Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by LadyEagle, Jun 19, 2003.
Another email I received today:
[ June 30, 2003, 11:46 AM: Message edited by: Squire Robertsson ]
If for no other reason than the fact that UNFPA supports of coercive abortion and sterilization programs in China, I believe this bill should be opposed.
What will Christians do if this bill is passed, not pay taxes?
Our tax dollars already pay for abortions. Right here in America.
One should be careful not to through the baby out with the bath water ... pun intended. UNFPA does so much more that simply fund abortion ... it would be wrong and unChristian not to support this program.
Check out this link and learn about the great program: http://www.unfpa.org/about/index.htm
If it supports abortion, I don't CARE what else it supports...it is wrong and Christians should not participate in it.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I, of course, do not agree that one issue should govern the health care for third world women. There are many more issue that out weigh the abortion issue. There is far to much suffering that is lessened by the overall program. This, of course, is my opinion. Sorry it makes you so mad.
Abortion is certainly a polarizing issue. I am opposed to it for mere birth control, but I do see some instances where it is unfortunately necessary. I think this is why it should be left up to the woman and her physician. There is some grey area here.
For those of you with daughters...
If you found out she was pregnant and would die if she carried the baby to term, would you support her getting an abortion or would you sacrifice your daughter for a child that might not even live?
It would not be my choice. But my daughters would NEVER think of having an abortion. They would choose to have the baby and let God take care of the rest.
BTW, this happened in my family. My daughter was told (because of cancer) she should have her pregnancy terminated or there was a definite risk to her life and the baby might not live due to the chemotherapy.
My daughter came through but the baby only lived nine days. My daughter went on to have three more beautiful, healthy children.
You can't outguess the Lord...
And we legally adopted the child our daughter had at 19 and unmarried. Erin is now married with two little girls. That info is for the pro aborts who always make the remark about pro lifers adopting unwanted children.
I agree with Sue. God is bigger than man's report. I would have to lean not on my own understanding......
Thank you Father God for my Nick!
I think abortion to save the life of the mother should be legal. To do otherwise falls into the same trap as those that don't believe one can use doctors, medicine, blood transfusions, etc, IMHO.
Yes, you are right. He causes the rain to fall on both the good and the evil. I agree the woman should make the decision with regard to her own body ... and sometimes there are good outcomes for which one can be thankful .. but often there are bad outcomes ... and some would say we should praise the Lord anyway??
I didn't know this. What law allows this?
This isn't about a grey area. Most abortions are carried out because of convenience. It is a very rare case where the teen mom would die due to complications of having a baby. My mom had my baby sister at the age of 41 in 1968. She could have aborted for "health reasons" which meant to as the Doctor recommended, her "mental health". Translate: Who wants a kid at the age of 41! She had my beautiful baby sister that year. Glad she chose to let her live.
Do the supporters know where this money goes? Our government wastes the money they take here. Why give more to waste in other countries.
Thanks for the link SheEagle911. I signed.
Of course, the best idea is to eliminate all foreign aid. If someone wants to support aid agencies, he should do so privately. The same thing applies to so many of the arguments over government funding. If the federal government only spent what it is constitutionally allowed to spend, a lot of our political fighting would be ended. If person A wants to support abortion funding he could do so, and if person B does not want to support such he could refrain from doing so. But they wouldn't be fighting with each other over whether their tax dollars should be used or not used.
Medicare, Medicaid, Title 19....... Goverment programs. Here in Georgia, if a woman wants to keep getting state money for her kids, she has to agree to sterilization after 3 children. The state pays for it.
A woman of any age who has recently had an abortion qualifies for Medicaid in Georgia for a certain amount of time. A (working poor) woman who has no insurance but has not had an abortion can just go somewhere and die......
Personally, I am opposed to such state(or federal) spending to begin with.
But, if someone is going to be receiving state aid, I think they should be sterilized from the moment they begin receiving such aid - women and men.
I didn't know this. What law allows this? </font>[/QUOTE]I believe what Diane is talking about is the fact that people on the poverty level can receive free health care when it is necessary. Free clinics, charity hospitals, etc.
That's paid for by our tax monies. And, unfortunately, abortions are a part of "health care". It's simply considered a medical procedure and impoverished women who desire an abortion can get one for free. Free for them, but paid for by taxpayers.
I disagree Ken. If someone is in dire straits because of a layoff or illness, why force them to permanently stop child bearing? Many people have borrowed from relatives, taken out second mortgages or received food stamps for short periods of time but then quickly rebound and never need help again. Who is to say that God is finished with their family just because of a short term financial problem?
Thanks ScarlettO. Exactly what I was referring to!
You have to bear in mind that I am totally opposed to any government taking money from me by force and giving it another person. In the private sector, we call that action - robbery.
But since we no longer follow the constitution to a large degree, if the government is going to take money from me by force, then during the time someone is receiving my money, they had sure enough not be adding to the public burden that I am paying for by having children.
No one is forced to accept taxpayer money. If they don't want to be sterilized, then they shouldn't sign up for the government program. They should look to family members, friends, private charity, etc., instead.