Republicans only care for children in the womb

[Obepawn]

Ever notice Republicans seem to only care about babies when they are unborn? When you talk about abortion, they pull their hair, cry, the nashing of teeth and all that so called concern for the unborn child. After the baby is born, where is all that love and compassion? Programs that were designed to help babies and children, they are a against, it's welfare, it's a handout, it's antithetical to their belief system. Where's all that love and concern for their health, and hungry children? The Republican Party has been trying to cut these programs for years. If they love babies soooooo much, why don't they promote adoption?
In fact the Trump administration is actively trying to make it harder for same sex partners to adopt. They rather see that child grow up in the system, then by someone from the LGBTQ community, and system is fucked up. I use to talk to a lot of guys on my caseload who were raised in the system, many of them broken people.

All that love for unborn babies is nothing more than a talking point for their party. Shouldn't that love and concern transcend the womb?

 

[medviper]

Ever notice Republicans seem to only care about babies when they are unborn?

they're just pandering to the evangelical hard right nut jobs, overall they don't give a flying fuck about kids in general, especially non white ones.
the republicans are still tryin to do away with the CHiP's program and make major cuts & slashing funding to the NEA programs in schools.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/10/03/gop-rep-repeatedly-promoted-pro-life-stance-a-week-after-reportedly-telling-mistress-to-get-abortion/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a129fbc69151

 

[Moses Mobetta]

They don't give a rats ass about children period. The only exception maybe rich kids who grow up to be snobby rich white trash bitches like trump. Republicans = fucking the average American as much as they can and I'm sure that's not enough for most of them. How about a Republican adopting a little black baby or a crack baby, ever hear of that

 

[hotrodharley]

They only care about KEEPING THE BABY IN THE WOMB. They don’t care about the baby itself or they would be somewhat concerned about prenatal care. I really wish the promised Rapture would hurry up and clean the Earth of the assholes.

 

[Obepawn]

They don't give a rats ass about children period. The only exception maybe rich kids who grow up to be snobby rich white trash bitches like trump. Republicans = fucking the average American as much as they can and I'm sure that's not enough for most of them. How about a Republican adopting a little black baby or a crack baby, ever hear of that

Never happen. What would the neighbors think? Lol

 

[Obepawn]

They only care about KEEPING THE BABY IN THE WOMB. They don’t care about the baby itself or they would be somewhat concerned about prenatal care. I really wish the promised Rapture would hurry up and clean the Earth of the assholes.

The Isley Brothers have an old song that basically says the same thing. ”Harvest for the world”. There's a part towards the end of the song that I really love:

”Gather every man, gather every woman, celebrate your lives, give thanks for your children. Gather everyone, gather altogether, overlooking none, hoping life gets better, for the world”.

 

[racerboy71]

republicans, the pro fetus party.

 

[squarepush3r]

After the baby is born, where is all that love and compassion?

Not killing a baby is just a right to life. It doesn't cost anything, you have it too. There is a big difference between saying someone shouldn't be killed, and saying that the government needs to redistribute wealth to pay for health care/food/housing, etc...

To make a proper comparison, you would have to find politicians advocating for actually killing poor children. I don't think you are going to find anyone advocating for post-birth abortion on a poor 6 year old child.

 

[Unclebaldrick]

Not killing a baby is just a right to life. It doesn't cost anything, you have it too. There is a big difference between saying someone shouldn't be killed, and saying that the government needs to redistribute wealth to pay for health care/food/housing, etc...

To make a proper comparison, you would have to find politicians advocating for actually killing poor children. I don't think you are going to find anyone advocating for post-birth abortion on a poor 6 year old child.

Your mom might.

 

[medviper]

I don't think you are going to find anyone advocating for post-birth abortion on a poor 6 year old child.

trumps administrations only allows that procedure for migrant children in US custody...

A 6th migrant child died while in US custody
The Lead
A 10-year-old migrant girl died in September 2018 while in the care of the Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Refugee Resettlement, according to department spokesman Mark Weber. Her death predates five other migrant children known to have died recently after traveling to the US and being apprehended by federal authorities. CNN's Nick Valencia reports.
Source: CNN

 

[Grandpapy]

Not killing a baby is just a right to life. It doesn't cost anything, you have it too. There is a big difference between saying someone shouldn't be killed, and saying that the government needs to redistribute wealth to pay for health care/food/housing, etc...

To make a proper comparison, you would have to find politicians advocating for actually killing poor children. I don't think you are going to find anyone advocating for post-birth abortion on a poor 6 year old child.

The good thing about it, it keep the prisons full. Got your stocks?

 

[Moses Mobetta]

Not killing a baby is just a right to life. It doesn't cost anything, you have it too. There is a big difference between saying someone shouldn't be killed, and saying that the government needs to redistribute wealth to pay for health care/food/housing, etc...

To make a proper comparison, you would have to find politicians advocating for actually killing poor children. I don't think you are going to find anyone advocating for post-birth abortion on a poor 6 year old child.

Republicans have no problem redistributing wealth when the money is going to those who are already wealthy and clearly not paying their fair share to begin with. Inflicting poverty on Americans is what Republicans do, then they dont want to have any assistance programs to help the people who they have fucked over. Gold star families are now paying much more, they fucked our veterans families over good with the new tax code. Fuck Republicans and their bullshit

 

[Fogdog]

Not killing a baby is just a right to life. It doesn't cost anything, you have it too. There is a big difference between saying someone shouldn't be killed, and saying that the government needs to redistribute wealth to pay for health care/food/housing, etc...

To make a proper comparison, you would have to find politicians advocating for actually killing poor children. I don't think you are going to find anyone advocating for post-birth abortion on a poor 6 year old child.

her body, her choice.

 

[Rob Roy]

Ever notice Republicans seem to only care about babies when they are unborn? When you talk about abortion, they pull their hair, cry, the nashing of teeth and all that so called concern for the unborn child. After the baby is born, where is all that love and compassion? Programs that were designed to help babies and children, they are a against, it's welfare, it's a handout, it's antithetical to their belief system. Where's all that love and concern for their health, and hungry children? The Republican Party has been trying to cut these programs for years. If they love babies soooooo much, why don't they promote adoption?
In fact the Trump administration is actively trying to make it harder for same sex partners to adopt. They rather see that child grow up in the system, then by someone from the LGBTQ community, and system is fucked up. I use to talk to a lot of guys on my caseload who were raised in the system, many of them broken people.

All that love for unborn babies is nothing more than a talking point for their party. Shouldn't that love and concern transcend the womb?

Good question, but a bit assumptive.

It seems that you consider forcing a person to pay for another persons children(s) upkeep as charitable, without any actual basis or proof that it is charitable.

Perhaps you could explain why you think "solutions" which begin with force could possibly qualify as
charity ? Isn't forcing a person to expend their energy on endeavors they don't want to, a form of slavery?

Isn't taking a persons money against their will, theft?

Please explain.

 

[squarepush3r]

Republicans have no problem redistributing wealth when the money is going to those who are already wealthy and clearly not paying their fair share to begin with. Inflicting poverty on Americans is what Republicans do, then they dont want to have any assistance programs to help the people who they have fucked over. Gold star families are now paying much more, they fucked our veterans families over good with the new tax code. Fuck Republicans and their bullshit

Still not an argument. You would have to Republicans actually calling for killing of poor children to be consistent.

We have SNAP which gives about $5000 per year to poor children for food.

 

[Obepawn]

Still not an argument. You would have to Republicans actually calling for killing of poor children to be consistent.

We have SNAP which gives about $5000 per year to poor children for food.

They are trying to cut that program as well as social security, Medicare and Medicaid. It just seems to me that any program designed to help the poor and less fortunate, they want to shit can.

 

[Fogdog]

Still not an argument. You would have to Republicans actually calling for killing of poor children to be consistent.

We have SNAP which gives about $5000 per year to poor children for food.

What does that have to do with a woman's right to privacy when making medical choices?

 

[medviper]

Perhaps you could explain why you think "solutions" which begin with force could possibly qualify as charity ? Isn't forcing a person to expend their energy on endeavors they don't want to, a form of slavery?
Isn't taking a persons money against their will, theft?

do you feel the similar sort of victimization when you are "forced" to pay for & plug up the nearly two trillion dollar hole in the fed so the elitist 1% enjoy a permanent tax holiday an further out of pocket inflation cost due to tariffs?
or are you one of the unaffected 1%?
seems like you don't mind paying "charity" as long as it doesn't go to the ones who need the assistance the most.

 

[Obepawn]

Good question, but a bit assumptive.

It seems that you consider forcing a person to pay for another persons children(s) upkeep as charitable, without any actual basis or proof that it is charitable.

Perhaps you could explain why you think "solutions" which begin with force could possibly qualify as
charity ? Isn't forcing a person to expend their energy on endeavors they don't want to, a form of slavery?

Isn't taking a persons money against their will, theft?

Please explain.

It's my opinion based on observation of their policies and talking points.

 

[Moses Mobetta]

The best argument against republicans is themselves and their own arguments / policies, of course a person has to be smart enough to see through their bullshit, the rest just get caught up in it and consumed by it. The economy is a magical beast that rears its head uncontrollably, rich people create jobs, the more money rich people have the better off we are. How come the 100 poorest counties in the US are straight red? How come the areas of the US where education is the worst are republican? How come over the course of my entire life when republicans get in control the economy is suddenly in a recession? Fuck republicans and their fuck the working class Americans agenda