Blue is the issue. Vote them all out and send a message to the world.

When was that? Back when the dems were endorsing segregation?

My point exactly. No one in the repub party believes that.

So the image I posted was talking about the Republican stance on women's reproductive rights. You're claiming that the stance of "pro-life" is an obsolete stance, just as the democratic stance of the mid 20th century of segregation was outdated. You assert that no one in the republican party believes that women shouldn't have the right to choose. Yet, last night during McConnell's debate with McGrath, he stated he's pro-life. That stance literally means women should not have the right of choice. So, your assertion is untrue. It may be what you desire of your party, but that doesn't make it factual.

It isn’t even about the woman. It’s about the child. If the child was not a human being I would agree with you that the woman would have every right to kill it. I would agree with everything you’re saying if the unborn were not human.

So, let's talk critically about this.

What do you believe about abortion?

Should it be illegal at conception when it is a collection of cells? When does it become a human, for you? Is it at that point when it becomes illegal? Help me understand.

Ah yes, you’re throwing the ball straight back at me and asking my personal beliefs. I’ve seen it all before.

But whatever.

No matter what stage it’s in, it’s a human being. All living things are collections of cells. You’re a collection of cells, I’m a collection of cells. What’s the difference between you and a fetus? The amount of cells?

Okay, fair enough - it's a human being at conception.

Personally, I think that forcing a woman to carry a rape baby to term is monstrous.
I think that forcing a woman to give up her life for an unviable child is selfish.
I think that forcing the child to be born only to have it die within hours of its birth is cruel.
I think forcing the mother to carry a baby that will be stillborn to birth is mental abuse to the mother.

As far as rape cases go, and unplanned pregnancies, I'm glad we agree:

Women need easier access to birth control and contraceptives to reduce the risk of abortions. We should fund planned parenthood to make this happen as that is one of its primary functions.

I am glad we agree that abortion is a horrible thing and it shouldn't have to happen. I'm glad that we agree we both care for the well-being and health of the fetus.

It is regrettable that you don't care half as much for the mother that you do for the fetus.

That being said. The same party that wants to go pro-life also wants to end food stamps. The same program that foster children have who are rape babies in which the mother didn't believe in abortion either. But, let's take away the food from these children.

I digress. This is about women's reproductive health. What I am hearing from you, if the mother has a 99% chance of survival with abortion versus the mother and the fetus going through labor with a 5% chance of survival each, you would prefer the latter.

That's a real shame.

For some reason I do not have the option to reply to your reply so I will have to do it here. I would agree to fund Planned Parenthood if they did not also do abortions, but since they do I cannot support them.

As for what you have heard from some in the Republican party I don't think that should apply to all Republicans any more than the stupid stuff that some Democrats say should apply to all. I think it is necessary to have restrictions on who can and cannot enter this country. I don't believe that just because you were born into a violent country that you should be allowed to come to America. I don't believe that just because you are poor that you should come to America. There is a system and rule of law that you must follow. The same goes for the countries that these people are coming from.

As for clearing the air on welfare inconsistencies I found a great non-partisan website that lists the official republican view on welfare. https://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Republican_Party_Welfare_+_Poverty.htm
Please peruse that site and take a look at the common sense ideas that Republicans espouse about welfare. It is a great safety net, but it should not be a career or way of life.

Hey Liberty76,

On Welfare:

I read your post and your article in its entirety. It was difficult for me to move beyond the seemingly heavy integration of church and politics, but I ignored it (which shouldn't be done as our country was founded on the idea of the seperations of church and state.)

That being said, let me level with you.

I tend to be knee-jerk on this subject as I was born into poverty, abuse, neglect, and a large family. I have only ever known poverty. My parents have always worked. Yet, they still needed food stamps. My parents split, I was with my mom, she became disabled, she needed food stamps. She couldn't work. Every place she had used flourescent lights which triggered epilepsy. Being that she couldn't work, she received disability. It was never enough to support the both of us, or her partner. Her partner worked full time at minimum wage, it still wasn't enough.

I'm now an adult, also disabled for different reasons. I keep in close contact with my care team to make sure that I am working to get to a place where I work again. I actually hate not working, but what I hate more is what happens when I do work. I'm working to fix that. A reality that I have to face is that I never get better.

When I face this possibility. Panic starts. I potentially may become an unwilling "career welfare recipient." I don't want that. Yet, people who don't/refuse to understand would rather point and say "welfare king."

In my 33 years of life, I can't recall someone using welfare to cheat the system and not improve themselves. There was a time however, at the start of 2010s that people were on welfare for a while. We were in a recession, finding a job then was like finding the lottery for people on the lower end of the class spectrum. At that time, I chose to be a caregiver and wipe ass, get scars from patients digging their nails into me, or hitting me in the back of the head giving me a concussion, rather than be on welfare.

Having been on welfare, at least in my state, it is very difficult to cheat the system. Every six months you have to submit a shit load of information. I've heard the moniker of Welfare Queen. I've never witnessed one myself. But I can see how people might think that for people who have a hard time finding jobs for whatever reason. I will say that some people don't know how to spend their food stamps. That's simply because they don't know how to cook or budget their funds.

I have yet to see the welfare queen for myself.

As for immigration? If I were to put this in a parallel, if someone came to my house seeking shelter from violence (like an abused woman.) I wouldn't think twice about taking her in. I would let her stay only long enough until she could support herself and get her own place and support herself.

My view on immigration is the same. If someone is in fear for their life because of where they live, they should be able to seek asylum here. I believe the phrase that goes with Lady Liberty "Give me your tired, your weary, and your poor..."

I agree, simply being poor is not enough to come into this country. I know we have educational programs that foreigners can take to be able to get into this country on the merits of their academic success. If you want to pursue that and do so successfully, more power to them. I welcome anyone into this country who wants to make something of themselves.

In 2004, the Guttmacher Institute anonymously surveyed 1,209 post-abortive women from nine different abortion clinics across the country. Of the women surveyed, 957 provided a main reason for having an abortion. This table lists each reason and the percentage of respondents who chose it.

Percentage Reason
<0.5% Victim of rape
3% Fetal health problems
4% Physical health problems
4% Would interfere with education or career
7% Not mature enough to raise a child
8% Don't want to be a single mother
19% Done having children
23% Can't afford a baby
25% Not ready for a child
6% Other

7.5% of abortions are for health reasons, the rest are murder for convenience.

So we agree, we should continue to fund Planned Parenthood to make sure that everyone gets the contraceptives that they need so the likelihood of abortion happening illegally or not, does not occur?

Also, there is some philosophical debate on when a fetus is considered "alive." Some say when it has a heart, some say when it has developed a nervous system and can feel pain. On this, people will never agree. I don't think that a consensus will ever be reached in this country regarding that issue.

I struggle to find how your party can claim the moral highground that everyone is made the same way and everyone should have "basic human rights." When, those who try to seek asylum in this country (as I've heard from some of the Republican party) don't deserve rights. Once more, the Trump admin upped the cage ante by separating children from family.

Or, claiming to be on the moral highground of pro-life, yet wanting to cease programs like welfare (food, medical and finance stipends) - which covers adopted children. I -genuinely- want to understand and clear the air about these inconsistencies.

Women will not have a choice if we keep bringing the third world here. As for abortion I could really care less. Your party is the one that wants abortions because "my body my choice" but then says everyone must recieve every vaccine that comes along so look in the mirror.

Whole paragraph is incompetent, as is the poster. You don't actually have an argument just a pocket full of labels and a brain with nothing in it. Where did I say vaccines cause autism? Oh that's right I did not.

Women should not have the right to decision when it comes to murder...

... Sorry... I meant abortion.

it is not murder, some women just don't want to have constant pain over and over again and have to work to be able to get food for a child, it is not murder if the kid is not alive yet.

So, you insist, being in the position of a male, that a woman should sacrifice her life for the life of her child which has a lower chance at surviving the birth than the mother?

Pardon me, but I don't think the mother would be the murderer in this case.

Pretty sexist to assume I am a male because I don’t support abortion. I am a male, mind you, but there are several women who don’t support it.

I don’t know what you’re getting at with “sacrificing her life for the life of her child” just by letting it be born. The risk is there that you will die, but it’s incredibly low. If all you see in pregnancy is death, I do feel sorry for you.

It's not sexist. You should look up that word before haphazardly throwing it around. I saw that one coming a mile away. I gleaned it from how you wrote "Women should not have the right..." If you were a woman, you would have said "We should not have the right..." Unless you're extremely challenged on your identity?

Granted, the risk of the mother dying in child birth is getting lower over the years. That being said....

Women sometimes choose to have a late-term abortion because the pregnancy poses a threat to their health or there are fetal medical conditions. But some women also have late-term abortions simply because they were unable to access one earlier due to difficulty in getting a referral or insurance problems. Studies have found this is particularly true for poorer women.

So, I am glad we agree, we should fund Planned Parenthood to give them easier access to birth control and other such contraceptives so the statistic of them getting pregnant is lower than the statistic of women who die from pregnancy every year. (Which is 700 women per year.)

Pro-lifers support the right of choice for the baby.

Technically the baby doesn’t get the choice either way. We just support its life. That’s why we’re pro-life.