| Political Talk |
| Return to Board • Menu • Bottom | Page 1 of 2  |
| Message |
| Pro life conservatives - would you accept this deal (hypothetical) Posted by Powerman Roe V Wade is overturned and whatever other steps necessary to make it illegal also happen.  on 2/5 at 8:32 pmA couple of catches though: 1. Gay marriage is now legal on a national level and they can adopt these would be aborted babies 2. The public will be asked to pay for the medical bills during pregnancy for all of these pregnant women that are going to give the babies up (if they decide to keep the baby later, they pay) As a result of this additional government expenditure, religious institutions lose their tax exempt status to generate revenue to cover the medical costs. Would you take that deal? Reply • Back to Top |
| why is it the libs always want the public to pay for someone else's behavior? Reply • Back to Top |
quote:  I would have a reply....but, you made a provision that eliminates me!!!  Reply • Back to Top |
quote: This is a hypothetical dude. Calm the frick down Reply • Back to Top |
| Well im pro gay marriage and we already pay for them anyway... So my answer would be yes Reply • Back to Top |
| I am conservative, do not support having abortions, but believe in it. It is great population control. Just wish the man had some say in deciding to have it or not. Reply • Back to Top |
quote:  quote: I really have no idea what your stance is  You don't support abortion but you think it's awesome? Reply • Back to Top |
quote:How Malthusian of you. Reply • Back to Top |
| Sure, I'd take it. Will the tax revenue from churches only go to those specific medical bills? Reply • Back to Top |
quote: No That's just the justification They'll squander it like everything else Reply • Back to Top |
quote: Well in this case it's because conservatives would be eliminating a possible behavior. Reply • Back to Top |
I'm all for life so I would have no problem with any of that if we remove this part quote: Screw the public paying for others mistakes. There must be consequences for ones actions. I'd trade abortion for gay rights in a minute. My stance is the rights of the people (gay rights, legalization of weed, pro gun) but those rights stop where another person's begin meaning that fetus has a right to live. I believe a person should be able to choose his/her path of life and the only regulation is the safety of others. I'm all for small government, fiscal conservativeness, minimal entitlement programs and lots of freedom for the people to enjoy their lives safely as they choose without discrimination. Reply • Back to Top |
quote: But it's a hypothetical. You don't get to choose. It's take it or leave it. Reply • Back to Top |
Posted by baybeefeetz on 2/5 at 9:52 pm to Powerman Reply • Back to Top |
quote: So, if I choose to not to kill my neighbors, will the government pay for me to build a soundproof fence so I don't have to listen to them? Reply • Back to Top |
| I would take that deal. 1. I have no problem with gays getting married or adopting 2. This is the tougher of the two stipulations, but still worth accepting. But why wouldn't the gay adopters pay for the pregnancy? Reply • Back to Top |
quote: To take that deal you'd need an IQ under 4. Mine's higher than that, so no. Here's a radical thought for you, pay for your own choices, and don't whine that someone else should do it for you because you're either too lazy, too stupid, or both. Reply • Back to Top |
| Yeah I would take it. Reply • Back to Top |
quote: This is the only part I would not agree to. The power to tax is the power to control. I would be willing to pay more in taxes to save those lives, I just don't want the government to control religious institutions. Reply • Back to Top |
| Why does one bad law require an acceptance of more bad policy? Mom always told me, "2 wrongs don't make a right:" Reply • Back to Top • Refresh |
| Return to Board | ||
  Page 1 of 2  | ||
on 2/5 at 8:56 pm to 
on 2/5 at 9:41 pm to 
on 2/5 at 10:44 pm to 
on 2/6 at 6:11 am to 
on 2/6 at 8:20 am to