You keep bringing it up so questions need
to be asked.
We have had this conversation before so I
agree it doesn’t need a rehash but my post
above isn’t assumptions it’s reality for a single
woman.
I know you make exceptions for women when
there life is in jeopardy and extreme medical
complications and I’m not arguing for abortion
and as stated before women don’t use abortion
like birth control or without it affecting them
personally.
If Roe v Wade were overturned republicans would
lose a campaign slogan and women would be
subjected to back alley clinics and death rates
for both women and children would sky rocket.
The specific targeting of women’s clinics by anti
abortion crazy people who kill doctors are very
sick individuals who have no right to publicly
harass and publish doctors addresses and what cars
they drive and stalk and kill doctors are extremely
dangerous people and yet it still happens today.
Sorry, Dan, your post hit a raw nerve; it wasn't your fault. In my view, abortion became a major issue as a result of the current welfare system which goes back to the sixties and Lyndon Johnson’s "Great Society" programs. These programs were supposed to be so generous, but their principal effect was to split families because, as implemented, the welfare system that resulted from their labor was paid only to single women with dependent children and in practice the welfare was cut off if a man was found in the house.
The presumption of which I speak is that it needed to be this way. And because it was this way, abortion became a major issue.
But it didn’t need to be this way. On the evening of August 8, 1969, President Richard Nixon proposed an alternate plan in an address to the nation. In his address, he proposed what he called a Family Assistance Plan (FAP) which would have provided families with an annual guaranteed minimum income (GMI). In today’s dollars, per his proposal, the annual benefit for a family of four with zero earned income would have been about $10,000, but as earned family income increased, the benefit was reduced such that for every dollar earned, the benefit was reduced 50 cents. Thus, the graduated benefit would end with an earned income of about $20,000. (In 1969 dollars, the proposal was an annual benefit of $500 for each adult and $300 per child.)
The great virtues of the plan were that it encouraged the family unit and marriage and ended the distinction between the working and non-working poor since both working and non-working could receive a benefit from the program.
Unfortunately, while it twice passed the House with large bipartisan majorities, it stalled in the Senate largely because the Chairman of the Finance Committee, Russell Long, a southern Democrat, opposed it. The ranking member, John Williams of Delaware also opposed it, but that is largely beside the point since the Democrats held a large majority in the Senate at the time. Regardless, it was a missed opportunity of monumental proportions which has resulted in the miserable welfare system we have to this day, abortion as a major issue and the presumption contained in your post. Cliff
