Pro-lifers force US to slash Third World aid

[afro-elf]

I tried to post earlier but I had computer problems

Hmmm.

as for science saying IT is alive. a few cells, a zygote, a fetus the same? different?

a vast majority of deaths due to pain and suffering that is practically assured to to lack of resources

very slim chance a "possibilty" of some "savior" will be born. do you sacrifice millions in the hope for one?

A least Cirdan has adopted and I THINK he is pro-choice.

for all those who think the CHOICE should be taken away. I do not see ALL prolifers adopting kids. if they were SO into saving this kids why don't they adopt more.

for each child you birth you should adopt one. that would give a lot of homes to needy kids AND give you one of your flesh and blood.

hell if every prolifer at age 18 adopted a child I wonder what would happen...?

put up or shut up.

I think its easy to tell someone what to do but put your money where you mouth is. YOU go out a raise ALL the children that are hungery and dying. Don't go to school anymore. just get a job or two and raise some one else's kids.

what's worse to stop extra misery and help those that are already here. your to constanstly feed the pain and agony machine.

Darth Tater why do you assume that or I should say state the word fetus and use examples like partial birth abortains.

There are early terms abortians and morning after pills etc.

Why do you target the "extreme" again i say
as for science saying IT is alive. a few cells, a zygote, a fetus the same? different?

we in the west have it easy we have resources. But in 3rd world countries they don't

I think it FAR cruel to subjectigate millions to a TRULY miserable life in the 3rd world. ( not the BS problems in the west)
that will be short brutish and nasty than to prevent it.

what kinda BS is this I respect life some much that I want you to suffer.

This is about the 3rd world baby NOT the west. WE have resources and education they don't. thought disagree with you, your arguments have more clout info a westernized world but for the 3rd world it is vile and cruel.

preventing suffereing from an ( EARLY TERM) abortian compared to a life of misery.

Its easy for high shoolers, hausfrau, men, westerners in general to say such things with food on your plate, education etc to be so noble

but you watch children die day after day, of sickeness, poverty, with no access to things we take for granted, like FOOD, SHELTER, CLOTHING, EDUCATION. You look into a mothers eyes who has lost ALL of her offspring because she does not have access to such basic things as mentioned above.

life aint no bowl of !@##$%^& cherries for most people alive, it is short brutish and nasty for most people alive an if you think it is noble to condemn someone to that kind of life I can do without your type of noblity.

recall that family planning does not equal abortion its more involved than that, my argument is for the 3rd world, IF it comes to that EARLY term abortions.

[Darth Tater]

Science is not completely sure on when a human becomes a human, but the time is being moved earlier and earlier. Should we risk murdering what could be a living human being, or should we wait till we know for sure when it becomes alive? The answer seems obvious.

As for the issue of abortion preventing the likelihood of dying. My god there is no logic there.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Darth Tater
As for the issue of abortion preventing the likelihood of dying. My god there is no logic there.

It's ironic huh? Terminate, and kill the special little guy quickly - terminations last all of 5 minutes - or drag it out for years... Hmm. Decisions, decisions. Let the baby live an AIDs ridden, food/resource impoverished life, or terminate?

I think you're missing the point though. Family Planning is about prevention, health care, and natal/post natal care more than it is about terminations. By pulling the funding for - lets face it - nothing more than a political maneuver is just diabolical. How many third world mothers are going to miss out on crucial health care, and check ups because of this pig headedness?

[Darth Tater]

BoP, listen to yourself, you're saying murder is alright if it's quick and relatively painless. Let me guess, you think doctor assisted suicide is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

How many third world mothers are going to miss out on crucial health care, and check ups because of this pig headedness?

None. The UN can get the funding without the US.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Darth Tater
BoP, listen to yourself, you're saying murder is alright if it's quick and relatively painless.

Don't be such a twat. I was being ironic.

Let me guess, you think doctor assisted suicide is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Well, not the greatest thing since sliced bread... Sliced bread is pretty special you know!

None. The UN can get the funding without the US.

Oh please. They've just had a huge chunk of their funding taken away. Yes, they could probably raise some more money, but in the meantime, there is going to be women going without healthcare, and so forth.

[Darth Tater]

Not if the UN takes out the abortion part. Welcome to the happy go lucky world of politics!

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Darth Tater
Not if the UN takes out the abortion part. Welcome to the happy go lucky world of politics!

And therein your logic fails. Abortions are cheaper than trying to feed hungry mouths.

(Ah go on, I know you want to misinterpret that... )

[afro-elf]

So you would rather a human to suffer than to prevent it from being born to prevent suffering.

Again I am stating this from 3rd world early termination

[emplynx]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
they're doomed to die! Either of starvation, or aids, or something worse!

So because they are doomed to die you want the parents to be able to just kill them? You're doomed do die, I bet you are glad your parents didn't just murder you in the womb!

[afro-elf]

So because they are doomed to die you want the parents to be able to just kill them? You're doomed do die, I bet you are glad your parents didn't just murder you in the womb!

we have the benefits of living in NON 3rd countries.

ours problems are not like theirs

[Wayfarer]

I have a question:

Should the US continue to fund the UN even though we know the money is going to be used in a way that the overwhelming majority of our citizens condemn?

On the other side of the coin:

Should we withdraw funding from a number obviously beneficial projects just because some of that funding might be diverted to immoral uses?

[Earniel]

I can't believe what I'm reading here, I really can't. A lot of you support this just because it'll show the rest that 'abortion is bad'? Are you that blind? We're not talking about the west here with it's orphanages and it's social cares. We're talking about third world countries where every mouth too much can cause an entire family to starve. To let one child too many being born is condemning more to die. Isn't that murder too? Most children don't even survive the first three years.

Third world countries already have a large natality, soon there are too many to feed. There are already too many to feed, 800 million people are starving. And this program isn't just about abortion, it was a clever move from anti-abortiongroups to target only abortion but it's much more than that.

[elendili]

This is a very moral issue so it ismpossible for anybody to be right I think it is cruel to terminate a pregnancy just because it wouldn't have a perfect life, noone has. Rather than working on Family Planning the UN should work on improving quality of life by providing integrated help so rather than giving a family a huge sack of meat they could give a goat with feed for it to provide milk so calcium for the growing children and the family could sell the excess milk for an income terminating pregnancies is no solution to the problem of the 3rd world

[Darth Tater]

I simply don't see the logic of those who say the child should be "terminated" so they're not born into poverty. This is not a dog or cat we're talking about here, it's a human being! There is no gaurantee of an untimely death, though yes, it is likely. But with abortion it's a gaurantee.

[emplynx]

Originally posted by Darth Tater
I simply don't see the logic of those who say the child should be "terminated" so they're not born into poverty. This is not a dog or cat we're talking about here, it's a human being! There is no gaurantee of an untimely death, though yes, it is likely. But with abortion it's a gaurantee.

AMEN TATER! Preach it Brother!

[Cirdan]

The Western view of abortion is totally lost on people in cultures were life is not valued. The main reason birth rates are high in these countries is becuase of the high infant mortality rates.

It may make you feel good about yourself to think you've saved a life by not funding abortion as part of family planning, but that is the only thing that will be accomplished. The child will die slowly and concious as opposed to quickly anf unconcious.

Until we make a commitment to feed every starving child, then the funding should continue.

Oh, and the UN bashers are completely uninformed. Who is first on the scene in crises around the world? Who sends peace keepers and aid workers into the most horrific situations? If they had better funding there was a chance that the Rawanda tragedy could have been averted, but as it was the contingent there was limited to saving a few children still clinging to the dead bodies of thier parents.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Cirdan
Oh, and the UN bashers are completely uninformed. Who is first on the scene in crises around the world? Who sends peace keepers and aid workers into the most horrific situations? If they had better funding there was a chance that the Rawanda tragedy could have been averted, but as it was the contingent there was limited to saving a few children still clinging to the dead bodies of thier parents.

I'm not uninformed - I just think the US should leave the UN. We get criticized for everything we do and we're usually the main suppliers for the humanitarian aid and everything else when the UN wants to do something. The only reason the UN failed in Rawanda was because the US refused to do anything because of what happened to us in Somalia. Oh and I don't criticize the UN for the aid work they do - I criticize them for the political wrangling and their inability to do what they were started for in the first place - which to prevent conflicts or bring warring parties to the negotiating table. The US is usually the one playing peacekeeper in that regard.

Getting back on topic though - I find it funny how everyone is screaming that if the US slashes funding to the UN family planning program and other third world aid packages run by the UN that it'll cause dire consequences in Africa. If the cutting of funding from ONE nation is going to cause those kinds of problems - maybe it's becuase other countries don't support enough. It seems to me what everyone is saying is that the United States is supposed to save the world. I think some other countries can pick up the slack. If more countries took a larger more active role - Americans might not be as arrogant.

Also - as I've said - the US government is voted in by American citizens. Our government is supposed to listen to the people. Just because your countries may have no problems with abortions and stuff - doesn't mean that our country doesn't. At this moment in time - I don't have a problem with 1st term abortions - but the partial birth thing - is completely gross and sick. If the UN advocates forced sterilization or abortions - then I am for the elimination of funding. Why shouldn't the US tie our funding to causes it believes in? I don't donate to the Young Communists of America organisation. I make a choice to donate to the people that support what I believe in. Maybe the UN should just create an "abortion/sterilization" fund seperate from the general health care and education. Then those countries that support that can donate to that fund and the US can choose where it's money goes.