Are you Pro choice or Pro Life?

[Nofriends]

Personally, I disagree with both positions, in terms of pro choice I find it deplorable that the hedonistic tendencies of another gives a female the right to murder another human, however, this does not mean I am anti-pro choice in cases of rape.

Those who are pro life believe that the individual should be condemned to an impoverished existence, only in cases where the child can have a fine life should pro life be advocated.

If the world wants to overcome this issue the only way forward is in the cases where positions of pro life and pro choice are invalid is for the father, mother and child to be killed. This may be an extreme position, but it will help households rebuild and create more happy families, because people are not going to be screwing up their life and then breeding for the transfer of an albatross which will be exceeding difficult for the individual to extricate itself of.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

This sums up my views on pro-life pretty well:
[bIMGx=350]http://i.imgur.com/ofuZJUX.jpg[/bIMGx]

"Pro-life" is a misnomer. The majority of people who are 'pro-life' are coming from religious values or political line-toeing and don't necessarily care about the welfare of the baby, mother or family in general; they just wish to control others and that is not pro life at all. The minority of them are bleeding hearts who just don't feel comfortable about aborting human life. If you are truly pro-life you should also be supporting things like easy access to sex education, birth control, sti/std protection, clinic visits, and general monetary welfare for new parents, in addition to recognizing the fact that abortion can prevent the trend of single mothers and uneducated parents that become stuck in poverty and raise unproductive kids.

Pro-choice is typically meant for the freedom to have abortions but whether or not one acknowledges it, pro-choice also stands for the freedom to not have abortions. It is similar to the drug debate because the core issue is personal sovereignty vs the impact on society. There must be a balance because realistically each new human consumes more resources which takes from everyone else, though for capitalist societies there are numerous benefits to increasing the working class. For social security and welfare programs to continue you have to constantly increase the population of the youth so they can support the elderly, and we need people to take the unskilled jobs that form the basis of society.

Overall there is no valid reason in a rational society to be against abortions, therefore "pro-life" is a void stance. But there may be a current or future need to consider forms of population control.

 

[Tannhauser]

I am categorically pro choice. The reason is simple: I have not seen a compelling argument for why a foetus, that is, a collection of cells to-be-a-human, should be the equivalent of a grown, sentient, conscious human being.

 

[Seteleechete]

Personally, I disagree with both positions, in terms of pro choice I find it deplorable that the hedonistic tendencies of another gives a female the right to murder another human, however, this does not mean I am anti-pro choice in cases of rape.

Those who are pro life believe that the individual should be condemned to an impoverished existence, only in cases where the child can have a fine life should pro life be advocated.

I dislike this position more than either of the stances, because it is contradictory and makes no sense. "Pro choice is wrong because it's murder but that's fine if x or y"

Also I am pro choice for the same reason as Tannhauser.

 

[Grayman]

I am both. It only matters when a fetus can be deemed a child. Abortion is mostly unnecessary being that adoptin is basically 100% likely.

 

[Jennywocky]

http://www.adoptuskids.org/meet-the-children/children-in-foster-care/about-the-children

400,000 kids in foster care; 100,000 available for adoption.

20,000 age out of the system each year (turn 18/21, etc) without being adopted... although I'm not sure what the breakdown is. A quarter of the available kids get adopted by foster families.

There's the issues of (1) when a collection of unborn cells uniformly earns legal status [especially consider the high percentage of recognized and unrecognized miscarriages, which makes the "conception" standard look silly] and (2) culture's ability to care for unparented children and (3) groups imposing moral judgments without taking practical responsibility for those stances.

I don't think there will ever be a definitive line for this. The truth resides somewhere in the ambiguous area: A stance with no flexibility for practical constraints will create a pool of unwanted human beings with its own issues that could impact society later as well as trying to force unsuited parents to parent, while a group with no regard for the reproduction process can create a subjective devaluing of life and possibly a population imbalance depending on the degree to which it is taken. Something workable lies in the grey in-between.

 

[Grayman]

http://www.adoptuskids.org/meet-the-children/children-in-foster-care/about-the-children

400,000 kids in foster care; 100,000 available for adoption.

20,000 age out of the system each year (turn 18/21, etc) without being adopted... although I'm not sure what the breakdown is. A quarter of the available kids get adopted by foster families.

Why are you giving me statistics on older children? Are we talking about aborting children infant and above?

According to the most recent federal data, there are currently more than 400,000 children in foster care in the United States. They range in age from infants to 21 years old (in some states). The average age of a child in foster care is more than 8 years old, and there are slightly more boys than girls.

Newborns and babies are adopted at 100%. Even if they enter the books for a bit while things get processed they are adopted shortly thereafter.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

I believe that Life is fueled by the power of Choice.

Pagans practiced infanticide, Pagans had a cool mythological pantheon.

Abortion is probably ok.

Does reincarnation occur at conception or birth?

I vote birth.

Also, astrology is pretty cool. Legit.

 

[EditorOne]

Pro choice for the reasons outlined above.

We are going to go through a fresh round of agony on this because of the Zika virus, which seems to produce children with severe birth defects like microcephaly. Microcephaly can be detected before birth, but apparently only in the third trimester. Most laws on abortion ban them during that period. Instant heartbreak, eternal burdens, often on families already scrambling economically.

 

[Grayman]

http://usaadoptions.com/articles/another_option.html

More details on my opinion

Spoiler

Yeah, the only realistic option is somewhere in the middle.

There needs to be exceptions but we also need to be respectful to the value of life and I don't think suddenly leaving the birth canal causes a soul to suddenly drop into the child making it a human being. The extremist positions on the pro-choice side disallows me from claiming to be a proponent of pro-choice even though there are things I agree with on their side.

We cannot know when a fetus becomes a human being with any real certainty. For this reason I am pro-adoption, pro-empathy, and then pro-life. If there are complications and risks to the child or mother we need to be pro-empathy and pro-life and let abortion happen, save the mother. If a child could suffer a lifetime illness that would significantly reduce their quality of life then we need to exercise empathy and allow abortion. The fact that I make rational exceptions on where abortion would be acceptable or even necessary makes it difficult for me to call myself a proponent of pro-life.

My main position is that we should be respectful to the value of life and promote adoption when possible. This is an option that is often not talked about. It is often ignored. It is an option. Yes, circumstances could change to where adoptions are in shorter supply. I am not an irrational pro-life proponent. I just think we should limit abortions to the degree that alternatives are very accessible and real.

So I call myself pro-adoption.

 

[TheManBeyond]

pro choice

 

[smithcommajohn]

Pro Life because I'm contrarian.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

pro-death

Just think about it, ok. Why risk raising your child and have them grow up to be a hellbound infidel when you can just kill them early and ensure they gain entry into an eternal paradise?* It's logical, kind, and devoid of risk. Anxious seven yr old Adaire actually wished her parents had been so thoughtful when she couldn't figure out if she was properly 'saved' or not. If your mom aborts you, then you've got a free ticket. What's all the fuss? The mother who selfishly brings her child to term is the real villain here.

*I know there are differences of opinion in where dead babies go depending on the sect

 

[redbaron]

I think some adults are worthy of abortion so why not the unborn?

 

[Absurdity]

Pro human extinction

 

[Pyropyro]

Pro-sex

 

[Cheeseumpuffs]

pro-death

I think some adults are worthy of abortion so why not the unborn?

Pro human extinction

+1

 

[Grayman]

This place is sick. It's a good thing I am hear to save everyone.

 

[Haim]

Pro life of the mother, having to rise a child before you are willing or prepared is really difficult.
In most cases it leads to the ruined life of the mother or/and the child, some stupid ass religious "'"warmhearted" vegetarian hippie" has zero right to decide on other people lives.
Really it's surprising me USA still has this kind of shit rules in some of the of the states, due we also have some stupid religious rules(not having non-religious marriage in Israel)

Forcing a raped woman or stupid teenager to have a baby does not make sense in our time of human right of freedom, regardless if you label a growing baby a "living" human or not which is just arbitrary anyway, there is nothing stopping you from calling sperm an human(which has the same religious source of this stupid discussion)

 

[Thurlor]

I think a lot of people are neglecting to think about the physical toll of pregnancy and labour on the woman. It's not a popular opinion but motherhood ruins a woman's body when comparing it to her pre-pregnancy body. Anyway, as long as men aren't required to take the risks they shouldn't have much of a say in the matter.

I've also noticed that a lot of people treat pregnancy as a punishment for sex. Another unpopular opinion of mine is that consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.

Having said all of that, I do think that there are frivolous reasons for wanting an abortion and those should be discouraged (but not banned).

 

[EditorOne]

I think a lot of people are neglecting to think about the physical toll of pregnancy and labour on the woman. It's not a popular opinion but motherhood ruins a woman's body when comparing it to her pre-pregnancy body. Anyway, as long as men aren't required to take the risks they shouldn't have much of a say in the matter.
QUOTE]

What?

Kerri Walsh Jennings.

Dana Vollmer

Heidi Klum

Those are just public examples. I know a great many women who emerged from pregnancy and put their bodies back in good working order, including a friend who just ran a marathon after four children.

Not picking on you, just noting it's not universal. Pregnancy does expose mothers to risks from complications, and not everyone's hormones, metabolism and life realities will allow them to regain pre-pregnancy physiques. It's just not universal and, yes, men don't have anything comparable.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

I think a lot of people are neglecting to think about the physical toll of pregnancy and labour on the woman. It's not a popular opinion but motherhood ruins a woman's body when comparing it to her pre-pregnancy body. Anyway, as long as men aren't required to take the risks they shouldn't have much of a say in the matter.
QUOTE]

What?

Kerri Walsh Jennings.

Dana Vollmer

Heidi Klum

Those are just public examples. I know a great many women who emerged from pregnancy and put their bodies back in good working order, including a friend who just ran a marathon after four children.

Not picking on you, just noting it's not universal. Pregnancy does expose mothers to risks from complications, and not everyone's hormones, metabolism and life realities will allow them to regain pre-pregnancy physiques. It's just not universal and, yes, men don't have anything comparable.

Persisting problems are not uncommon at all though; and not just in terms of being able to maintain attractiveness. >.> Off the top of my head I know four women who have persistent sciatic pain 5+ years after pregnancy/miscarriage, to the point of not being able to walk sometimes in two cases. You can't just look at a woman to tell with certainty that she doesn't have some left over problems caused by pregnancy. You can't really expect her to tell you either, as that's something most women are unlikely to disclose to a man who's not her partner or a medical professional.

The whole medical field tends to gloss over the long term negative aspects of pregnancy, which I find particularly frustrating. Hardly any research between parous and nulliparous women is done.

 

[Tannhauser]

I think a lot of people are neglecting to think about the physical toll of pregnancy and labour on the woman. It's not a popular opinion but motherhood ruins a woman's body when comparing it to her pre-pregnancy body. Anyway, as long as men aren't required to take the risks they shouldn't have much of a say in the matter.
QUOTE]

What?

Kerri Walsh Jennings.

Dana Vollmer

Heidi Klum

Those are just public examples. I know a great many women who emerged from pregnancy and put their bodies back in good working order, including a friend who just ran a marathon after four children.

Not picking on you, just noting it's not universal. Pregnancy does expose mothers to risks from complications, and not everyone's hormones, metabolism and life realities will allow them to regain pre-pregnancy physiques. It's just not universal and, yes, men don't have anything comparable.

Come on, man. Did you just list Heidi Klum as an example to support your case?

 

[Grayman]

Deep within screams my paternal instincts. It gnashes its teeth in disgust and horror at the destruction it sees before it. It sees liberalism as a immoral, irresponsible, beast. Intellectually I try to quiet it and tell it that these are not children but little packets of cells. Yet it remains unconvinced uncertain and unwilling to risk the lives of children on such speculation. It churns within me. Call me a sexist, call me a bigot. It matters not. Paternal instincts are blind to such concepts. These instincts are deep and biological and are not obstructed or destroyed by ideas and concepts of the mind.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

Deep within screams my paternal instincts. It gnashes its teeth in disgust and horror at the destruction it sees before it. It sees liberalism as a immoral, irresponsible, beast. Intellectually I try to quiet it and tell it that these are not children but little packets of cells. Yet it remains unconvinced uncertain and unwilling to risk the lives of children on such speculation. It churns within me. Call me a sexist, call me a bigot. It matters not. Paternal instincts are blind to such concepts. These instincts are deep and biological and are not obstructed or destroyed by ideas and concepts of the mind.

That tirade was so dramatically fabulous....
1970s Tim Curry would be jealous.

*applauds*

 

[EditorOne]

Come on, man. Did you just list Heidi Klum as an example to support your case?

Heidi Klum returned to professional modeling after childbirth. That's all. Why, is she unacceptable as an example??

 

[Tannhauser]

Heidi Klum returned to professional modeling after childbirth. That's all. Why, is she unacceptable as an example??

Its Marie-Antoinette level thinking

 

[Yellow]

A lump in your uterus isn't sacred. You know what's sacred? Parenting. Shitty parenting hurts us all way worse than abortion.

I wish we had overwhelming messages to young people that condoms and birth control will save your fucking life. If those didn't work, Plan B. If that failed too (or you didn't know you needed it), abort it as soon as possible. Don't hem and haw, just suck it up and suck it out.

 

[Cheeseumpuffs]

I think a lot of people are neglecting to think about the physical toll of pregnancy and labour on the woman. It's not a popular opinion but motherhood ruins a woman's body when comparing it to her pre-pregnancy body. Anyway, as long as men aren't required to take the risks they shouldn't have much of a say in the matter.

What?

Kerri Walsh Jennings.

Dana Vollmer

Heidi Klum

Those are just public examples. I know a great many women who emerged from pregnancy and put their bodies back in good working order, including a friend who just ran a marathon after four children.

Not picking on you, just noting it's not universal. Pregnancy does expose mothers to risks from complications, and not everyone's hormones, metabolism and life realities will allow them to regain pre-pregnancy physiques. It's just not universal and, yes, men don't have anything comparable.

Come on, man. Did you just list Heidi Klum as an example to support your case?

Heidi Klum returned to professional modeling after childbirth. That's all. Why, is she unacceptable as an example??

Its Marie-Antoinette level thinking

Poor quote game is poor. smh fam I mean like bruh c'mon

suck it up and suck it out.

If I ever in my life have a pregnancy scare you've just given me the first thing I say to the girl I'm with.

 

[Sinny91]

I am both. It only matters when a fetus can be deemed a child. Abortion is mostly unnecessary being that adoptin is basically 100% likely.

So is sexual abuse in the state care system.

The depths of this abuse .. barely any know, bar those subjected to it.

I'd sooner abort than put the life of a child in the hands of those who relish in depravity.

But I tell you what we don't need; men thinking then can speak for women. Go and fuck yourselves - instead of us, most likely you'll be doing us a favor.

 

[Puffy]

pro-death

Just think about it, ok. Why risk raising your child and have them grow up to be a hellbound infidel when you can just kill them early and ensure they gain entry into an eternal paradise?* It's logical, kind, and devoid of risk. Anxious seven yr old Adaire actually wished her parents had been so thoughtful when she couldn't figure out if she was properly 'saved' or not. If your mom aborts you, then you've got a free ticket. What's all the fuss? The mother who selfishly brings her child to term is the real villain here.

*I know there are differences of opinion in where dead babies go depending on the sect

Your plan's fatal flaw is the valour of said parents. If they murder the child they break the Sabbath and go to hell in its place. I have yet to meet a pro-lifer who would go to hell for a foetus.

(The sad thing is I feel pretty certain someone has already done what you suggested for the exact reason you suggested.)

 

[Yellow]

What I don't get about most pro-lifers are the social and political opinions that accompany their opposition to abortion. Like "if someone or something steps on my property, it's my right to kill them" and "we shouldn't have to help the poor" and "fuck immigrants".

I mean, I'm very pro life, if your considering "life" to be things that are viable and present. I don't think it's right to kill stray animals for convenience or launch drone attacks on desert villages. I think we should afford one another basic dignities and at least a meager living. The number of "pro-life" people who would disagree with me on at least one of these points is staggering, and very telling.

 

[Haim]

Deep within screams my paternal instincts. It gnashes its teeth in disgust and horror at the destruction it sees before it. It sees liberalism as a immoral, irresponsible, beast. Intellectually I try to quiet it and tell it that these are not children but little packets of cells. Yet it remains unconvinced uncertain and unwilling to risk the lives of children on such speculation. It churns within me. Call me a sexist, call me a bigot. It matters not. Paternal instincts are blind to such concepts. These instincts are deep and biological and are not obstructed or destroyed by ideas and concepts of the mind.

That is the thing, it is your selfish feelings which should not matter at all to the mother life.I also have many feelings, does not give me the right to force people to act accordingly(well unless/until I will have god power in some world)

 

[Jennywocky]

What I don't get about most pro-lifers are the social and political opinions that accompany their opposition to abortion. Like "if someone or something steps on my property, it's my right to kill them" and "we shouldn't have to help the poor" and "fuck immigrants".

it reveals it's more of an ideological/religious stance versus some kind of broad concern about human life in general.

It's just weird, since the stance is supposedly derived from some Judeo-Christian value, yet in the Old Testament if you injured a pregnant woman so that she lost the pregnancy, you only paid a silver price to the husband (versus being executed for murder, as was the penalty, if the mother died).

There's even a ritual that you can force your wife to undergo if you think she has been sleeping around when you haven't been sleeping with her... basically forcing a miscarriage if she happens to be pregnant, which would signify that she was indeed cheating on you and would be punished according to law. Not much concern about the fetus though. From both of these examples, it seems the larger concern was that any baby born had the husband's lineage and/or the husband was compensated fairly for a lost pregnancy.

These aren't the only two examples. The traditional Torah reading generally is that a human life begins when the baby enters the world.

 

[Grayman]

So is sexual abuse in the state care system.

Pro-Empathy means there is room for a woman to have an abortion as a result of rape.

The depths of this abuse .. barely any know, bar those subjected to it.

I support sterilization for sex abusers as well as rehabilitation facilities that teach empathy and respect. An individual who is capable of such abuse isn't the type of individual who should be allowed to have children.

But I tell you what we don't need; men thinking then can speak for women. Go and fuck yourselves - instead of us, most likely you'll be doing us a favor.

I base policy first on the success of society and secondly the success of an individual. I am not concerned with artificially defined groups. Women should have as much say in what men do as men in what women do as long as the goal is the success of society and it's future.

 

[Cheeseumpuffs]

Pro-Empathy means there is room for a woman to have an abortion as a result of rape.

I think she's talking about sexual abuse of children who are adopted/fostered. I could be reading that wrong, though.

 

[Yellow]

it reveals it's more of an ideological/religious stance versus some kind of broad concern about human life in general.

It's just weird, since the stance is supposedly derived from some Judeo-Christian value, yet in the Old Testament if you injured a pregnant woman so that she lost the pregnancy, you only paid a silver price to the husband (versus being executed for murder, as was the penalty, if the mother died).

There's even a ritual that you can force your wife to undergo if you think she has been sleeping around when you haven't been sleeping with her... basically forcing a miscarriage if she happens to be pregnant, which would signify that she was indeed cheating on you and would be punished according to law. Not much concern about the fetus though. From both of these examples, it seems the larger concern was that any baby born had the husband's lineage and/or the husband was compensated fairly for a lost pregnancy.

These aren't the only two examples. The traditional Torah reading generally is that a human life begins when the baby enters the world.

That makes sense. Most of the sexuality-related rules in the Torah are effective designs for limiting population growth among the peasant classes. A little primitive of course, we don't need to resort to killing/enslaving reproductive-aged women willy-nilly anymore, but still effective.

 

[Yellow]

I think she's talking about sexual abuse of children who are adopted/fostered. I could be reading that wrong, though.

I assumed that too. Of course, most kids in foster care were sexually abused before they even got there, but a few put into foster care as newborns, before bio parents have a chance to fuck things up (beyond using drugs/drinking/being severely beaten while pregnant).

Currently in my county, we have 1 foster home for about every 12 children who need to be sheltered. The foster homes can typically take 1-3 kids at a time. Some burgeon up to 5. The rest get shipped and swapped around god knows where. Transported 100 miles for a visitation each week that mom might or might not show up for until there's an "opening" nearer home so that mom can flake with less guilt. That's the better-behaved kids, of course. The "needy" ones are tossed around like hot potatoes from home to home. Becoming more and more unstable with every move.

Even if every set of foster parents have the very best intentions, the other kids might not. Children who are abused tend to perpetuate abuse with younger, more vulnerable children.

 

[smithcommajohn]

Come on, guys. This is the same shit I can read anywhere. Let's get back to the pro-death stuff.

Btw, I'm still sticking with Pro Life since it's the underdog.

 

[Sinny91]

I think she's talking about sexual abuse of children who are adopted/fostered. I could be reading that wrong, though.

That I am... but to a lesser extent - I presume most people who want to adopt or foster are decent people. But it's within the system prior to that that I speak of.

I know through my 'elite sexual abuse' research that there are *systems built within systems* to take advantage of the children within the system.

Poor wording, poor explanation, but I'm half drunk.

Predators know where convenient targets can be found.
There is a whole sick culture built around it, to take advantage of it.

There are things worse than death, of this I'm sure. As sure as any live person can be.

Can you think of any child less protected than those without family/friends to protect them? What befalls these children? Rape, murder, organ harvesting, ritual abuse.

People and reality are far sicker than most realise.
I realise and feel it on a daily basis. I feel ill just existing.

 

[Grayman]

So is sexual abuse in the state care system.

http://childmyths.blogspot.com/2012/02/whos-abusive-comparing-step-parents.html

The Children’s Bureau report noted that parents (including step-parents and adoptive parents, but not foster parents) were responsible for 81.2% of the cases in the “duplicate count” (adults who were reported more than once for mistreatment of a child). Of these cases involving parents, 0.7% *were perpetrated by adoptive parents, 84.2% by biological parents, 4.0% by step-parents, and 11.2% by parents whose relationship to the child was not recorded.

Foster care and Adoption are under extreme scrutiny for legal reasons and the fear of law suits. Biological parents get a lot of rope. Of course people are going to hear more about abuse when it occurs in the public arena(Foster care) than when it occurs in privacy because people are generally opposed to the idea of the government taking their kids.

 

[smithcommajohn]

Sexual abuse worries as a reason to abort, Sinny? Come on, you can do better than that. That's some weak D.

Maybe we should kill all children that might go up for adoption/foster care to avoid this tragedy.

 

[Sinny91]

Sexual abuse worries as a reason to abort, Sinny? Come on, you can do better than that. That's some weak D.

Maybe we should kill all children that might go up for adoption/foster care to avoid this tragedy.

What do you mean I can do better, like this is some sort of fucking contest ???

Listen yea, the level of abuse within our care systems is so fucking large it's a scandal that *is*, and is set to further, ROCK THE WHOLE FUCKING ESTABLISHMENT.


You ignorant fucktards.

Visit my Jimmy Savile thread to tide you over until I'm sober enough to argue my point coherently.

... and my *educated* opinion comes from an Irish/ 'British' Roman Catholic background, and I know fine well what the fuck I"m talking about.

Large scale sexual abuse IS institutionalised.

To clarify... MY mother was never a FIT MOTHER, but the alternative was STATE CARE, which the WHOLE of my family oppose - being the Belfast children they are.

You wanna know about child abuse ? Unless you are as close, or closer than them, you'll never know.

 

[smithcommajohn]

What do you mean I can do better, like this is some sort of fucking contest ???

Isn't it? Nobody really gives a fuck about the human life, right? We're just arguing about whether people should be allowed to do whatever they want. Sounds like a contest to me.

Listen yea, the level of abuse within our care systems is so fucking large it's a scandal that *is*, and is set to further, ROCK THE WHOLE FUCKING ESTABLISHMENT.


You ignorant fucktards.

Visit my Jimmy Savile thread to tide you over until I'm sober enough to argue my point coherently.

... and my *educated* opinion comes from an Irish/ 'British' Roman Catholic background, and I know fine well what the fuck I"m talking about.

Large scale sexual abuse IS institutionalised.

I really don't understand what this has to do with abortion. Call me an ignorant fucktard again, maybe that'll clear things up.

 

[Sinny91]

Well, you ignorant fucktard

I already stated that I'd prefer to abort than hand over a child to an abuse ridden system.

Dunno which part you missed??

 

[smithcommajohn]

Ahh... see? That cleared it up

 

[Bad Itch]

We already have trouble feeding everyone as it is (Re-worded, everyone has trouble getting fed as it is).
The system can't/won't do right by the children who end up in it, and we can't necessarily trust foster care or adoptive parents to do so either (and I'm sure there are better than decent examples of upstanding foster parents who give a modicum of a shit with or without oxytocin poisoning - I might know some).

Pro-life strikes me as somewhat anti-town.

 

[smithcommajohn]

We already have trouble feeding everyone as it is (Re-worded, everyone has trouble getting fed as it is).
The system can't/won't do right by the children who end up in it, and we can't necessarily trust foster care or adoptive parents to do so either (and I'm sure there are better than decent examples of upstanding foster parents who give a modicum of a shit with or without oxytocin poisoning - I might know some).

Pro-life strikes me as somewhat anti-town.

Only scum would say something like this.

/vote Bad Itch

 

[Bad Itch]

Only scum would say something like this.

/vote Bad Itch

No can defense.

I have no regrets! Or children. So, they also have no regrets.

 

[Grayman]

I used to think anarchy and indoctrination were an oxymoron until I met sinny.