hokiewolf said:

---

Look at my post above. You're falling for the media narrative that this decision will be divisive . I just don't think reasonable people think that way

---

I agree. I'm not worried about reasonable people! You should look at a montage of media coverage yesterday. The vast majority are selling this as an all out assault on women.

caryking said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Look at my post above. You're falling for the media narrative that this decision will be divisive . I just don't think reasonable people think that way

---

I agree. I'm not worried about reasonable people! You should look at a montage of media coverage yesterday. The vast majority are selling this as an all out assault on women.

---

When in reality they should have been selling this as an all out assault on defenseless unborn children.

Lots of distractions now with the SCOTUS leak. 2000 Mules has sold out around the country for it's limited showings. The election fraud is being exposed. Also Pfizer released documents yesterday about the vaccine and I don't think it's very good. The media wants you distracted.

Packchem91 said:

---

cowboypack02 said:

---

Outside of the obvious issue here of a leak from the Supreme Court the largest issue here is that people are incapable of any critical thinking at all. In this case all the court decision does is remove the federal government from the equation and make abortion a state level issue, which it should of always been.

Folks are all stirred up but for the most part nothing is going to really change outside a few states in terms of getting an abortion if you want one. If your state doesn't offer the option for an abortion anymore then California will pay for you to fly out there and get one free of charge (Newsome talked about allocating money in the CA budget for this yesterday). Conversely you could always elect state representatives that will codify the right to an abortion in your state for you.

The other issue here is that politicians, and by extension the media push that its an all or nothing thing and that just isn't true. You'll still be able to get an abortion up to a certain point in your pregnancy if you choose, which is as it should be. You shouldn't be able to go an after-birth abortion (something that elected officials in CA, VA, and IL have all said that they support).

I think realistically if you asked people most would be ok with an abortion in the first trimester, less than half would be ok with an abortion in the second, and then almost no one except your extremists would support a third trimester (or after birth) abortion.

As far as all the fun political stuff for the purposes of this post I identify as a woman (even though i'm not a biologist), so my opinion matters on this subject.

---

So why is your name "cowboy"?

Seriously....your comment about politicians and media pushing the "all or nothing" angle is spot on. Clearly, its an emotional topic, so people will tend to believe you more as you appeal to emotion, regardless of fact.
Second, it creates a lot more consternation if you can make your followers believe something is 100% being taken away from them as opposed to "we're just going to move the decisioning to your state"

---

I identified as a man when I created my profile?

Seriously though...It was a nickname in high school and it has just followed me through out my life. 20 years after I graduated I still get "cowboy...is that you?"

caryking said:

---

I am Pro-Life! I think we should do everything possible to save a life. If a women is pregnant and the possibility of losing her life, from disease, then do everything you can to save the woman's life and the babies life. If we lose the baby, then that's extremely unfortunate; however, we tried!

That said, this media frenzy is purposeful; however, I'm not sure it's going to work out like the Dems (potentially) want. The people are not on their side with this! Most states have some level of abortion rights. Some have unfettered. Polling suggest an even split on abortion at all. It starts to really change once we get into second and third trimesters.

---

Recognizing that reduction in access to abortions will lead to more children being born that were not planned for / wanted, it will potentially lead to higher poverty rates, higher crime rates, more people depending on government support, etc. Would make more sense to have birth control / sex education materials available widely to help ensure that people aren't having children that weren't planned for / wanted.

Assume someone is without means and they live in a State that has banned abortion. They also don't have money to travel to a State that allows it. They also don't have money to take time off from work to travel. They don't get an abortion, have a baby, and now have even less means to support themselves and the baby.

statefan91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

I am Pro-Life! I think we should do everything possible to save a life. If a women is pregnant and the possibility of losing her life, from disease, then do everything you can to save the woman's life and the babies life. If we lose the baby, then that's extremely unfortunate; however, we tried!

That said, this media frenzy is purposeful; however, I'm not sure it's going to work out like the Dems (potentially) want. The people are not on their side with this! Most states have some level of abortion rights. Some have unfettered. Polling suggest an even split on abortion at all. It starts to really change once we get into second and third trimesters.

---

Recognizing that reduction in access to abortions will lead to more children being born that were not planned for / wanted, it will potentially lead to higher poverty rates, higher crime rates, more people depending on government support, etc. Would make more sense to have birth control / sex education materials available widely to help ensure that people aren't having children that weren't planned for / wanted.

Assume someone is without means and they live in a State that has banned abortion. They also don't have money to travel to a State that allows it. They also don't have money to take time off from work to travel. They don't get an abortion, have a baby, and now have even less means to support themselves and the baby.

---

I don't disagree with anything you're saying, and I know every circumstance is unique to the individual. But, when do we start putting the responsibility back on the individual for decisions they make? If you don't want a kid don't have sex or take proper precautions.

I'm getting tired of the government having to take care of somebody because they have 8 kids and don't have time for a job.

I mean it's sort of pick your poison, isn't it? State's will move to criminalize abortion if Roe v. Wade is overturned, many State AGs have already said as much. It is no secret this will lead to all the things mentioned.

Personal responsibility should be a huge part of it, and using the means that they have access to - contraceptives, sex education, abortion, are all part of personal responsibility as it is today. But we live in a society where personal choices will affect other's lives.

There are 500k+ children in foster care or waiting to be adopted in the US today. And this ruling would likely see an increase to those numbers.

statefan91 said:

---

There are 500k+ children in foster care or waiting to be adopted in the US today. And this ruling would likely see an increase to those numbers.

---

And that's so sad! I feel like we spend more time fixing the outcomes in this country, instead of focusing on the causes at the grassroots level.

I saw on the local news last night, that Utah has an automatic law if Roe vs Wade were overturned. Abortion would be only allowed in special cases. Incest, rape, and health of the mother. It said several states had a similar automatic law in this case.

Steve Videtich said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

I am Pro-Life! I think we should do everything possible to save a life. If a women is pregnant and the possibility of losing her life, from disease, then do everything you can to save the woman's life and the babies life. If we lose the baby, then that's extremely unfortunate; however, we tried!

That said, this media frenzy is purposeful; however, I'm not sure it's going to work out like the Dems (potentially) want. The people are not on their side with this! Most states have some level of abortion rights. Some have unfettered. Polling suggest an even split on abortion at all. It starts to really change once we get into second and third trimesters.

---

Recognizing that reduction in access to abortions will lead to more children being born that were not planned for / wanted, it will potentially lead to higher poverty rates, higher crime rates, more people depending on government support, etc. Would make more sense to have birth control / sex education materials available widely to help ensure that people aren't having children that weren't planned for / wanted.

Assume someone is without means and they live in a State that has banned abortion. They also don't have money to travel to a State that allows it. They also don't have money to take time off from work to travel. They don't get an abortion, have a baby, and now have even less means to support themselves and the baby.

---

I don't disagree with anything you're saying, and I know every circumstance is unique to the individual. But, when do we start putting the responsibility back on the individual for decisions they make? If you don't want a kid don't have sex or take proper precautions.

I'm getting tired of the government having to take care of somebody because they have 8 kids and don't have time for a job.

---

Plus the fact that no one can't afford to travel to another state for anything given all the freebies that are readily available right now. The entire argument is complete horse **** . The only way that you can't afford it is if you are actually trying to pull your own way. There is none of that anymore. Sorry.

Can't wait to hear the anecdotal explanation that is forthcoming.

TheStorm said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

I am Pro-Life! I think we should do everything possible to save a life. If a women is pregnant and the possibility of losing her life, from disease, then do everything you can to save the woman's life and the babies life. If we lose the baby, then that's extremely unfortunate; however, we tried!

That said, this media frenzy is purposeful; however, I'm not sure it's going to work out like the Dems (potentially) want. The people are not on their side with this! Most states have some level of abortion rights. Some have unfettered. Polling suggest an even split on abortion at all. It starts to really change once we get into second and third trimesters.

---

Recognizing that reduction in access to abortions will lead to more children being born that were not planned for / wanted, it will potentially lead to higher poverty rates, higher crime rates, more people depending on government support, etc. Would make more sense to have birth control / sex education materials available widely to help ensure that people aren't having children that weren't planned for / wanted.

Assume someone is without means and they live in a State that has banned abortion. They also don't have money to travel to a State that allows it. They also don't have money to take time off from work to travel. They don't get an abortion, have a baby, and now have even less means to support themselves and the baby.

---

I don't disagree with anything you're saying, and I know every circumstance is unique to the individual. But, when do we start putting the responsibility back on the individual for decisions they make? If you don't want a kid don't have sex or take proper precautions.

I'm getting tired of the government having to take care of somebody because they have 8 kids and don't have time for a job.

---

Plus the fact that no one can't afford to travel to another state for anything given all the freebies that are readily available right now. The entire argument is complete horse **** . The only way that you can't afford it is if you are actually trying to pull your own way. There is none of that anymore. Sorry.

Can't wait to hear the anecdotal explanation that is forthcoming.

---

In fairness, if you live in South Alabama, you may have to travel 4-5 states to find a state that would allow. There are people in poorer communities who don't have cars (or ability to leave jobs, etc) to do that.
I don't know how much of an issue is....but it is an issue.

And to the other 91's point....it will result in more orphans / fostered babies

Steve Videtich said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

There are 500k+ children in foster care or waiting to be adopted in the US today. And this ruling would likely see an increase to those numbers.

---

And that's so sad! I feel like we spend more time fixing the outcomes in this country, instead of focusing on the causes at the grassroots level.

I saw on the local news last night, that Utah has an automatic law if Roe vs Wade were overturned. Abortion would be only allowed in special cases. Incest, rape, and health of the mother. It said several states had a similar automatic law in this case.

---

Soooo, fix poverty? Ultimately for the foster care situation, that is the issue. There is the occasional team mom who puts child into process so can go to college, etc....but most of these are poor / ill-educated teens who have no prospects and/or are unfit to mother.

It's a tough tough scenario, no doubt. If we could fix the root causes....it would likely have affects much more widespread than abortions. But, fixing poverty is tough.

Steve Videtich said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

There are 500k+ children in foster care or waiting to be adopted in the US today. And this ruling would likely see an increase to those numbers.

---

And that's so sad! I feel like we spend more time fixing the outcomes in this country, instead of focusing on the causes at the grassroots level.

I saw on the local news last night, that Utah has an automatic law if Roe vs Wade were overturned. Abortion would be only allowed in special cases. Incest, rape, and health of the mother. It said several states had a similar automatic law in this case.

---

Agreed. Most Western nations have much better support systems in place for families / parents. I would assume that abortion rates may even be lower in countries that have better support systems because there is less despair at the prospect of bringing a child into the world without means.

So if we're not going to have those support systems in place, but then outlaw abortion as well, we are going to end up with a lot more unwanted children. For the amount of people that are pro-life in this country, it seems like they could easily adopt the children waiting for adoption and in the foster care program.

Libtards in LA riot to protest their right to murder unborn babies.

Cops can't make an arrest because they are attacked by a mob.

The Commie Lamestream media and DemonRats say this is another "peaceful" protest.

NOW: LAPD attempt to arrest pro-choice protesters but fail as they get mobbed by rioters. pic.twitter.com/XWn9xC23Hk

— Katie Daviscourt🇺🇸 (@KatieDaviscourt) May 4, 2022

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

There are 500k+ children in foster care or waiting to be adopted in the US today. And this ruling would likely see an increase to those numbers.

---

And that's so sad! I feel like we spend more time fixing the outcomes in this country, instead of focusing on the causes at the grassroots level.

I saw on the local news last night, that Utah has an automatic law if Roe vs Wade were overturned. Abortion would be only allowed in special cases. Incest, rape, and health of the mother. It said several states had a similar automatic law in this case.

---

Soooo, fix poverty? Ultimately for the foster care situation, that is the issue. There is the occasional team mom who puts child into process so can go to college, etc....but most of these are poor / ill-educated teens who have no prospects and/or are unfit to mother.

It's a tough tough scenario, no doubt. If we could fix the root causes....it would likely have affects much more widespread than abortions. But, fixing poverty is tough.

---

Are you saying we shouldn't fix poverty? Not trying to start anything, just not 100% sure what you're saying.

The last time I researched the abortion numbers, repeat customers were almost 50% of abortions. Perhaps folks will learn to be more responsible with their choices. Regardless, remember, abortion is a big business in this country. There will be plenty of responses from the abortionists to fill the gap.

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

There are 500k+ children in foster care or waiting to be adopted in the US today. And this ruling would likely see an increase to those numbers.

---

And that's so sad! I feel like we spend more time fixing the outcomes in this country, instead of focusing on the causes at the grassroots level.

I saw on the local news last night, that Utah has an automatic law if Roe vs Wade were overturned. Abortion would be only allowed in special cases. Incest, rape, and health of the mother. It said several states had a similar automatic law in this case.

---

Soooo, fix poverty? Ultimately for the foster care situation, that is the issue. There is the occasional team mom who puts child into process so can go to college, etc....but most of these are poor / ill-educated teens who have no prospects and/or are unfit to mother.

It's a tough tough scenario, no doubt. If we could fix the root causes....it would likely have affects much more widespread than abortions. But, fixing poverty is tough.

---

Are you saying we shouldn't fix poverty? Not trying to start anything, just not 100% sure what you're saying.

---

Not saying that at all --- you said we needed to fix the grassroots, not the outcomes. To me, the grassroots issue that most ultimately leads to this is poverty. Fix poverty, and the largest driver of the need for this goes away

And I'm not sure we're going to do that in this lifetime...

Now, while poverty may be the grassroots....the political issue here is not poverty-based. No one really cares about the impoverished. The political issue is "women's rights" and the incredibly loud voice those folks have.

statefan91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

I am Pro-Life! I think we should do everything possible to save a life. If a women is pregnant and the possibility of losing her life, from disease, then do everything you can to save the woman's life and the babies life. If we lose the baby, then that's extremely unfortunate; however, we tried!

That said, this media frenzy is purposeful; however, I'm not sure it's going to work out like the Dems (potentially) want. The people are not on their side with this! Most states have some level of abortion rights. Some have unfettered. Polling suggest an even split on abortion at all. It starts to really change once we get into second and third trimesters.

---

Recognizing that reduction in access to abortions will lead to more children being born that were not planned for / wanted, it will potentially lead to higher poverty rates, higher crime rates, more people depending on government support, etc. Would make more sense to have birth control / sex education materials available widely to help ensure that people aren't having children that weren't planned for / wanted.

Assume someone is without means and they live in a State that has banned abortion. They also don't have money to travel to a State that allows it. They also don't have money to take time off from work to travel. They don't get an abortion, have a baby, and now have even less means to support themselves and the baby.

---

That is 100% an emotional argument! The potential Supreme Court ruling is a constitutional ruling. If you care about that, then you would recognize what I'm saying. I suggest you go read the entire draft!

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

There are 500k+ children in foster care or waiting to be adopted in the US today. And this ruling would likely see an increase to those numbers.

---

And that's so sad! I feel like we spend more time fixing the outcomes in this country, instead of focusing on the causes at the grassroots level.

I saw on the local news last night, that Utah has an automatic law if Roe vs Wade were overturned. Abortion would be only allowed in special cases. Incest, rape, and health of the mother. It said several states had a similar automatic law in this case.

---

Soooo, fix poverty? Ultimately for the foster care situation, that is the issue. There is the occasional team mom who puts child into process so can go to college, etc....but most of these are poor / ill-educated teens who have no prospects and/or are unfit to mother.

It's a tough tough scenario, no doubt. If we could fix the root causes....it would likely have affects much more widespread than abortions. But, fixing poverty is tough.

---

Are you saying we shouldn't fix poverty? Not trying to start anything, just not 100% sure what you're saying.

---

The United States has 30T in debt trying to fix problems! We do not have anymore money. Hell, we had some saying we should spend 33B more in Ukraine!

WE CANT DO IT ALL!!!

caryking said:

---

That is 100% an emotional argument! The potential Supreme Court ruling is a constitutional ruling. If you care about that, then you would recognize what I'm saying. I suggest you go read the entire draft!

---

No it's not, it's simply recognizing the cause and effect of abortions being banned. Is there anything about the outcomes that you disagree with?

I personally think this ruling is the best thing that could happen to this country! This isnt about abortion; rather, this is about Federalism!

The constitution's only call out for issues like this is the 10th amendment!

Some of you folks need to more classes on on how our government should work. Some of you have been deceived by the 100 years of unconstitutional governance! We have a ruling that does it right. Again, this isn't about abortion, like some of you think!

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

There are 500k+ children in foster care or waiting to be adopted in the US today. And this ruling would likely see an increase to those numbers.

---

And that's so sad! I feel like we spend more time fixing the outcomes in this country, instead of focusing on the causes at the grassroots level.

I saw on the local news last night, that Utah has an automatic law if Roe vs Wade were overturned. Abortion would be only allowed in special cases. Incest, rape, and health of the mother. It said several states had a similar automatic law in this case.

---

Soooo, fix poverty? Ultimately for the foster care situation, that is the issue. There is the occasional team mom who puts child into process so can go to college, etc....but most of these are poor / ill-educated teens who have no prospects and/or are unfit to mother.

It's a tough tough scenario, no doubt. If we could fix the root causes....it would likely have affects much more widespread than abortions. But, fixing poverty is tough.

---

Are you saying we shouldn't fix poverty? Not trying to start anything, just not 100% sure what you're saying.

---

Not saying that at all --- you said we needed to fix the grassroots, not the outcomes. To me, the grassroots issue that most ultimately leads to this is poverty. Fix poverty, and the largest driver of the need for this goes away

And I'm not sure we're going to do that in this lifetime...

Now, while poverty may be the grassroots....the political issue here is not poverty-based. No one really cares about the impoverished. The political issue is "women's rights" and the incredibly loud voice those folks have.

---

Okay, just wasn't sure. Also, I wasn't saying that we shouldn't fix the outcomes, just that we seem to only focus on the outcomes. It's like, if you keep making the same mistake, why are you making the same decision that leads to that mistake. Like was said above, 50% of abortions are repeat customers. I have a problem with that, because you're now repeating poor decisions. At some point, you have to accept responsibility.

Now poverty is a big problem in this country. It needs to be addressed. Poverty leads to many of the bigger issues we have. Crime, drug and alcohol abuse, unwanted pregnancies, and mental issues to an extent. But, why do some areas stay in poverty? Is it because of poor local government? Is it because drug lords thrive on keeping these areas in poverty? These are all reasonable questions.

But, also we live in a country where better places to live are a short drive away. Why don't people move if they want a better life? Why don't they vote for better people to run their towns? Why don't they make better decisions to stay away from negative influences that lead to bad decisions?

I don't know all the answers to these questions. But, do know the world is full of examples of people who made better decisions for themselves, their families and their futures. So why can't we focus address the outcomes, but put some efforts into addressing the causes as well?

caryking said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

There are 500k+ children in foster care or waiting to be adopted in the US today. And this ruling would likely see an increase to those numbers.

---

And that's so sad! I feel like we spend more time fixing the outcomes in this country, instead of focusing on the causes at the grassroots level.

I saw on the local news last night, that Utah has an automatic law if Roe vs Wade were overturned. Abortion would be only allowed in special cases. Incest, rape, and health of the mother. It said several states had a similar automatic law in this case.

---

Soooo, fix poverty? Ultimately for the foster care situation, that is the issue. There is the occasional team mom who puts child into process so can go to college, etc....but most of these are poor / ill-educated teens who have no prospects and/or are unfit to mother.

It's a tough tough scenario, no doubt. If we could fix the root causes....it would likely have affects much more widespread than abortions. But, fixing poverty is tough.

---

Are you saying we shouldn't fix poverty? Not trying to start anything, just not 100% sure what you're saying.

---

The United States has 30T in debt trying to fix problems! We do not have anymore money. Hell, we had some saying we should spend 33B more in Ukraine!

WE CANT DO IT ALL!!!

---

Cary, you and I both agree that $30T has seen a lot of wasted money. But, Trump showed money can be rescinded as well. We need to fix a lot of things in this country, and then help the world as we can. Broke can't fix broke!

There are many States that have been preparing for Roe v. Wade to be overturned so they can outlaw or extremely limit abortions.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/03/us/state-abortion-trigger-laws-roe-v-wade-overturned/index.html

caryking said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

That is 100% an emotional argument! The potential Supreme Court ruling is a constitutional ruling. If you care about that, then you would recognize what I'm saying. I suggest you go read the entire draft!

---

No it's not, it's simply recognizing the cause and effect of abortions being banned. Is there anything about the outcomes that you disagree with?

---

Abortion hasn't been banned! That's a false argument!!!!

---

Nor did he say that...but it helps your argument to make up stuff. He said reduced access --- which will 100% happen, because certain states have already said so.


*I do agree there will be arguments about overall banning of abortion, but Statefan didn't make that argument.

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

There are 500k+ children in foster care or waiting to be adopted in the US today. And this ruling would likely see an increase to those numbers.

---

And that's so sad! I feel like we spend more time fixing the outcomes in this country, instead of focusing on the causes at the grassroots level.

I saw on the local news last night, that Utah has an automatic law if Roe vs Wade were overturned. Abortion would be only allowed in special cases. Incest, rape, and health of the mother. It said several states had a similar automatic law in this case.

---

Soooo, fix poverty? Ultimately for the foster care situation, that is the issue. There is the occasional team mom who puts child into process so can go to college, etc....but most of these are poor / ill-educated teens who have no prospects and/or are unfit to mother.

It's a tough tough scenario, no doubt. If we could fix the root causes....it would likely have affects much more widespread than abortions. But, fixing poverty is tough.

---

Are you saying we shouldn't fix poverty? Not trying to start anything, just not 100% sure what you're saying.

---

Not saying that at all --- you said we needed to fix the grassroots, not the outcomes. To me, the grassroots issue that most ultimately leads to this is poverty. Fix poverty, and the largest driver of the need for this goes away

And I'm not sure we're going to do that in this lifetime...

Now, while poverty may be the grassroots....the political issue here is not poverty-based. No one really cares about the impoverished. The political issue is "women's rights" and the incredibly loud voice those folks have.

---

Okay, just wasn't sure. Also, I wasn't saying that we shouldn't fix the outcomes, just that we seem to only focus on the outcomes. It's like, if you keep making the same mistake, why are you making the same decision that leads to that mistake. Like was said above, 50% of abortions are repeat customers. I have a problem with that, because you're now repeating poor decisions. At some point, you have to accept responsibility.

Now poverty is a big problem in this country. It needs to be addressed. Poverty leads to many of the bigger issues we have. Crime, drug and alcohol abuse, unwanted pregnancies, and mental issues to an extent. But, why do some areas stay in poverty? Is it because of poor local government? Is it because drug lords thrive on keeping these areas in poverty? These are all reasonable questions.

But, also we live in a country where better places to live are a short drive away. Why don't people move if they want a better life? Why don't they vote for better people to run their towns? Why don't they make better decisions to stay away from negative influences that lead to bad decisions?

I don't know all the answers to these questions. But, do know the world is full of examples of people who made better decisions for themselves, their families and their futures. So why can't we focus address the outcomes, but put some efforts into addressing the causes as well?

---

Fair questions, but also not easy answers. Why not move a short distance away....where? You want them building a bunch of low-income / government housing backing up to your property? Move to some trailer that you can afford but is now 10 minutes from the nearest store (if you want to find affordable housing in my county that is not in a very poor center of the one city, you'd likely have to choose something like that)?

Why stay poor? Circle of poverty is one of the more real statements we see....if you are born into poverty with no dad and a mom in jail or working 2 jobs and never at home, etc --- a sizable reality -- when do you learn to work hard and not have premarital sex so you don't have unwanted babies?
***BTW, personally, I think culture has failed many of these communities because culture doesn't want to talk about responsible family life.

I think when you are in these poor situations, abject poverty, some basic decisions your kids and mine take fro granted or never even have to consider are different. .It's how to survive. Its how to have a moment of fun instead of 7x24 misery. On and on......

Finally....as I've argued before....legislators don't care about those in abject poverty -- and frankly, most Americans don't. Sure, they do in the 6 months before elections. They do maybe for their district. But overall...nahh....how do i keep my taxes and how do i get mine.

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

There are 500k+ children in foster care or waiting to be adopted in the US today. And this ruling would likely see an increase to those numbers.

---

And that's so sad! I feel like we spend more time fixing the outcomes in this country, instead of focusing on the causes at the grassroots level.

I saw on the local news last night, that Utah has an automatic law if Roe vs Wade were overturned. Abortion would be only allowed in special cases. Incest, rape, and health of the mother. It said several states had a similar automatic law in this case.

---

Soooo, fix poverty? Ultimately for the foster care situation, that is the issue. There is the occasional team mom who puts child into process so can go to college, etc....but most of these are poor / ill-educated teens who have no prospects and/or are unfit to mother.

It's a tough tough scenario, no doubt. If we could fix the root causes....it would likely have affects much more widespread than abortions. But, fixing poverty is tough.

---

Are you saying we shouldn't fix poverty? Not trying to start anything, just not 100% sure what you're saying.

---

Not saying that at all --- you said we needed to fix the grassroots, not the outcomes. To me, the grassroots issue that most ultimately leads to this is poverty. Fix poverty, and the largest driver of the need for this goes away

And I'm not sure we're going to do that in this lifetime...

Now, while poverty may be the grassroots....the political issue here is not poverty-based. No one really cares about the impoverished. The political issue is "women's rights" and the incredibly loud voice those folks have.

---

Okay, just wasn't sure. Also, I wasn't saying that we shouldn't fix the outcomes, just that we seem to only focus on the outcomes. It's like, if you keep making the same mistake, why are you making the same decision that leads to that mistake. Like was said above, 50% of abortions are repeat customers. I have a problem with that, because you're now repeating poor decisions. At some point, you have to accept responsibility.

Now poverty is a big problem in this country. It needs to be addressed. Poverty leads to many of the bigger issues we have. Crime, drug and alcohol abuse, unwanted pregnancies, and mental issues to an extent. But, why do some areas stay in poverty? Is it because of poor local government? Is it because drug lords thrive on keeping these areas in poverty? These are all reasonable questions.

But, also we live in a country where better places to live are a short drive away. Why don't people move if they want a better life? Why don't they vote for better people to run their towns? Why don't they make better decisions to stay away from negative influences that lead to bad decisions?

I don't know all the answers to these questions. But, do know the world is full of examples of people who made better decisions for themselves, their families and their futures. So why can't we focus address the outcomes, but put some efforts into addressing the causes as well?

---

Fair questions, but also not easy answers. Why not move a short distance away....where? You want them building a bunch of low-income / government housing backing up to your property? Move to some trailer that you can afford but is now 10 minutes from the nearest store (if you want to find affordable housing in my county that is not in a very poor center of the one city, you'd likely have to choose something like that)?

Why stay poor? Circle of poverty is one of the more real statements we see....if you are born into poverty with no dad and a mom in jail or working 2 jobs and never at home, etc --- a sizable reality -- when do you learn to work hard and not have premarital sex so you don't have unwanted babies?
***BTW, personally, I think culture has failed many of these communities because culture doesn't want to talk about responsible family life.

I think when you are in these poor situations, abject poverty, some basic decisions your kids and mine take fro granted or never even have to consider are different. .It's how to survive. Its how to have a moment of fun instead of 7x24 misery. On and on......

Finally....as I've argued before....legislators don't care about those in abject poverty -- and frankly, most Americans don't. Sure, they do in the 6 months before elections. They do maybe for their district. But overall...nahh....how do i keep my taxes and how do i get mine.

---

"Why not move a short distance away....where?"

Who said they have to move to low income housing? Are you saying they can't just choose to move to a better place with a better environment? And no I'm not saying it's as easy as flipping a light switch. But where there's a will there's a way.

"Why stay poor?"

You kind of answered your own statement here. Culture! That's the failing part of all of this. It takes a movement to change the culture, or remove yourself from the culture. For every example you give off things to overcome, you can find an example of somebody that has overcome those circumstances. It can happen, it's not impossible.

"legislators don't care about those in abject poverty"

Well, that's where I say to make change with you vote. They have that option as well. Nobody is forcing them to vote for crappy representation. I never said any of this is easy. But, there are thousands of examples that it's possible. I'm really not trying to argue about this, and I don't have all the answers. But if it's possible for some, it's possible for the many.

Steve Videtich said:

---

"Why not move a short distance away....where?"

Who said they have to move to low income housing? Are you saying they can't just choose to move to a better place with a better environment? And no I'm not saying it's as easy as flipping a light switch. But where there's a will there's a way.

"Why stay poor?"

You kind of answered your own statement here. Culture! That's the failing part of all of this. It takes a movement to change the culture, or remove yourself from the culture. For every example you give off things to overcome, you can find an example of somebody that has overcome those circumstances. It can happen, it's not impossible.

"legislators don't care about those in abject poverty"

Well, that's where I say to make change with you vote. They have that option as well. Nobody is forcing them to vote for crappy representation. I never said any of this is easy. But, there are thousands of examples that it's possible. I'm really not trying to argue about this, and I don't have all the answers. But if it's possible for some, it's possible for the many.

---

Do you feel like housing / rental prices are at a place where someone who is in a bad situation can easily move somewhere else? You say "where there's a will, there's a way" but what does that mean for people that have a will but no realistic way to get out of the cycle of poverty?

statefan91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

"Why not move a short distance away....where?"

Who said they have to move to low income housing? Are you saying they can't just choose to move to a better place with a better environment? And no I'm not saying it's as easy as flipping a light switch. But where there's a will there's a way.

"Why stay poor?"

You kind of answered your own statement here. Culture! That's the failing part of all of this. It takes a movement to change the culture, or remove yourself from the culture. For every example you give off things to overcome, you can find an example of somebody that has overcome those circumstances. It can happen, it's not impossible.

"legislators don't care about those in abject poverty"

Well, that's where I say to make change with you vote. They have that option as well. Nobody is forcing them to vote for crappy representation. I never said any of this is easy. But, there are thousands of examples that it's possible. I'm really not trying to argue about this, and I don't have all the answers. But if it's possible for some, it's possible for the many.

---

Do you feel like housing / rental prices are at a place where someone who is in a bad situation can easily move somewhere else? You say "where there's a will, there's a way" but what does that mean for people that have a will but no realistic way to get out of the cycle of poverty?

---

No, I don't. And again, I'm not saying that it's a decision that happens like turning on the lights. But, what you and Chem are doing is making excuses. Should those in poverty keep making excuses and just stay there. "My life sucks, I can't catch a break! I'm just going to get some weed and alcohol and hang with my friends and ***** about our lives." Is that a choice?

I'm really not trying to say this is easy, or that everybody can overcome these things that exist in poverty ridden areas. But, I do think the more people that do overcome, it could finish these areas over time. It's not an easy fix either. But, you have to start somewhere.

Steve Videtich said:

---

No, I don't. And again, I'm not saying that it's a decision that happens like turning on the lights. But, what you and Chem are doing is making excuses. Should those in poverty keep making excuses and just stay there. "My life sucks, I can't catch a break! I'm just going to get some weed and alcohol and hang with my friends and ***** about our lives." Is that a choice?

I'm really not trying to say this is easy, or that everybody can overcome these things that exist in poverty ridden areas. But, I do think the more people that do overcome, it could finish these areas over time. It's not an easy fix either. But, you have to start somewhere.

---

The original direction of this has been lost a little, as my basic premise is that as these State's will likely move to ban or greatly reduce access to abortion, we are going to have more issues with poverty, homelessness, crime, neglected children, etc. I don't see any way that people think these things won't get worse. So despite much of the drive for these challenges and laws is to be "pro-life," many of the children being brought into this world are going to be subjected to the cycle of poverty.

PackFansXL said:

---

We did take in about a million folks just last year who believe they can get out of poverty in their countries and traveled a lot farther than anyone you can mention already living here. Regardless, slaughtering people is not a solution to poverty. That's a terrible answer if that is the best you have.

---

How many children have you adopted?

statefan91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

We did take in about a million folks just last year who believe they can get out of poverty in their countries and traveled a lot farther than anyone you can mention already living here. Regardless, slaughtering people is not a solution to poverty. That's a terrible answer if that is the best you have.

---

How many children have you adopted?

---

PackFanXL, that is such a great point! All this other stuff is just noise! If there is a will, there is a way!

I have one for you... If you can't afford the trip for an abortion, close your legs! Any other reason, for an abortion, will not be available, regardless of your CNN report.

statefan91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

We did take in about a million folks just last year who believe they can get out of poverty in their countries and traveled a lot farther than anyone you can mention already living here. Regardless, slaughtering people is not a solution to poverty. That's a terrible answer if that is the best you have.

---

How many children have you adopted?

---

Me personally? None. My brother adopted two girls and paid for their college educations. The second one just graduated last week.

How about you?

Steve Videtich said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

"Why not move a short distance away....where?"

Who said they have to move to low income housing? Are you saying they can't just choose to move to a better place with a better environment? And no I'm not saying it's as easy as flipping a light switch. But where there's a will there's a way.

"Why stay poor?"

You kind of answered your own statement here. Culture! That's the failing part of all of this. It takes a movement to change the culture, or remove yourself from the culture. For every example you give off things to overcome, you can find an example of somebody that has overcome those circumstances. It can happen, it's not impossible.

"legislators don't care about those in abject poverty"

Well, that's where I say to make change with you vote. They have that option as well. Nobody is forcing them to vote for crappy representation. I never said any of this is easy. But, there are thousands of examples that it's possible. I'm really not trying to argue about this, and I don't have all the answers. But if it's possible for some, it's possible for the many.

---

Do you feel like housing / rental prices are at a place where someone who is in a bad situation can easily move somewhere else? You say "where there's a will, there's a way" but what does that mean for people that have a will but no realistic way to get out of the cycle of poverty?

---

No, I don't. And again, I'm not saying that it's a decision that happens like turning on the lights. But, what you and Chem are doing is making excuses. Should those in poverty keep making excuses and just stay there. "My life sucks, I can't catch a break! I'm just going to get some weed and alcohol and hang with my friends and ***** about our lives." Is that a choice?

I'm really not trying to say this is easy, or that everybody can overcome these things that exist in poverty ridden areas. But, I do think the more people that do overcome, it could finish these areas over time. It's not an easy fix either. But, you have to start somewhere.

---

LOL, come on man, thats not making excuses, its reality. Tell you what, I don't know the worst, poorest school in your current district, but why don't you send your kids there for 12 years? Let them get the poorest resrouces and the poorest friends to hang out with for their developmental cycles?

Then lets test them when they graduate and see if they have the same principals and interests and motivations that the other kids in your current neighborhood.

I know what you're trying to say, and in theory I agree....ask my kids, I am 100% the "get up off the ground, shake it off, and get back at it" approach to life, and that has served them well.

But i think you underappreciate how stacked the deck is against many people to just say "suck it up".

Sooo....when you say you have to start somewhere -- do what? Cut them off and give them nothing, sink or swim?
If you're not married, we're going to take your kids? Sew you up so you can't have more?

PackFansXL said:

---

statefan91 said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

We did take in about a million folks just last year who believe they can get out of poverty in their countries and traveled a lot farther than anyone you can mention already living here. Regardless, slaughtering people is not a solution to poverty. That's a terrible answer if that is the best you have.

---

How many children have you adopted?

---

Me personally? None. My brother adopted two girls and paid for their college educations. The second one just graduated last week.

How about you?

---

I've not adopted any but I'm also not advocating for removing the option of abortion. If you're pro-life, why haven't you adopted any children yourself and helped these children that have been brought into the world unwanted?