It is? Thats news to me. I suppose Americans aren't still dying over there and its no longer called a "war"? As I recall correctly, in another thread, you were all gung-ho about starting some crap in Iran as well. No you haven't. You have avoid every one of the questions that involve adoption. Based on your response in this last post, you are still avoiding the same damn questions. YES! And because you claim that its an answer to the problem. Its the prolife version of the not-in-my-backyard syndrome. Um...yeah. Thats why they are being provide for free all over the country. I'm not advocating adoption as an answer to the problem; you are. Life is soo precious, thousands of people die each year because pharmaceutical companies aren't forced to share life-saving technology in the interest of protecting intellectual property. Life is sooo precious in America, that its the number one market of for-profit homes where the old and infirmed are locked away and left to lie in their own fecal matter. Life is sooo precious in America, that its the number one demand market for human sex slaves. Life is sooo precious in America, that its the number one market for violence as entertainment. Oh yes, life is sooo precious it should be legislated. People should live and die according to laws that govern a nation. Oh yeah, I know how precious life is. However, I prefer to worry about the living first, because there are worst fates than death. You are experiencing a psychological condition known as projection. I am disgusted at people who are outraged (thats you) and want to impose your version of morality on everyone else through federal intervention. Actually, I don't mind paying higher taxes, do you? As a matter of fact, I wouldn't mind paying higher taxes to have a lot of financial crap taken off my shoulders. I only brought it up because it would be a consequence to criminalizing abortion. My original question was: can you handle it? Or are you going to bitch about that too?
So the answer is no; if they needed help, they can't do it now can they? DUH!!!!! You are assuming every teenager has a family and social support structure that would be condusive to 18 years of care. I didn't. They just happen to be the ones I'm worried about the most. Oh babies!!! Thats right, the present 100,000+ are too old for their liking I suppose. Yes, lets force women to have babies they don't want so those that ARE interested in adoption can have a better selection of babies to choose from! THAT should improve the number of potential adopters, right? You'll want one then?
You aren't a woman, so what makes you think you're qualified to force 9 months of pregnancy on women that you have no clue what their life circumstances are? A lot of people don't have a problem understanding that, but you seem to have serious issues with it.
This is a surprising question for you. I am not even sure what you mean? Why would a conservative not want to be conservative of life? Why would a conservative want to prevent govt from doing one of the tasks -- govt is set up to do. My question is quite the reverse. Why do liberals who wish to protect spotted owls and least terns and support the ethical treatment of animals all of a sudden say the killing of a baby as it is leaving the vagina in a very barbaric manner is o.k.
There's virtually ZERO American children available for adoption. I've known couples who've gone to China, Russia and Bosnia in search of babies.
Sinful acts according to your religious beliefs and criminal acts under the penal code are two entirely separate classifications. To force the two to overlap would be the greater crime.
WRONG: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/waiting2003.htm The fact is most people that want to adopt want babies, thats the real issue here.