Babies say thank you to Virginia

[Anonymous]

This will just result in a bunch of fundraising by PP and NARAK to get the facilities through accreditation. The upside is that this will attract a lot of out-of-state money to VA. The clinics will remain open.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is a fact that the # of abortions are more now than pre-Roe.

It is my opinion that placing more restrictions on abortions will lower their #.

What right do you have to poke your nose into a purely personal matter? If you are pregnant and do not want an abortion, fine, but keep your bloody nose out of my personal business and that of every other woman who has to make this decision.

How do you feel about the death penalty?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a fact that the # of abortions are more now than pre-Roe.

It is my opinion that placing more restrictions on abortions will lower their #.

well I think you are wrong, and if there are more now then there were back then, its prbably due to the increase in population instead of anything else.

no, it is not because of population increases. by any measure (total, percent of population), and using the best guesses of unreported illegal abortions pre-Roe, the number of abortions increased after Roe. Not sure why you would dispute that. It seems clear to me that more people would make that choice if the abortions were safer and more accessible and legal.

as for Virginia, I'm not saying the decrease is going to be substantial. Someone in Richmond who wants an abortion will drive 2 hours to either Northern Virginia (assuming there would be an open clinic here) or Maryland. But others may not be able to afford that drive or it may prolong their decision just enough for them to change their mind and decide to have the baby.

So you think that someone who cannot afford to drive where they can have a safe, legal abortion is a good thing? This same person who cannot afford gas will also not be able to afford a baby. Don't say that she can give her child up for adoption because that is not the solution to unwanted babies who, frequently, are abused.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is a fact that the # of abortions are more now than pre-Roe.

It is my opinion that placing more restrictions on abortions will lower their #.

What right do you have to poke your nose into a purely personal matter? If you are pregnant and do not want an abortion, fine, but keep your bloody nose out of my personal business and that of every other woman who has to make this decision.

How do you feel about the death penalty?

and war, do you think its ok to go to war or occupy another country and kill inoccent people?

[Anonymous]

I'm just as concerned for the baby as I am for the woman carrying it. Why do you only support the woman?

how is the death penalty relevant? Are you saying the babies have committed first degree murder and their abortion is actually an execution?????????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm just as concerned for the baby as I am for the woman carrying it. Why do you only support the woman?

how is the death penalty relevant? Are you saying the babies have committed first degree murder and their abortion is actually an execution?????????

NP here. No, I don't think you care one iota about the woman. I think you are a liar who cares only about her cause, meddling any other women's personal lives.

[Anonymous]

I think that the expression "republicans (conservatives, tea partiers, etc.) only care about children from conception until birth" is right on the money. If you really care about children, all of you anti-choicers out there should be on the front lines supporting health care reform, TANF, increased education spending, etc. Not to mention that you should be major proponents of contraceptives. Otherwise you are hypocrites, big time.

[Anonymous]

yes, because increased education spending leads to better education

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:yes, because increased education spending leads to better education

That's your best response?!? Wow, way to not refute anything said above...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yes, because increased education spending leads to better education

That's your best response?!? Wow, way to not refute anything said above...

because it was such silliness as to not warrant a response. and please show me where increased education funding correlates to higher student achievement. besides, I'm not a Republican so attacks on Republicans are fine. I am pro-baby's-not-being-murdered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yes, because increased education spending leads to better education

That's your best response?!? Wow, way to not refute anything said above...

because it was such silliness as to not warrant a response. and please show me where increased education funding correlates to higher student achievement. besides, I'm not a Republican so attacks on Republicans are fine. I am pro-baby's-not-being-murdered.

Is this Michelle Rhee?!!! You sound just like her.

[Anonymous]

here are the 2005 results. $ per pupil and NAEP scores. There is zero statistical correlation.

State 2005 per pupil spending 2005 NAEP score
AK $10830 980
AL 7066 947
AR 7504 983
AZ 6261 966
CA 8067 956
CO 7730 1,009
CT 11572 1,013
DC 12979 885
DE 10910 1,013
FL 7207 988
GA 8028 977
HI 8997 955
IA 7972 1,012
ID 6283 1,009
IL 8944 991
IN 8798 1,001
KS 7706 1,017
KY 7118 989
LA 7605 960
MA 11267 1,044
MD 9815 997
ME 10106 1,017
MI 9329 1,004
MN 8662 1,029
MO 7717 997
MS 6575 944
MT 8058 1,021
NC 7159 998
ND 8159 1,025
NE 8282 1,010
NH 9448 1,028
NJ 13800 1,020
NM 7580 945
NV 6722 960
NY 14119 1,006
OH 9260 1,015
OK 6613 979
OR 8115 1,000
PA 10552 1,012
RI 10371 982
SC 7555 989
SD 7197 1,020
TN 6729 976
TX 7267 1,000
US 8701 992
UT 5257 1,001
VA 8891 1,018
VT 11835 1,027
WA 7560 1,015
WI 9744 1,013
WV 9005 970
WY 10255 1,016

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it means (i) that abortion clinics need to have better facilities, which can only help the safety of the women getting the procedure done, and (ii) that many clinics will not be able to afford this and shut down.

so that means less babies getting killed.

It doesn't reduce the number of babies being killed, it reduces the number of foetuses being aborted. It is a very different thing.

Exactly. All the unwanted, neglected and abused kids would be better off having not been born. But, since the first poster MUST be involved in childrens' welfare issue on a daily basis, they know that. OTherwise, s/he should shut his/her pie-hole.

[Anonymous]

Also, I plan to give a large sum of money to Planned Parenthood and get WAY more involved in this issue as a result of this (and others like it).

So, at least you "pro life" folks managed that. Well done.

[Anonymous]

This has also convinced me to donate a thousand dollars to planned parenthood. I have never been pro-abortion but I think trying to make the procedure more expensive to price poorer women out of the choice is absolutely despicable. Thank you OP.