You can abort if a child has a ‘defect’, but it’s wrong to abort if it’s a girl and you want a boy. What’s the difference, really

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html

Contrary to what Obama claimed, the real problem with abortion (aside from the fact that it kills babies) is that women and girls make the decision ALL TOO casually having been tragically brainwashed by Planned Parenthood, NARAL, government education administrators and union hacks and the Democrat Party.

Obama claims he believes women are using abortion responsibly; I can vouch for the fact that many do not – after working in an OB/GYN clinic for years, through which terminations were facilitated, I have seen incidents of women returning time and again for abortion as birth control. They’re not isolated incidents, either. I understand there is a segment of the population out there that grieves over their decision to terminate a pregnancy, but it’s not the overwhelming majority, by far.

And thank you for providing some information about Roe and Doe that most people are unaware of.

Sorry I don’t think economic circumstances or marital status is a good reason to murder a child. What if a woman has a baby and then, say, 7 months later decides she can’t pay the bills? What if her husband leaves her? Should she be able to kill the baby? By your logic, the answer would be an unavoidable “YES.”

“And then once you have this baby, they don’t want to provide social services to help you out…Let’s pretend we prohibit abortion and instead fund social services. How much extra in taxes are you willing to pay? 10% more, 25% more? How much is human life worth to you?”

Bogus argument. More restrictions on abortion and de-incentivizing out-of-wedlock childbearing would reduce the incidence of both. When people are allowed to take responsibility for their actions (instead of government stepping in and removing all consequences from willful actions), they usually do. For those kids who are born to people in less-than-optimal circumstances, there should be some safety-net mechanism to assist these innocent, genuinely impoverished children, but we cannot perpetuate a system in which the first stop in the mind of poor people is some government office. Such a system has led to higher poverty rates, more fatherless homes (the greatest indicator of poverty) and more abortion.

Fewer poor kids and fewer dead kids is usually seen as a good thing. Not sure how you can diagree.

“You aren’t providing any solutions to the problem, which is teenage pregnancy.”

Wrong. 80% of all abortions in America are carried out on women 20 or older.
http://www.abortionfacts.com/Statistics/age.asp

Anyway, abortion-on-demand is one factor that has led to the explosion in out-of-wedlock pregancy among young girls. Your solution seems to be, “Encourage these young girls to act like hookers in training, then pull them into an abortion clinic. Then start all over again! Gotta keep the abortion industry in the red!” (In more ways than one)

“Abortion doesn’t matter. Get over it.”

OK, now I get to tell you one thing you are not allowed to care about. No, forget it. I do care whether babies are murdered or not. You don’t. My conscience is clear. Can’t imagine that yours is.

Guess what, you need to pick one or the other. Let’s pretend we prohibit abortion and instead fund social services. How much extra in taxes are you willing to pay? 10% more, 25% more? How much is human life worth to you?

You aren’t providing any solutions to the problem, which is teenage pregnancy. Abortion doesn’t matter. Get over it.