I think we can prevent many abortions by providing the option of sterilization. The state of Texas offered it to women who recieved prenatal care, birth and hospitalization on the taxpayer dime and who had 2 or more children (counting the newborn) It prevents these women from coming back for additional services if they don't want another baby. My ex-husband and I had just moved to Texas and hadn't been at our jobs long enough to get insured yet. After I was lucky enough for them to pay for my little broken condom, I chose the tax payer funded sterilization. I don't feel bad about accepting the aid since temporary situations are what they are designed for. It's a good investment for everyone as it ensures the mother doesn't become a pregnancy turnstile, therfore keeping her in the workforce producing and paying taxes. A tubal ligation is steralization and reversible if the women so chooses at a later date BTW.
HOW IN THE FUCK ARE THEY NOT TERRORISTS?! THEY'RE DESTROYING SHIT! MOTHER FUCKING PERIOD! END OF DISCUSSION! NO MORE COMMENTS! THAT'S IT! THERE'S NOTHING MORE!
I agree. Abortion cannot be seen as a real option. I am not really a fan of sterilisation either... It reeks of Eugenics. but birth control, yes. Birth control is reversible. All you have to do is stop taking the pill, or not wear a condom. -The problem with making abortion illegal is that in cases where it is illegal, that automatically makes it unregulated. Criminals quickly fill the gaps, and those who find themselves pregnant and desparate, will know where to look. And once they are in the hands of the organised criminals who do these abortions, they will be at their mercy. The backyard abortionists will not provide any alternatives, as can be mandated if abortion is legal, they will be all too glad to take these vulnerable people in, perhaps providing usurious loans to pay for these abortions. Then once these abortions are carried out, they are beholden to criminals.-
Yes they are terrorists in the same way abortionists are murderers. I can think of nothing more despicible than scrambling the helpless body of a tiny fetus. The only socialist leaning I have is that I support FREE government distributed birth control and sterilization. It prevents unwanted babies from being ripped apart while also not forcing women to become mothers. It would in the long run save the taxpayers a fortune in social program fund distribution and prevent poverty.
peoople who do that must be idiots, because if they are against abortion then they are pro-life, meaning all life, and the buildings they bomb probably have people in them...they are sort of terrorists, but mostly just huge hypocrites who aren't good at solving problems
If attacks are against citizenry, it's terrorism. If against government or rule, it's anarchy, a definite difference and often overlooked. The good old US of A was founded on anarchy, not terrorism.
Going with Bmccue7's definition, yes. They are on a much smaller scale than other well-known terrorist organizations, and often, are only one or two people in a local area, not really organized at all. But yes, they are small-time terrorists. Not only that, they are hypocrits.
they go on & on about killing a human life but bombing does the same thing......idiots....
Yes clearly. By definition.
I think we can prevent many abortions by providing the option of sterilization. The state of Texas offered it to women who recieved prenatal care, birth and hospitalization on the taxpayer dime and who had 2 or more children (counting the newborn) It prevents these women from coming back for additional services if they don't want another baby. My ex-husband and I had just moved to Texas and hadn't been at our jobs long enough to get insured yet. After I was lucky enough for them to pay for my little broken condom, I chose the tax payer funded sterilization. I don't feel bad about accepting the aid since temporary situations are what they are designed for. It's a good investment for everyone as it ensures the mother doesn't become a pregnancy turnstile, therfore keeping her in the workforce producing and paying taxes. A tubal ligation is steralization and reversible if the women so chooses at a later date BTW.
eloquently stated.
HOW IN THE FUCK ARE THEY NOT TERRORISTS?! THEY'RE DESTROYING SHIT! MOTHER FUCKING PERIOD! END OF DISCUSSION! NO MORE COMMENTS! THAT'S IT! THERE'S NOTHING MORE!
I agree. Abortion cannot be seen as a real option. I am not really a fan of sterilisation either... It reeks of Eugenics. but birth control, yes. Birth control is reversible. All you have to do is stop taking the pill, or not wear a condom. -The problem with making abortion illegal is that in cases where it is illegal, that automatically makes it unregulated. Criminals quickly fill the gaps, and those who find themselves pregnant and desparate, will know where to look. And once they are in the hands of the organised criminals who do these abortions, they will be at their mercy. The backyard abortionists will not provide any alternatives, as can be mandated if abortion is legal, they will be all too glad to take these vulnerable people in, perhaps providing usurious loans to pay for these abortions. Then once these abortions are carried out, they are beholden to criminals.-
Yes they are terrorists in the same way abortionists are murderers. I can think of nothing more despicible than scrambling the helpless body of a tiny fetus. The only socialist leaning I have is that I support FREE government distributed birth control and sterilization. It prevents unwanted babies from being ripped apart while also not forcing women to become mothers. It would in the long run save the taxpayers a fortune in social program fund distribution and prevent poverty.
peoople who do that must be idiots, because if they are against abortion then they are pro-life, meaning all life, and the buildings they bomb probably have people in them...they are sort of terrorists, but mostly just huge hypocrites who aren't good at solving problems
More of an insurgence, or possibly a revolution. Definately more organised than anarchy.
If attacks are against citizenry, it's terrorism. If against government or rule, it's anarchy, a definite difference and often overlooked. The good old US of A was founded on anarchy, not terrorism.
Going with Bmccue7's definition, yes. They are on a much smaller scale than other well-known terrorist organizations, and often, are only one or two people in a local area, not really organized at all. But yes, they are small-time terrorists. Not only that, they are hypocrits.
If the definition of a terrorist is someone who uses violence or the threat of violence to effect politcal change, then yes.