AggiePops said:

---

Quote:

---

What happens a lot of times is that because the government is there to foot the bill, women that know who the father is will claim they do not. In many cases, the woman is living with the father but remain unmarried in order to get the government benefits.

It's a problem with most government cradle-to-grave welfare socialism; rife with abuse and fraud.

---

Welfare of any sort is great in theory to help those truly in need but as you say, taken advantage of far too often because there's a lot of less than honest people who want the easy way out. Any woman who wants to make a claim would need to show true need, not just ask for help. Any girl/woman who doesn't absolutely know who the father is or when she knows but the guy denies it should have a paternity test done to cut down on sperm donors skipping out on responsibilities. Plus many guys likely wouldn't even know. Face it, piling up random hookups is almost like a game for some guys. There are no perfect solutions but that doesn't mean you don't even try.

We were all young once and many on here still are. Hormones (not to mention, alcohol) can make for bad decisions plus there's also just plain bad luck. Dreams and goals shouldn't have to be abandoned because the revolver chamber that comes up happens to be the one with the live round. If you're going to force a girl/woman to be a broodmare and spend the best part of a year carrying and giving birth to a baby she isn't equipped to best take care of that baby's health and development while pregnant or raise and nurture following birth and doesn't have family to help, then society needs to step up. With consequences for cheaters.

---

I think what you meant to say was that the couple who elected to engage in coitus shouldn't have to be responsible for their choices. That whole "hopes and dreams" and "force to be a broodmare" garbage is leftist pablum. Nobody forced anybody to do anything. They chose to do something with a known possible outcome. Now they want "society" to cover their responsibilities.

There are a lot of things that can happen before a woman is "forced to be a broodmare". Use protection, take morning after pill. Have 1st trimester abortion, provide child for adoption to a family that wants and can care for the child.

If the woman elects to have and keep the child of an unwanted pregnancy, shouldn't they be able to care for it? If they can't, choose a different option.

tysker said:

---

Houstonag said:

---

Thou shall not kill. Remember. Abortion past 4 weeks makes no sense. This idea of 15 weeks is murder. Can one imagine a spike being rammed through a child's head as it takes its first breath?

---

I dont think anyone here is suggesting to ram a spike into the head of a newborn

---

If the baby's head hasn't actually exited the birth canal, yes they sure are. Some even as long as the baby's toes haven't been removed from the birth canal, and some even after that, but the left absolutely is advocating for late-term and up-to-birth abortions, even at the national leadership level.

AggiePops said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

AggiePops said:
If you're going to force a girl/woman to be a broodmare and spend the best part of a year carrying and giving birth to a baby...

---

Who is forcing these dumbasses to get pregnant? It's really, REALLY easy to prevent .

---

Sounds like you're putting it all on the female. That's a pretty dumbass thing to do. You want to hook up? Hey, go for it, it can be a great experience, especially with gals for who it's not their first rodeo. But take some responsibility yourself. Carry and use condoms, and at the very least ask her (before, of course) if she's on the pill or some other form of birth control. And if she isn't, use a condom - or keep it in your pants. It's easy to do it and probably prevent pregnancy, but not doing it is the only sure way. Not doing it is no fun, so be responsible.

---

Please quote where I limited the dumbassery to just the female. It takes two to get pregnant. It's easy to avoid.

tysker said:

---

Houstonag said:

---

Thou shall not kill. Remember. Abortion past 4 weeks makes no sense. This idea of 15 weeks is murder. Can one imagine a spike being rammed through a child's head as it takes its first breath?

---

I dont think anyone here is suggesting to ram a spike into the head of a newborn

---

no. not a spike exactly. Let's just crush millions of babies' skulls with forceps as we kill them and extract them. Gotta be specific with the baby murderers or they'll get you on a trivial technicality.

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

tysker said:

---

Houstonag said:

---

Thou shall not kill. Remember. Abortion past 4 weeks makes no sense. This idea of 15 weeks is murder. Can one imagine a spike being rammed through a child's head as it takes its first breath?

---

I dont think anyone here is suggesting to ram a spike into the head of a newborn

---

If the baby's head hasn't actually exited the birth canal, yes they sure are. Some even as long as the baby's toes haven't been removed from the birth canal, and some even after that, but the left absolutely is advocating for late-term and up-to-birth abortions, even at the national leadership level.

---

I dont see anyone here advocating for 'late-term and up-to-birth abortions." That is an minority position even at the national level

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-americans-stand-on-abortion-in-5-charts/

Quote:

---

One of the most significant ways in which support for abortion varies depends on when in the pregnancy the abortion is performed. Polls have found that a large majority of Americans support abortion in the first trimester, but that support tends to drop in the second trimester.

---

Even if you believe that there is large percentage of people that think late-term and up-to-birth abortions should be legal, polling suggests it is about the same percentage of Americans that think abortion should be outlawed completely:https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/13/politics/abortion-right-polling-roe-v-wade/index.html

Quote:

---

When asked whether they want abortion to be always legal, mostly legal, mostly illegal or always illegal, a split public emerges. An AP-NORC poll from last year that 23% thought abortion should always be legal, 33% said it should mostly be legal, 30% said mostly illegal and 13% believed it should always be illegal. (The results line up with the long-term average percentages on this question.)

---

Both extremes are minority views and probably should be acknowledged but dismissed as not politically feasible.

tysker said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

tysker said:

---

Houstonag said:

---

Thou shall not kill. Remember. Abortion past 4 weeks makes no sense. This idea of 15 weeks is murder. Can one imagine a spike being rammed through a child's head as it takes its first breath?

---

I dont think anyone here is suggesting to ram a spike into the head of a newborn

---

If the baby's head hasn't actually exited the birth canal, yes they sure are. Some even as long as the baby's toes haven't been removed from the birth canal, and some even after that, but the left absolutely is advocating for late-term and up-to-birth abortions, even at the national leadership level.

---

I dont see anyone here advocating for 'late-term and up-to-birth abortions." That is an minority position even at the national level

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-americans-stand-on-abortion-in-5-charts/

Quote:

---

One of the most significant ways in which support for abortion varies depends on when in the pregnancy the abortion is performed. Polls have found that a large majority of Americans support abortion in the first trimester, but that support tends to drop in the second trimester.

---

Even if you believe that there is large percentage of people that think late-term and up-to-birth abortions should be legal, polling suggests it is about the same percentage of Americans that think abortion should be outlawed completely:https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/13/politics/abortion-right-polling-roe-v-wade/index.html

Quote:

---

When asked whether they want abortion to be always legal, mostly legal, mostly illegal or always illegal, a split public emerges. An AP-NORC poll from last year that 23% thought abortion should always be legal, 33% said it should mostly be legal, 30% said mostly illegal and 13% believed it should always be illegal. (The results line up with the long-term average percentages on this question.)

---

Both extremes are minority views and probably should be acknowledged but dismissed as not politically feasible.

---

I didn't say Americans supported it, I said Dem leadership supports it.

Look not further than the yea votes on the attempt to codify Roe plus every other far-left abortion pipe dream, which included late-term abortion and federal funding. Lots of lots of federal level Dems voted yea, including all the leadership positions.

Quote:

---

I didn't say Americans supported it, I said Dem leadership supports it.

---

Who exactly? And who gives a **** when its not politically viable? If they want to go that extreme, let them fail, because most Americans wont accept it.

tysker said:

---

Quote:

---

I didn't say Americans supported it, I said Dem leadership supports it.

---

Who exactly? And who gives a **** when its not politically viable? If they want to go that extreme, let them fail, because most Americans wont accept it.

---

Well, let's say you're Malibu. You vote Democrat, but you see that the party supports a barbaric practice like late-term abortion and decide you can't support them, even though you support taxing the rich and welfare for the poor.

That's why it matters what they support.

Quote:

---

because most Americans wont accept it.

---

In recent times, has this ever dissuaded Democrats from pushing through their often awful legislation?

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

Quote:

---

because most Americans wont accept it.

---

In recent times, has this ever dissuaded Democrats from pushing through their often awful legislation?

---

Which is why allowing the citizens to decide via voting matters.
Republicans are just as likely to push through awful legislation.

tysker said:

---

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

Quote:

---

because most Americans wont accept it.

---

In recent times, has this ever dissuaded Democrats from pushing through their often awful legislation?

---

Which is why allowing the citizens to decide via voting matters.
Republicans are just as likely to push through awful legislation.

---

Defending innocent unborn babies is awful legislation?
Just be exceedingly happy your own mother decided to protect you!

Awful legislation might be a total ban. This kind of population is not going to go for that either. That's unreasonable in just a reality context, the American nation does not have some extra special burden to solve a problem none of the empires to date have. We haven't quite reached the scientific point where could simply never have unforeseen cases of pregnancy.

This is even more so if you maintain and continue to promote a public sector that allows a titillation industry to constantly sexualize the atmosphere from grade school to grave.

This by way of saying some ultra draconian call and expectation for abstinence is only possibly going to work in a public sector free of excess dwelling on it.

Funny how even conservative Kansas voters believe in bodily autonomy and reproductive health for women, even if an out of touch coterie of unhinged, elderly theocrat state legislators do not. A cabal that has no idea what's coming.

FlyRod said:

---

bodily autonomy and reproductive health

---

this became synonymous for crushing the skull, stopping the heartbeat, extracting it, and either throwing the body away or donating it for research in just a few decades

The other part that people are not talking about is that a lot women are victims of sexual violence which goes unreported for variety of reasons. You can probably poll your our family members and find out this is case unfortunately. A lot of times it is really hard for victims to pursue legal action against their abusers.

I and many more people feel that the government sticking their nose in and trying to make heads or tails in these instances is overreaching.

GMaster0 said:

---

The other part that people are not talking about is that a lot women are victims of sexual violence which goes unreported for variety of reasons. You can probably poll your our family members and find out this is case unfortunately. A lot of times it is really hard for victims to pursue legal action against their abusers.

I and many more people feel that the government sticking their nose in and trying to make heads or tails in these instances is overreaching.

---

If government shouldn't protect the most innocent and vulnerable among us, why should it protect you?

FlyRod said:

---

Funny how even conservative Kansas voters believe in bodily autonomy and reproductive health for women, even if an out of touch coterie of unhinged, elderly theocrat state legislators do not. A cabal that has no idea what's coming.

---

Just F'in stop it already.

Abortion is not reproductive health. It's actually the exact opposite. Abortions can cause irreparable damage to a woman's reproductive system and has been shown in some studies to increase chances for developing breast cancer (in addition to that little inconvenient fact that it's literally killing another human being).

Calling abortion reproductive health is about the most dishonest thing of all of the many dishonest things that abortion rights proponents say.