On Monday 1/2/17 - 3:56:15 PM Abzurd wrote: if it was about saving babies, they would do something for them after they are born.
Oddly, everyone I know that is involved in *any* pro-life demonstrations or movements spends some of their time, if not not significantly more time than protesting abortion, volunteering for and financially supporting groups that provided all those things George just said they are against: neonatal care, day care, head start, or directly helping mothers with unplanned newborns (buying baby needs, food, etc.).
And every Crisis Pregnancy Center that I know of, including the one I supported for years, devotes as much or more resources to helping women who have had unplanned babies as it does to counseling and treating women who are pregnant.
People who make the above insane claims are being willfully ignorant. Take a 2 minute internet search.
On Monday 1/2/17 - 10:17:43 PM CowDung wrote: Thanks- - I've heard the statement many times, and never understood what parts of the Conservative platform it was referring to.
On Tuesday 1/3/17 - 10:41:25 PM Raisinman wrote: Clearly, it's referring to the part about reducing welfare benefits, particularly for families and single parents with children.
...but a reduction of welfare benefits isn't what conservatives are really seeking. The goal is to reform a system that tends to make welfare a lifestyle rather than a safety net. The thinking is that those families will benefit more from having work and being self supporting rather than trapped collecting welfare checks forever.
On Wednesday 1/4/17 - 7:29:26 AM dacash wrote: Oddly, everyone I know that is involved in *any* pro-life demonstrations or movements spends some of their time, if not not significantly more time than protesting abortion, volunteering for and financially supporting groups that provided all those things George just said they are against: neonatal care, day care, head start, or directly helping mothers with unplanned newborns (buying baby needs, food, etc.).
Of the pro-life people I know, none of them are devoted to any other causes, with the exception of opposing the death penalty. Certainly none are involved in any of the areas you listed and some even actively oppose family planning (birth control).
I do agree with Ghoul that most pro-life supporters mean well. But my anecdotal experiences differ from yours.
Maybe you need to upgrade your crowd, Spoonerism. When you say devoted - are they giving money? Or is it that when they participate in conversations pro-life how they come out, or do they actually go protest and carry signs?
I'm really curious, because most of the folks I know that are prolife with any degree of seriousness are from church.
To be fair, I'm limiting this only to people I know well enough to speak to their charitable givings in both time/money. Which isn't a lot of people. And they are known from former church connections. They go and protest at both anti-abortion and anti-death penalty rallies. But in conversations, they are not supportive of services for young, unwed mothers, citing that such services encourage young people to engage in sexual activity. And they're vehemently opposed to birth control from a religious standpoint.
Again, this isn't to say that all pro-lifers are like this. But just that your experiences are not universal.
Wow. The only 2 couples I know that are anti-birth control for religious reasons. One set are co-workers here at the orphanage and raise children of unwed mothers (that's where most orphans in this country come from). In the other, the woman regularly volunteers at a crisis pregnancy center and her job there is working with unwed mothers and helping provide for their needs.
I realize my experiences are not universal. In every movement of any size there are going to be whacky fringe elements. And that's where I'd place the people you know. If they spouted those ideas in any church I've ever been to, they'd be shut down pretty fast by the leadership. Their stance is as about as contrary to biblical principle as I can come up with. They are punishing children for their parent's sin (and not even thinking that the parent might need forgiveness).
We tossed a pastor from a church once over view very similar to that (he wouldn't dedicate a child because the mother - an openly repentant daughter of one of the church members - wasn't married). You can disagree with me over my ideas that sex outside of marriage is a sin. But the same book that calls it a sin, says that we are called to forgive one another - no excuses.
Sorry for going on about it. It just really irritates me when I hear about stuff like that being done in the name of Christianity.
On Wednesday 1/4/17 - 6:01:33 PM _Ghoul_ wrote: But if you can't quote a celebrity on it, is it really true? I think many, if not a majority, of pro-life individuals actually mean well.
and they do, they're not bad people at all. it's when people get militant about it is where i draw the line. like those guys killing abortion doctors and people blocking the entrances of abortion clinics. it's not like abortion or birth control is some mandated thing that the government is pushing on people.
as much as i may disagree with pro-life people's opinions, i don't think that they're sincerely aiming to actively punish women; i think it is just people with a different point of view about where human life begins having strong opinions about that. sure some of them can be psychopathic assholes but i don't think it necessarily stems from misogyny
there's a lot of disagreement on where life begins, at least from my experience from talking with pro-life people. some say it's when the sperm meets the egg, others say when you can feel a fetus's heartbeat.