Reasons for having an Abortion
Jill Stanek listed one of those reasons in her blog. It's a popular one.
Money
Actually the article is titled "The financial burden of nonaborted children" and points out an interesting fear by a proAbort named Robyn Limberg-Child.
http://www.thetimesherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050901/OPINION02/509010334/1014/OPINION
"If legally-recognized "life" begins at conception, there will be serious economic ramifications. Currently, dependent exemptions on taxes are only permitted for children that are alive outside the womb. But if life starts at conception, so too should "dependent" status."
I always thought it was outrageous that proAborts would bring up money as a reason to kill a human being, but this one is really funny!
Let me get this right...Robyn Limberg-Child believes that it would be a burden on our economy to have children because people will be able to get a tax deduction? What am I missing here? I thought the age-old financial argument was that people who were poor were having abortions because they couldn't afford the child?
This is good. I don't think Ms. Limberg-Child understands what she is saying. How can you make the argument that poor people can't afford to have children, but if you give them money when they are pregnant, it is a burden? It certainly isn't a burden to the mother who is now getting a tax write-off is it?
The most important and most chilling statement by Ms. Limberg-Child is this one:
"As a nation we have to realize there is a practical, economic side to the abortion issue that too often is ignored by opponents of reproductive choice, because the warm, fuzzy image of a newborn baby is much more likely to win converts to their cause."
Shades of Margaret Sanger don't you think? Yep, that one sent a chill down my spine just like the first day I read one of her books.
It is "practical" and "economic" to kill human beings so they won't burden society.
It is "practical" and "economic" to make sure people who live in poverty don't breed and soak the wealth from the rich with their pregnancies.
Eugenics is becoming ingrained in the moral fabric of society more and more.
Kill the weak
Kill the elderly
Kill those who burden others
Kill the sick
Kill the unborn
But that discussion is for another day.
Do your part to help end abortion. We all have our individual tasks, but we must unite once a month for the Call for Life at http://www.marchtogether.com.
We will stop abortion through our proLife unity!
Money
Actually the article is titled "The financial burden of nonaborted children" and points out an interesting fear by a proAbort named Robyn Limberg-Child.
http://www.thetimesherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050901/OPINION02/509010334/1014/OPINION
"If legally-recognized "life" begins at conception, there will be serious economic ramifications. Currently, dependent exemptions on taxes are only permitted for children that are alive outside the womb. But if life starts at conception, so too should "dependent" status."
I always thought it was outrageous that proAborts would bring up money as a reason to kill a human being, but this one is really funny!
Let me get this right...Robyn Limberg-Child believes that it would be a burden on our economy to have children because people will be able to get a tax deduction? What am I missing here? I thought the age-old financial argument was that people who were poor were having abortions because they couldn't afford the child?
This is good. I don't think Ms. Limberg-Child understands what she is saying. How can you make the argument that poor people can't afford to have children, but if you give them money when they are pregnant, it is a burden? It certainly isn't a burden to the mother who is now getting a tax write-off is it?
The most important and most chilling statement by Ms. Limberg-Child is this one:
"As a nation we have to realize there is a practical, economic side to the abortion issue that too often is ignored by opponents of reproductive choice, because the warm, fuzzy image of a newborn baby is much more likely to win converts to their cause."
Shades of Margaret Sanger don't you think? Yep, that one sent a chill down my spine just like the first day I read one of her books.
It is "practical" and "economic" to kill human beings so they won't burden society.
It is "practical" and "economic" to make sure people who live in poverty don't breed and soak the wealth from the rich with their pregnancies.
Eugenics is becoming ingrained in the moral fabric of society more and more.
Kill the weak
Kill the elderly
Kill those who burden others
Kill the sick
Kill the unborn
But that discussion is for another day.
Do your part to help end abortion. We all have our individual tasks, but we must unite once a month for the Call for Life at http://www.marchtogether.com.
We will stop abortion through our proLife unity!
posted by Peter Shinn at 10:10 PM
<< Home