Hello:

Right wing radio talker, Jan Mickelson, says ENSLAVE the undocumented immigrants if they don't leave when they're told. Is this how ethnic cleansing begins? I think it DOES.

IA Radio Host Jan Mickelson: Enslave Undocumented Immigrants Unless They Leave | Blog | Media Matters for America (http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/08/19/ia-radio-host-jan-mickelson-enslave-undocumente/205020)

excon

People are seeing how much attention the Donald is getting for stupid one liners and copycat that to make money. Stupid one liners are covered by the media and any press is good press. No or low ratings means he’s out of a job so stupid one liners are understandable. Pathetic, but understandable.

Clearly there is a market for saying dumb stupid stuff, but do you think there are enough dumb stupid people to actually do the stuff Trump talks about, Ex?

I hope not, or I may have to stop eating popcorn and watching the repub clown show, and exercise MY second amendment rights.

Do I sound like a winger? OMG stupid IS contagious!

Never heard of him even though Media Matters is trying to inflate him into being an influential conservative king maker. He was clearly being satirical, with his point being that illegals who come here and tap into the social welfare state 'enslave 'the taxpayers . I'm sure that Media Matters intentionally missed that point .

The one ethnic cleansing taking place in the USA is being done by the Liberals. Planned parenthood kills more black babies than are born every year.

A major point the Left refuses to even acknowledge.

As far as the illegals... yeah... I endorse endentured servitude for them... at least we will get something back for all the tax dollars we have spent on them. 30- 40 years should suffice.

Unless they leave... apply the right way... get legal papers and come back legal like they should have in the first place.

But then I don't make policy... throne kings... or much else.

And yet smoothy you still have more black people, speaking of the resiliance of the race, ask yourself who is responsible for this genocide.


Planned parenthood kills MORE black babies than are born every year

You really should tone down the rhetoric, it is unworthy of an educated man and besides you just wrote an absurdity


However going back to the seventeenth century, this is a barbaric solution

Since its abortion... and nobody was marching them in under gunpoint... they have themselves to blame.

Its statistically accurate, Not Rhetoric.


Actually I'm not a die hard pro-lifer...

Since its abortion... and nobody was marching them in under gunpoint... they have themselves to blame.

Its statistically accurate, Not Rhetoric.


Actually I'm not a die hard pro-lifer...

Get real how can this statement be statistically accurate? It is pure rhetoric and poor rhetoric at that


Planned parenthood kills MORE black babies than are born every year


Please give us the benefit of your statistics where you demonstrate that the organisation Planned Parenthood aborts more black babies than are born anywhere in a year or even in the US

Get real how can this statement be statistically accurate? It is pure rhetoric and poor rhetoric at that



Please give us the benefit of your statistics where you demonstrate that the organisation Planned Parenthood aborts more black babies than are born anywhere in a year or even in the US
Google black abortion statistics... they are all over the web. Easy to find... and no need to me to cherry pick

Smoothy what you allege is not logical on the one hand you have statistics saying more blacks are aborted than born yet predications say the black population will grow to 71 million by 2050, now either they are having children or they are not. Planned Parenthood is alleged to have aborted almost 400,000 but that is nothing like the total of US abortions so you cannot say "Planned Parenthood kills MORE black babies than are born every year" something else in is the mix here

Smoothy what you allege is not logicalYou are right. I've been down this path with him before - you will NEVER gets facts to support the argument. It is indeed just inflammatory rhetoric. No need to carry on the discussion as it's just an uneducated racist rant.

What he is saying, is that the majority of abortions are black babies. That is a fact, at least in the US. China aborts more Chinese than anybody, but it is done to lower the population. It takes several generations but abortion in mass numbers, does lower populations.

Yup and Planned Parenthood was founded by racist ,ethnic cleansing ,eugenists Margaret Sanger .

Abortion is becoming just another method of birth control. It is easy to see where America is headed when you see how things have ended in other nations. Here for example, birth control pills are seldom used, the belief is that they are bad for a women's body. Condoms and sometimes the morning after pill are about the only regular used birth control methods, beyond having an abortion if you become pregnant. It is normal for a women by the time she reaches 40, to have had 2 to 5 abortions.

You are right. I've been down this path with him before - you will NEVER gets facts to support the argument. It is indeed just inflammatory rhetoric. No need to carry on the discussion as it's just an uneducated racist rant.

You should know.. that's how you base ALL your posts here... rhetoric and no facts to back them up.


Smoothy what you allege is not logical on the one hand you have statistics saying more blacks are aborted than born yet predications say the black population will grow to 71 million by 2050, now either they are having children or they are not. Planned Parenthood is alleged to have aborted almost 400,000 but that is nothing like the total of US abortions so you cannot say "Planned Parenthood kills MORE black babies than are born every year" something else in is the mix here

Use Google... plenty of facts there back my claims up without having to go down to page 146 of results...

Now being on the opposite side of the Planet.. you would not be aware that Planned Parenthood is the MAJOR provider of abortions in the USA.

Planned Parenthood is the MAJOR provider of abortions in the USA.So what? Not sure what you're point is here.

His point is services for 10 million clients a year should be stopped because they do 300,000 abortions. By law abortions cannot be funded by taxpayer dollars. This is verified by tax filings every year. There is no ethnic cleansing when abortions are LEGAL, and voluntary.

http://plannedparenthood.org/files/4814/3638/1447/PP_Services.pdf

What I get from this is black americans are committing genocide on their own race, but not only black americans, all americans, and for that matter many people all over the world. I doubt any country is immune. Is the government complicit, well perhaps they are not actively discouraging the practice

If you don't like abortion don't get one.

His point is services for 10 million clients a year should be stopped because they do 300,000 abortions. By law abortions cannot be funded by taxpayer dollars. This is verified by tax filings every year. There is no ethnic cleansing when abortions are LEGAL, and voluntary.

http://plannedparenthood.org/files/4814/3638/1447/PP_Services.pdf

let's see $528.4 in government funds ;$305.3 million from non-governmental sources .So you would agree that most of their money comes from the taxpayer .

The taxpayer contributions to the organization frees up funding for their baby wacking and harvesting of baby parts for profit .

Even if PP never used one penny of taxpayer money for abortions, our money should not be going to an abortion provider, regardless of what other services they provide . There are plenty of FQHCs available that don't provide abortions that we could fund instead.

His point is services for 10 million clients a year should be stopped because they do 300,000 abortions. By law abortions cannot be funded by taxpayer dollars. This is verified by tax filings every year. There is no ethnic cleansing when abortions are LEGAL, and voluntary.

http://plannedparenthood.org/files/4814/3638/1447/PP_Services.pdf

Planned parenthood does very little but abortions and advocating abortions despite their propaganda... and doing things behind the backs of parents.

Personally I'm glad certain groups are getting abortions.(if it prevents Welfare bums of ANY ethnicity from procreating more I'm for it) in fact I think they should get a lot more... since using birth control is either apparently too much of an inconvenience or too difficult for them.

What I take exception with and find hypocritical... is that Liberals push them into it and its considered a great service... if Conservatives pushed them into it, they would be screaming bloody murder about how we are systematically committing ethnic cleansing or Genocide.

smoothy you have to understand that the society has educated people to drop out and rely of welfare, it is not their fault that employment has moved offshore, that is the result of their short sighted employers who fail to realise that less local income means a shrinking market or lower prices meaning greater volume to achieve the same result. I don't know your system but I know that here we have what we call the poverty trap where once you are on unemployment or welfare the system acts to actually reduce your income if you take a lowly paid part time job so incentive is destroyed. This works against those with larger families actually taking employment and reality doesn't sink in until the kids leave home or are older. We see full time employment being converted to casual or part time jobs.

I know there are some who are generational unemployed because they grow up in homes without their parents modelling productive behaviour but often there are no opportunities any way and the cost of reestablishment elsewhere is beyond them. So I don't think giving them the incentive to abort children through government subsidised advice is a great idea, it sounds like some sort of affirmative action crap gone off the rails

So I don't think giving them the incentive to abort children through government subsidised advice is a great idea, it sounds like some sort of affirmative action crap gone off the rails

You were going fairly well until you injected this total nonsense into the equation, since there is NO government incentive to abort children nor is it subsidised by the government. Women have sought abortions since the beginning of time and they have that right, but US law clearly states that no taxpayer money can be used for an abortion (abortions are funded through private donations, and women of means have been going to ob/gyns for decades for their abortion).

Maybe you should Google the Roe v Wade case, or peruse the budget figures released every year by the government and see the small expenditure for welfare each year. It would help you also to stop comparing your own population to one that's 5 times as big, as there is NONE. We were like you, before diversity created the culture clashes we now see playing itself out. You will be like us too, as you diversify from your own singley dominant culture, and assimilation is not so easy with dwindling numbers.

You are correct about population being the real issue, but you have to be aware of the composition of the growing population. I doubt your huge island will insulate you against the migrations of other cultures for too much longer though, any more than China can remain isolated from the machinations of the rest of the world.

Sovereignty is but an illusion to deny the FACT there is only ONE human race, and keeping the blood pure is unsustainable, which makes ethnic cleansing a horrible way for humans to behave by any standard, or excuse.

You were going fairly well until you injected this total nonsense into the equation, since there is NO government incentive to abort children nor is it subsidised by the government. Women have sought abortions since the beginning of time and they have that right, but US law clearly states that no taxpayer money can be used for an abortion (abortions are funded through private donations, and women of means have been going to ob/gyns for decades for their abortion).



What has been bothering me is that we dont actually know for sure that government money isnt being used for abortions. Through creative bookkeeping and the sidestepping of laws there is a window where it may be happening. We need to demand answers and carefully decern where the deviding line is for the charges that are being claimed. Since we now know that some of the aborted are being harvested for research then it can be deduced that the procedure could be claimed as research and thereby sidestepping the law. If this is happening then we need explinations.


As far as the claims that continue in this debate Im posting some links as to where the claims are coming from.

BlackGenocide.org | Abortion and the Black Community (http://www.blackgenocide.org/black.html)

NYC: More Black Babies Killed by Abortion Than Born (http://cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/nyc-more-black-babies-killed-abortion-born)

KKK Lynched 3,446 Blacks in 86 Years – Abortion Claims That Many Black Babies in ‘Less Than Four Days’ (http://cnsnews.com/news/article/kkk-lynched-3446-blacks-86-years-abortion-claims-many-black-babies-less-four-days)

Tom you like to twist what I say, you know what I mean without further explanation. Consider this the advising organisation should not be the organisation carrying out the procedure irrespective of funding

That's what tax filings are for and while I agree they can be creative, they can be audited and verified. The means and procedure and process is in place. I also reject the way the stats presented are spun since they do NOT reflect the circumstance of the female who VOLUNTARILY chooses abortions. Very subtle way to link abortions to murder. A typical pro-life position that is invalid and misleading.

Examining the issue of abortion in such narrow terms is akin to saying the Civil War was about states rights and not slavery. Both cases are about the RIGHT to make choices as individuals based on individual circumstance. Both cases are about one group taking away that choice from a second group.

So we can holler our objections to the choices others make, those choices for having an abortion are both legal and voluntary, and while pro-lifers are insistent against it, they won't step up and defend those babies after they are born. That's the real hypocrisy of those who are against abortions, and no doubt the incentive to have one in the first place. Especially given most women already have kids and want no more.

The number of abortions has been declining

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/03/us/abortions-declining-in-us-study-finds.html?_r=0


But Dr. Joffe agreed with the report that the wider use of contraceptives — IUDs that can prevent pregnancy (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/pregnancy/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier) for up to 10 years and injectable hormonal drugs that do so for months — appears to be an important factor in the reported recent decline.
These long-term, more reliable methods can have high upfront costs, Dr. Joffe noted. The cost may be a factor in the significantly higher rates of abortion among black and Hispanic women and the poor compared with white women, she said, and also points up the importance of providing health insurance (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/health_insurance_and_managed_care/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier) that covers contraception (http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/specialtopic/birth-control-and-family-planning/overview.html?inline=nyt-classifier) to low-income women.

We both know CDad, there is much opposition to health care AND contraceptives by those that oppose abortions. Even in the educating of people to those better options.

Under an audit the findings can be classified as research when the intent was to get an abortion paid for with government funds. That is the part I am leary about since the discovery of the way they have been handling fetal tissues.

I dont know if it is happening or not but it does raise the question.

Another conflicting stat is that the number of abortions has been declining but why is it consistent through the years that the percentage of abortions at PP remains at a constant 3%. That again raises red flags to me.

Would seem that if the private donations support the number of abortions performed then what's the worry?

Abortions are contracted to private doctors, and the procedure is the same be it PP, or a private clinic, depending on the doctor. I do know that mothers have to consent and sign forms for the tissue to be used any way, as do anyone who donates anybody part either for research or transplants under federal law and has been even before PP and stem cell research were ever thought of.

I get knowing the graphic details can be disturbing to many, but so would an autopsy, or images of the reality of war (Imagine the images after the Newtown shooting). I don't make light of such sensibilities either, but clinicians discussing their craft may be something not accepted by the general public especially not over lunch. I can respect that, yet feel the purpose was to inflame rather than educate by this group releasing the heavily edited video. That it was edited is a red flag to me, but I cannot totally dismiss your red flags either and have to research those numbers deeper.

A valid argument CDad, though I expect that 3% to reflect a slower decline than may have been alluded too, but will still verify if possible.

Under an audit the findings can be classified as research when the intent was to get an abortion paid for with government funds. That is the part I am leary about since the discovery of the way they have been handling fetal tissues.

I dont know if it is happening or not but it does raise the question.

Another conflictins stat is that the number of abortions has been declining but why is it consistent through the years that the percentage of abortions at PP remains at a constant 3%. That again raises red flags to me.
They can deny it all they want to . Money is fungible . PP gets more money from taxpayers than from private sources .

PP makes the absurd argument that only 3 % of their services are abortions . You want to talk about playing games with figures ? This is how they come up with theirs . A pregnant women comes in for an abortion . PP does a pregnancy screening ,maybe an STD screening ;and after the abortion she's given birth control pills. So for that one women ;the abortion only accounts for 25% of the services provided . Yet the sole reason that woman went to PP was to get that abortion. So I ask myself ;was taxpayer dollars being used for 75% of the services related to that abortion ? I'm betting it was.

Like I said ...there is NO reason for taxpayer to give a dime to a clinic that performs abortions ;regardless of the other services it provides . PP isn't the only option for other women's health services .

Like I said ...there is NO reason for taxpayer to give a dime to a clinic that performs abortions ;regardless of the other services it provides . PP isn't the only option for other women's health services .

I agree with you Tom

Unfortunately, you both seem to be in a minority as to should PP receive federal funding.

Reuters Poll: Most Back Funding Planned Parenthood on Women's Health Services (http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/reuters-poll-funding-planned/2015/08/19/id/670760/)

Just curious where those better options are for those 10 million clients that PP serves a year? While it's true money is fungible, you do understand PP has to show a level of donation (Non government funding) to support the number of abortions they do?

Unfortunately, you both seem to be in a minority as to should PP receive federal funding.

Reuters Poll: Most Back Funding Planned Parenthood on Women's Health Services (http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/reuters-poll-funding-planned/2015/08/19/id/670760/)

Just curious where those better options are for those 10 million clients that PP serves a year? While it's true money is fungible, you do understand PP has to show a level of donation (Non government funding) to support the number of abortions they do?

You miss the point entirely Tal. Women can receive advice from their doctors and should PP no longer offer abortion services then they may receive service from such organisations but it is entirely inappropriate that PP should be both the advisor and provider of the service. You may be unaware but incentives are common among the medical profession which leads to over servicing and the government should not play a part on what is, after all, a private enterprise

tal there are Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) all over the country . Not only that ;but if PP was defunded ,Obamacare provides block grants for FQHCs. Just as these walk in clinics are springing up in just about every strip mall over changes in the health care laws ,so would more FQHCs that cater to women's health open .

Where Obamacare gets it wrong is that it tells these clinics that if they become FQHCs, they'll receive federal funding IF they distribute contraceptives, including abortifacient ...and give written referrals to other FQHCs that provide abortions if they don't do abortions .Obamacare in other words has it completely backwards .

All we need to do is make a provision in the law that no women's clinic or organizations that perform abortions are qualified for Federal Funding . I know that won't happen with the emperor ,Evita ,or Bolshevic Bernie in office . But it is doable if a Repubic (besides Trump and other RINOs running ) becomes President .

I think it's you who miss the point that right now PP is popular (and in demand) and preferred by the populace, and women have a right to an abortion. Not surprising that you are against poor and minority people that fall between the cracks of health care services that YOU deem wrong.

It's YOU who have sought to curtail the rights of this segment of the population. Loud as you may be on the subject, you are a rapidly growing minority, and until the options you speak of become a VIABLE realistic reality your protest will be seen as another failed attempt to control the free expression and choices of other Americans.

Personally trying to tie women's health choices to religious morality is disgusting, and hypocritical given the science behind reproductive health issues, and focusing on such a narrow core of the population who have the least resources defeats the whole purpose of making abortions UNNECESSARY in the first place.

So let me know when those clinics popping up in stripmalls everywhere can offer the full range of services women need, and lawfully demand, without the moral stamp of approval of the MINORITY.

Change the law then... but you tried that and FAILED already right? Further you make no bones with unneeded embryos being destroyed, sold, after the IVF process is completed. Not a peep at all.

There are already some FQHCs . Abortion being legal is wrong ,but that is not my point . Taxpayer funding for abortions ,either legally or by the shell games that PP plays is unacceptable . If PP disappeared tomorrow it would take days for alternative FQHCs to pop up .

But even that is irrelevent . Let PP survive without funding if they can OR stop performing abortions if they wish to continue to receive federal funding .
I think that lets them off easy after what has been revealed about their monstorous practices .

Defunding efforts have failed, so your point is a moot one, and right or wrong abortions are LEGAL. Those are the FACTS.

I already stated the conditions under which defunding will happen. In the meantime I want Congressional hearings and a special prosecutor to investigate their harvesting of body parts like the Nazi's did "for medical research " .
Yes ethic cleansing . PP is ground zero in this country not some local-yokel dj in Iowa.

I have no problem with the MARKET defunding PP. PP exists because there is a DEMAND for the services and very little supply. You don't need congressional hearings for that. Nor does it appear enough support for one. There was not for defunding.

I have no problem with the MARKET defunding PP. PP exists because there is a DEMAND for the services and very little supply. You don't need congressional hearings for that. Nor does it appear enough support for one. There was not for defunding.

Do you hear yourself? But the statistics give the lie to your argument. PP provide a third of abortion services, that doesn't sound like very little supply, It sounds like a market in which there is plenty of competition and PP are a major player. As a major player it should be capable of standing alone without government support

The niche that PP fills is for people with limited to non existent resources and fewer options. Of course that need will not go back in the closet, or the back alley's and that's the purpose of government to serve the needs of the least. Maybe another business model will emerge to compete for those dollars but until then PP is all some have.

Because you are of the opinion that it's wrong to even have abortions is totally irrelevant since its legal. Actually it's none of your business you hypocrite since the sanctity of life you scream about so incessantly seems to end after birth. You scream about the problem of man being population then it's a responsible choice to limit the population voluntarily, but of course you holler without listening to YOURSELF.

Until such time education and science are the normal practice abortions are and have always been viable options for women. Did I mention they are LEGAL?

Tal I have a particular point of view on this. Each life should have the chance to reach its potential. If my mother had taken the opportunity to end my life I would not be here. As far a certain problems are concerned population and rising population is a problem but I don't see abortion as a birth control tool. What is needed is for people to take a little responsibility for outcomes and avoid unwanted pregnancies. This requires education and a lift in moral and ethical values but it is useless suggesting that in the most lawless and unethical place on Earth. Your laws are a sham and their outcomes leave much to be desired

You should be grateful your mother made that choice to have you but that has little to do with the choices and situation of others at all. So get off your moral high horse at those who have different points of view. Abortions are birth control, and responsible, AND population control... AND LEGAL. It's responsible FAMILY planning.

Your particular point of view is irrelevant to anyone but you, and the short sighted narrow minded bigots you share it with.

It think it's disgusting you think forcing a female to making YOUR moral choice, and then walk away quacking about responsibility after a child is born instead of supporting that choice, is pure HYPOCRISY!! How is that even MORAL?


Once a child is born you, and others like you should rallying around the mother and child with the full support a human can instead of walking away like a deadbeat dad, and leaving them both to fend for themselves.

That's my particular view.....back to YOU!

either you think taking an innocent life is wrong or not . We know where you stand .

What is the difference between Planned Parenthood and the Islamic State ?
The Islamic state doesn't care if the eyes are closed after decapitation.

Now tal you have to remember ....... when you execute a baby and take off it's head ;make sure it's eyes are closed before you ship the head to Mengele labs .

Nice try Tom, but comparing ISIS to PP is a very desperate move. Come on PP is a legal entity in the US.

I'm not impressed with the "it's legal ,therefore it's cool " argument . State sanctioned murder is still murder .

So is the death penalty but who notices? I would rather have the morning after pill available and cheap, or everybody being informed of the many other form of birth control and responsible safe sex. Doubt that happens tomorrow though, so in the meantime.. feed the babies and help the females who have them.

PS I did my part, barring unforeseen upgrading/updates. YOUR TURN! Good Luck! ;)

Tom sinks to new lows.

so you going to compare the taking of a henious criminal's life to that of the most innocent life on earth ? My positon on the death penalty (executions by the state )is that it should be an option rarely used ,but still an option.

My positon on the death penalty (executions by the state )is that it should be an option rarely used ,but still an option.

That's my position on abortions. A viable option. Especially if a proper support system is not in place or apparent.

the most innocent life on earthIt isn't life by definition. Take issue with the lawmakers or the mothers who are making this decision. Don't forget to tell them they are worse than islamic terrorists.

That's my position on abortions. A viable option. Especially if a proper support system is not in place or apparent.
I said rare . Your side looks at it the same way they do about wearing a condom. Abortion is on demand in this country ,not rare . If I compared it to death penalty it would be the equivalent of death because of the crime of jay walking .


It isn't life by definition. Take issue with the lawmakers or the mothers who are making this decision. Don't forget to tell them they are worse than islamic terrorists.
you selectively cherry pick and distort what I wrote . I called Planned Parenthood the equivalent of ISIS ,not the mothers.

I do take issue with the lawmakers . But the fact is that many lawmakers had already decided that abortion was illegal . Then SCOTUS distorted the Constitution to make it the law of the land .

BWT the plaintiff Norma McCorvey aka "Jane Roe" regrets her decision to be part of the case . She would like Roe v Wade reversed . She says that it should be reversed because the decision is no longer valid because scientific and anecdotal evidence that has come to light in the last 30 years has shown the negative effects of abortion.

Then SCOTUS distorted the Constitution to make it the law of the landWell of course, that's what you always say when you don't agree with someone - like you're smarter than 99% of the population.


Your side looks at it the same way they do about wearing a condom.Nah, I disagree with abortion being used as birth control. But them again using the Pill to prevent inplantation/ovulation is different how? Also donating eggs must be murder too, right?

Tom, what will you do about all the children born in poverty to single mothers?

Tom, what will you do about all the children born in poverty to single mothers?
the obvious answer is you kill em before they are born ....that's the most expedient remedy right ?

Well of course, that's what you always say when you don't agree with someone - like you're smarter than 99% of the population.

Don't really think that 99% of the population holds the position that right to privacy ;that the court held to be found in the emanations and penumbras of the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth Amendments, and Fourteenth Amendments, are so broad that it is guaranteed at all costs. It is an unreasonable position to take . No one would argue that murder done in the privacy of your home is permissible . The ruling cherry picked bits of rights that the judges interpreted in the various amendments mentioned ,but their ruling ignored the plain text right to "life" which precedes “liberty” in the 14th Amendment.

The ruling spoke of viability of life as being the time between point where the right to privacy gives way to the right to life . But as we know ,abortions are performed well past the time of viability . Further ,medical advances have made the age of viability closer and closer to the day of conception . So EVEN if I were to accept the court's phony description of when life begins ;I can say that most of the abortions occur well past that threshold. (more when I have more time )

the obvious answer is you kill em before they are born ....that's the most expedient remedy right ?
We don't kill them. They're born. Then what?

Well then you look after them

Well then you look after them
And the mothers are single, have no job, have five older children by various men, and the children are hungry. And need clothes. And the rent hasn't been paid.

And the mothers are single, have no job, have five older children by various men, and the children are hungry. And need clothes. And the rent hasn't been paid.

This is the disconnect in the dabate, there is a implied obligation on the part of society to look to the welfare of every person, but there is also an impled obligation on the part of the individual to be responsible

This is the disconnect in the dabate, there is a implied obligation on the part of society to look to the welfare of every person, but there is also an impled obligation on the part of the individual to be responsible
A baby isn't able to be responsible.

could it be that the irresponsible behavior can be directly linked to the remedy ? Like I said ,in this country abortion is used as a form contraception.

could it be that the irresponsible behavior can be directly linked to the remedy ? Like I said ,in this country abortion is used as a form contraception.
So what would responsible behavior be? And what's the remedy?

Some people are against contraception, and think some contraceptives, are abortifacients. Some never learn the facts about sex, and reproduction, some are not allowed to learn. Now what?

No one has answered the question of destroyed embryos after in vitro fertilization getting a free pass from protests either.

It seems strange that a question about a right wing talk show saying negative things about immigration and if that could lead to ethnic cleansing could turn into a thread about abortion. Ethnic cleansing is the removal of another race by force (Like what happened to the native Americans by early European settlers) leading to genocide. Abortion is down to the decision of the mother weighing up her situation and deciding if she wants to bring a child into the world. Hardly comparable.

The threads on this Board can take any turn because the polarised views expressed here narrow into certain corridors. The original suggestion was that forced migration was in fact ethnical cleansing. It is then suggested that abortion of black races because they are the larger uses of this "solution" and that their may be another agenda behind the recommendations they receive