end with the demonization of the left. Oh, clasp your face in horror of how horrible they are and then take the suggestion and deny, deny, deny. "Oh, my child would NEVER do that! You must be mistaken!"

Jesus Christ! Grow up!

What I'm suggesting is not the entire right should believe this way. I'm suggesting there are some who already do. There are some who would if they thought it through and stopped listening to all the talking points their party feeds them. And of course, there are some who never would.

Abortion is an issue that will never be solved. Half of all Christians believe it should remain legal. It's an issue that doesn't even belong in politics.

That last comment of yours was a whole lot of the same as the rest.

The way my mind works is not dem or repub. It's INTJ.

https://www.truity.com/personality-type/INTJ

It's a scientific, thinking, judging mindset that is extremely good at thinking about the big picture and cares very little about down in the weeds details and/or the sensibilities of others regarding same. I just don't care about down in the weeds details and never will. My mindset also doesn't allow me to care a whole lot that you have problems with that. While I may try to explain in other ways so you may understand (a skill practiced by INTJ's when other people don't get it) the bottom line is if you can't, I'm not going to worry a whole lot about it because ultimately, I don't care.

I'm sorry to hurt your sensibilities regarding the details. I'm stating facts regarding the big picture.

It's a fact that ending abortion would cost huge amounts of money.

1. Of course, there are much larger considerations regarding abortion, than cost
2. It makes no difference if you think bringing up cost is offensive. NONE. It's reality.
3. The statement in no way means that I'm a horrible person or that Dems are horrible people like you keep implying. The statement is just reality and your comments regarding this point I find, small minded.
4. Making the statement does not make me a Dem, anymore than a Republican
5. I'm a social Dem and a fiscal conservative. No party fits me well. Both are BS as far as I'm concerned.

6. You are hopelessly caught up in the left and right, framing everything politically and religiously when both politics and religion are human created abstracts with decisions made and followed due to alternative rational and motivations. It's also BS to suggest those motivations are always based on, "morality" or "right and wrong".

People don't think and should not think with such limitations on their minds. That to me, seems like a prison for your mind.

Yes, your stupidity has defeated both of us.

You can't be helped.

Too stupid and discount everything you don't agree with. Calling MTBI pseudoscience with 60yrs of proven track record yeah, you are pretty helpless.

Stop talking to me. Not listening any longer.

You are not one of "We," you are Canadiam.

We murder the alive, whats the difference?

Sperm is a single cell, living organism. We need to outlaw ejaculation outside of the female body. We're killing Trillions a year.

I'm asking, where do we cut this off?

It's all life.

If you say, "viability" that means you're for many forms of controlling/ending many possible human lives.

So sperm is necrotic? Cool, zombie hybrids.

So you're for married couples watching the woman's monthly cycle and only having sex when she's not fertile.

You're for pulling out before ejaculation

You're for conception being prevented due to choice but not for conception being ended due to choice.

There is very little difference. Very little.

Both prevent the birth of a human yet one the Catholic church supports. The other it does not.

"2. Life begins at conception. That's the (very clear) line in the sand.

I know this is hard to believe for some, but it's perfectly possible to abstain from sex...even if you're married (cue jokes about wife making you sleep on the couch.)"

So you're in agreement with what I said!

Some forms of preventing birth are acceptable to you.

And somehow, your personal thoughts on this subject makes you more humane, more moral when basically your line in the sand is semantics between two words.

Prevented vs Ended

Both stops life.

If life is so precious and so special. Why the hell are you abstaining? How horrible of you to stop life like that!

You could have been creating the next genius. The next Einstein. The world will never know what you've done.

Timber, I hear the, "personal responsibility" excuse all the time when confronting pro-"lifers" with the fact they would be on the hook for raising these unloved kids. Personal responsibility sounds good but you can't legislate it and it means NOTHING in terms of the reality we would face if abortion were illegal.

So, where will the money and care come from?

And there you go.

You yourself think the parents who were forced to have children, will suddenly have the, "personal responsibility" to pay for them.

That's just not going to happen in the majority of cases.

Yes, there are plenty of people living and breathing every day who are a burden on society and cost taxpayers money. No, we don't kill them.

“Thou shalt not steal.”
“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife.”
“Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.”
“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods.”

Tell that to Bill Clinton. Actually nothing proven at all with Stormy. Trump is the most vetted President ever and NOT one Shred of evidence! NADA! ZILCH! But, Bill raped a young intern right in the oval office.

Nothing proven?

Are you crazy? is that your problem?

Why would you pay someone and have them sign an nda for an affair that didn't happen?

How does that make sense?

No Obama investigations.
No Obama Special Counsel investigations.
No Obama administration indictments.
Hillary Clinton Benghazi "Investigation"
4 years
0 indictments
0 convictions
Hillary Clinton Email "Investigation"
2 years
0 indictments
0 convictions
Trump-Russia Investigation
15 months
34 Indictments/Charges (Individuals) (and counting)
3 Indictments/Charges (Companies)
5 GUILTY pleas (and counting)
4 CONVICTIONS (and counting)
Indicted: Roger Stone
Indicted: Paul Manafort
Indicted: Rick Gates
Indicted: George Papadopoulos
Indicted: Michael Flynn
Indicted: Michael Cohen
Indicted: Richard Pinedo
Indicted: Alex van der Zwaan
Indicted: Konstantin Kilimnik
Indicted: 12 Russian GRU officers
Indicted: Yevgeny Prigozhin
Indicted: Mikhail Burchik
Indicted: Aleksandra Krylova
Indicted: Anna Bogacheva
Indicted: Sergey Polozov
Indicted: Maria Bovda
Indicted: Dzheykhun Aslanov
Indicted: Vadim Podkopaev
Indicted: Irina Kaverzina
Indicted: Gleb Vasilchenko
Indicted: Internet Research Agency
Indicted: Concord Management
Guilty Plea: Michael Flynn
Guilty Plea: Michael Cohen
Guilty Plea: George Papadopolous
Guilty Plea: Richard Pinedo
Guilty Plea: Alex van der Zwaan
Guilty Plea: Rick Gates
Over 191 Criminal Charges (and counting):
Conspiracy against the USA (2 counts)
Conspiracy to launder money (2 counts)
Bank fraud (8 counts)
Bank fraud conspiracy (10 counts)
Subscribing to false tax returns (10 counts)

Brilliant rundown and comparison here. And we're not even close to done yet with the Trump stuff. I'mma have to steal this.

How f**king stupid are you? Earth is flat too huh?

https://time.com/5556331/mueller-investigation-indictments-guilty-pleas/

Do you dispute any of it?

What's wrong with the context?
You still haven't explained it.
Looks pretty factual to me.

Would you like to add some alternative facts?
I'll add f**k here, so you can scold me on my cursing.

No Obama investigations.
No Obama Special Counsel investigations.
No Obama administration indictments.
Hillary Clinton Benghazi "Investigation"
4 years
0 indictments
0 convictions
Hillary Clinton Email "Investigation"
2 years
0 indictments
0 convictions
Trump-Russia Investigation
15 months
34 Indictments/Charges (Individuals) (and counting)
3 Indictments/Charges (Companies)
5 GUILTY pleas (and counting)
4 CONVICTIONS (and counting)
Indicted: Roger Stone
Indicted: Paul Manafort
Indicted: Rick Gates
Indicted: George Papadopoulos
Indicted: Michael Flynn
Indicted: Michael Cohen
Indicted: Richard Pinedo
Indicted: Alex van der Zwaan
Indicted: Konstantin Kilimnik
Indicted: 12 Russian GRU officers
Indicted: Yevgeny Prigozhin
Indicted: Mikhail Burchik
Indicted: Aleksandra Krylova
Indicted: Anna Bogacheva
Indicted: Sergey Polozov
Indicted: Maria Bovda
Indicted: Dzheykhun Aslanov
Indicted: Vadim Podkopaev
Indicted: Irina Kaverzina
Indicted: Gleb Vasilchenko
Indicted: Internet Research Agency
Indicted: Concord Management
Guilty Plea: Michael Flynn
Guilty Plea: Michael Cohen
Guilty Plea: George Papadopolous
Guilty Plea: Richard Pinedo
Guilty Plea: Alex van der Zwaan
Guilty Plea: Rick Gates
Over 191 Criminal Charges (and counting):
Conspiracy against the USA (2 counts)
Conspiracy to launder money (2 counts)
Bank fraud (8 counts)
Bank fraud conspiracy (10 counts)
Subscribing to false tax returns (10 counts)

Factual information like gravity = 9.8m per sec/sec, doesn't need context. It's just fact.

Yeah well, we already know the context. For some it’s been found in court!

So you're saying, there can be very good reasons why all these people would lie, cheat, steal and break laws deemed serious enough that some have gone to jail and paid fines for?

None of your examples went to jail. They are considered American hero's.

You think those on my list are American hero's?

Dimby is not saying anything unless it can be copypasted.

Golly Dimbwit, that deflection was so amazingly you.
SPatpoine shut your fat trap just like I did time and time again,,,

That's it, Dimbwit, that's just the way to settle that quandry I told you about last night. Granted a weeeee bit tooooo late and now you're overdosing on it which serves wonderfully well to highlight the fakery, but hey, that's a "D" for effort for you (or whatever they use in Canada).

Hey Dimbz, what Timber1972 from elsewhere are you referring to as not you?
What makes you think of the "thousands of Timber1972" you say are on the web, that THAT one is the one we know as you?

Gaagh, Timby got me on the we that is the we that saw the screenshots that we saw about its home in Northern Alberta that is not from where we are but it is, oui oui.

Bill did NOT rape an inturn in the oval office you f**kin idiot.

Bill raped Monica. She was a subordinate. A subordinate is in not in position to decline sexual advances by the President. Bill is a rapist. He raped before he was president, he raped while President, you are the f**kin' idiot. Someone should sew your mouth shut. But, such a brave dude here on imgflip. You are probably a rapist yourself since you defend one. Moron!

You can't go around making up definitions willy nilly like timber. She did not claim rape, her own words she was in love, he was not charged with rape, there was no rape.

There's some pretty f**ked up idiots on here, making shit up as they go. Critical thinking and logic are not their friends.

Not making anything up. It is common that a subordinate is deemed as helpless as a child and unable to consent. It is the same as if a prison guard has sex with an inmate or a teacher has sex with a pupil. Bill Clinton raped Monica. He used his authority over her to manipulate her and have his way right in the oval office. He is a disgusting piece of trash like anyone who would defend him and his actions. Of course Monica said what she had to say to stay alive. She was vulnerable as a child. Young, naïve. Bill is a Predator!

Adults are raped every day! that was a stupid comment. She was a VERY Young college girl. https://statelaws.findlaw.com/dc-law/district-of-columbia-rape-and-sexual-assault-laws.html
Second degree Sexual Abuse/Rape
"Where the person knows or has reason to know that the other person is incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct, incapable of declining participation in that sexual act, or incapable of communicating unwillingness to engage in that sexual act."

The President knew full well that he had authority of the very young Monica Lewinsky who was just a college girl who was his subordinate prey. Bill was known for this
pursuing young, vulnerable victims. She certainly was powerless over such a high authoritarian figure as the President of the United States! He used his position way over her
to seduce, control and rape her. Your president was a rapist! And, he only got away with it because of his power. Prison guards, Professors, Doctors, Psyhciatrists, Therapists
Foster parents, Bosses all over the country get charged and do time or have their careers destroyed all the time for same thing or even less.

Stop defending your rapist president. An adult can be vulnerable to an authoritarian figure. So, you think it is perfectly ok for a prison guard to have sex with an inmate? You think it is perfectly fine for a professor to have sex with a student who is relying on him for a good grade? You think it is perfectly fine for a President to have sex with a young college intern who is trying to jump start her career with this wonderful opportunity to work in the White House and you don't think that his status could sway her into having sex with him? How could she say no and hope to keep her intern position? Who are you fooling, Octavia? Yourself? Bill took advantage sexually of a vulnerable subordinate right in the Oval office, cheated on his wife, and lied about it. And, here you are defending him. He's a rapists!

Holy f**k, you're definately are making shit up again. Way out to lunch there buddy. Who hurt you?

You like rapist Bill, don't you? Sorry hurt your itty bitty libby feelings

You havn't hurt my feelings, you give yourself too much credit. Facts aren't your thing are they?

You gotta be acting retarded on purpose. Do you think rape is about pregnancy or sex?

It is not my logic, it is the law, human law. And, to even compare the two scenarios is beyond ridiculous. But, you have always been over the top.

No, he did not, you stupid little twit.

Bill Clinton never was hailed as a hero by Christians... nor did he rape anyone... but your fake jesus did you f**king idiot and she was just 13 too

Thou shalt not kill!

If the trump cultists were really Christian, they would say things like this real Christian

https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/december-web-only/trump-should-be-removed-from-office.html

Does your god kill babies? My God doesn't kill babies. You are getting weird. Way out there!

O daughter of Babylon, doomed to be destroyed, blessed shall he be who repays you with what you have done to us! 9 Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones and dashes them against the rock! (Psalms 137:8–9 ESV)

Samuel 15:3: "This is what the Lord Almighty says ... 'Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.' "

btw, Zygotes are not babies... even the bible says there is no soul until first breath.... like Octavia said, maybe you should actually try reading the bible if you are going to comment on it.

The Bible is referring to Adam taking his first breathe. It does not say that all humans come to life in this manner, no more than it says that all women come from a rib of the man as Eve came to be. Jesus was deemed LORD during first trimester. That made him a valuable human being before he took his first breathe. There are many references in the Bible that attaches high value to the pre-born. The Bible says we should not take the life of an innocent human being without proper justification. This command rules out abortion at any stage of development since abortion takes the life of an innocent human being without proper justification. And, without any biblical stance, it is unnatural and inhumane to kill ones own offspring. Soon, abortion will be looked back on as a barbaric practice committed by ignorant, selfish, naïve man-not-so-kind.