Sorry, the title got cut off...

It's "Reproductive Rights or Hey, I know, let's kill some blacks, downs syndrome babies and girls!"

The War Against Girls
<sarcasm>Women's Rights! YEAH! A woman's right to choose to kill her daughter, because she would rather have a son. That's real progressive and forward thinking. </sarcasm> 50% of black babies in the USA are aborted every year. 90% of Downs Syndrome babies are aborted every year. And I thought Eugenics died out with the Nazis.

Would be interesting what the quite is outside the US. Here in Austria you are quite well supported if your child is handicapped. But still i think many people would rather abort it if they know. I am working as a medical doctor... so my opinion is pro life, but still i can´t take someone´s right to abort. But i am working as a psychiatrist and there are enough people who come to me and have a trauma cause of the abortion... (too young, were under pressure from parents... and so on).
I don´t want to judge either. That´s not my right i think. I don´t know what i would do. These days are hard times. If you are not Mr. and Mrs. perfect and you are able to work for at least till you are 70, the best thing is, that you shouldn´t exist. At least that´s the feeling you get from our politics... (not only Austria... in many states).

haha...

The Third Reich was merely the early testing grounds for the eugenics movement.

Groups like the Pioneer Fund are still in existence and they continue the legacy of the progressive eugenics movement.

Scientists are furiously working to find genetic markers for Autism and Homosexuality. Why is that? I'll guarantee once they do, it will become SOP for every expecting mother to get their unborn baby (or lump of tissue as some prefer) tested for Homosexuality and Autism, just as they now test for Downs Syndrome.

I wonder what will happen to the homosexual population if/when they find the "gay gene"? My guess is that many of them will make a sudden 180% in their position on "Reproductive Rights".

I always hear how there are so many children needing homes,,,and I wonder what is true and what isnt

I cant find data (Which seems as if it would be easily collectible) on the NUMBER of children up for adoption vs the number of adults SEEKING to adopt

my gut says the latter number is much higher than the former, and the hold up is the red tape and the requirements(some justifiable and some not, in my opinion)

People adopt from foreign countries, because it's easier and cheaper.

EDIT: The real fix for this is people need to start taking some damn responsibility for their family and their kids.

thats true as well

but sex is so 'necessary' in our adult relationships and its sometimes as difficult for some to do the 'responsible' thing which may sacrifice their physical pleasure,, as it is difficult for an obese person to be more responsible in their food choices if it affects their physical pleasure

our flesh is pleasure driven, and our culture is convincing us to idolize and seek the flesh,,,


hey, could I call that 'indoctrination' ? we are being indoctrinated into a belief that sex is necessary, mandatory, avoidance of sex is ridiculous and pointless, and whatever feels good,, do it without having anyone have any opinion about it,,,

Are abortions still being federally funded?

Sex is an animal instinct.
Position preference is a human trait.
If I prefer doggie style, does that make me an animal?

why yes, yes they are federally funded

(not in all cases, of course)


and it makes you animal LIKE, but you were still born human,,,

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/trends.htm Link for children, in the US, needing adoption, as of the 2009 date.

According to those needing to be adopted 115,000, but in foster 424,000.



Federal funds are only sometimes used. The Hyde Amendment saw to that. State funds, however, are another story.

State Funding for Abortion under Medicaid


Funding under Hyde Amendment Only: Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wyoming.

Hyde Amendment and Additional Health Circumstances: Indiana (physical health), Iowa (fetal abnormality), Mississippi (fetal abnormality), Utah (physical health and fetal abnormality), Virginia (fetal abnormality), and Wisconsin (physical health).

All or Most Health Circumstances: Alaska, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia.

Noncompliant with the Hyde Amendment: South Dakota (life endangerment only).

I know more men who want boy children then women. We may gripe about China and their aborting of girl children to have their ever important boys, but I have no doubts we'd see that here in ending pregnancies because of being female.

But yes, I have no problem with a woman making a decision one what she wants. I know I would terminate a pregnancy when there was a problem like Down's or other major genetic factors.

We do a better job breeding our animals, then we do with animals. And we have no problem killing off animals that aren't functional or useful.

I think mostly in those situations, animals are seen as a product for profit. When it costs more to keep them than they bring in, they become disposable.

Thank goodness most dont see human children that way, I hope.

Males are more important, bring in the funds and take care of their parents, generally speaking. Females stay home, keep house, and their father usually had to pay a dowry to the guy and his family who took her.

As the article said: "1980s it was known as the "sex test" in India and other places where parents put a premium on sons. When amnio was replaced by the cheaper and less invasive ultrasound, it meant that most couples who wanted a baby boy could know ahead of time if they were going to have one and, if they were not, do something about it. "Better 500 rupees now than 5,000 later," reads one ad put out by an Indian clinic, a reference to the price of a sex test versus the cost of a dowry."

Looks like a profitable and financial issue to me!

in some cultures Im sure, but Im still not believing most do

You have official horrified me.

My dad treated a lot of women when he was an intern who had come to him completely messed up from back-alley abortions. It broke his heart. Although he was fiscally Conservative, he could never vote pro-life.

Fetuses are not human beings. I don't feel much for an unborn creature that is not even as capable of being aware of its own existence as a new-born hamster.

Interesting, so you believe that a fetus isn't a human being?

I just looked at the dictionary definition of Human Being: "any living or extinct member of the family Hominidae characterized by superior intelligence, articulate "

So a dead body is a human being, but an unborn baby isn't? I don't think so.

I think what you mean is that a fetus isn't a person. That's very interesting. Slave owners used to say the same thing about blacks. Hitler said the same thing about Jews. It's an argument to excuse the inexcusable.

how many other laws might he not support if the breaker was people being physically harmed by choosing to BREAK the law,,,?


I feel for women who suffer from any medical malpractice or who do any type of harm to their own bodies for whatever reason,,but I still dont think that life inside them is theirs to be God over and decide life and death from