Skip to main content

Sen. Johnson,
I would like to know what is so special about fetus's that they have to be saved, besides that they could be born and become wonderful people. I understand that if a child is wanted, it is very beautiful, no matter how the child is. But if the child is unwanted, why force the woman to give birth? It is especially gives little consideration to poor, powerless (in the sense of political, work, or society (family, friends)). A lot of women who do not want a child, but have to have one do not have the wherewithal to raise it, and you do not want to help them - they should help themselves; it is like we are paying them to make babies; why should we help them for making a poor choice; there are more important things to spend our tax dollars on; etc. You know that a lot of the women who are being forced to have these unwanted children are people of color, and it is already expected that white people will be a minority in twenty (20) years or so. Is this what you want – sooner?
I understand that you are concerned with protecting our interests, especially business related, with respect to foreign countries (the defense budget, foreign aid), so you agree to fund those parts of the federal budget. I agree that the anarchic international climate makes this important, but there is a balance to be adjusted to. We have a lot of needs here at home that need money, and that should be increased, especially women who would have gotten abortions should be able to financially support, if that is their choice, this child you have forced them to have. It would be a difficult decision to choose which programs deserve funding, and which do not.
What is so special about an unwanted fetus that women should not have the choice of abortion? “Might be...” is not a proper answer. I am asking about the fetus, not the future possibilities, those are more important/appropriate for wanted babies.  As a good Libertarian I do not see it as proper for the government to interfere with the women's right to abort a fetus.  Sen. Johnson is not really a good Libertarian, more of a Republican party hack - their plank on women is they should be barefoot, pregnant, and chained to the stove.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

http://www.gmtoday.com/news/front/topstory026.asp I would like to know what the whistleblower said that the president thought was 'incorrect?'  It was a transcript, so it must have been what the president was saying in fact, or is black white?  Maybe the complaint what was said not as it was intended, but, sometimes, the president denies the obvious to his own glory.  I have not read the transcript or the whistleblower complaint, but the general consensus is that the president was breaking the law.  I have read elsewhere that the president said the whistleblower is a spy & this is a Democratic plot to do him in.  Do the employees of the government, especially Central Intelligence  Agency employees, have to take an oath supporting the Constitution and laws of the country?  If this person did take the oath, would what he did be part of upholding his oath?
Post a Comment
Read more
Speaking of how much or how far Sen. Johnson will go in support of Pres. Trump, I wonder how he squares Pres. Trump's helping women get abortions with his own or his parties stand on abortion? I do suppose it is possible that the president and his immediate family has not had anything to do with any women getting abortions, but if you believe that I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell to you. I, personally know of a handful of women who have had to obtain abortions, and I am sure there were options they could have chosen other than abortion, but they did not. As a good libertarian, I am not in a position to tell them no.
Post a Comment
Read more
      As the impeachment story rolls on, I would like to have Sen. Johnson answer a simple yes or no question. Should a public officeholder use his office to enhance his reelection? If I remember right, this was the situation that caused Chuck Chvala so many problems.      There is a lot about Pres. Trump that has incited a lot of problems for our country, our image not the least, as well as trade and relations with our neighbors, Mexico & Canada, so let us pare it down to this question. I suppose that Sen. Johnson could claim that Pres. Trump was not doing partisan politics during the phone call to Ukraine. That just calls into question Sen. Johnson's perception, or his unquestioning support of a president doing whatever he can to get reelected. It may be that Sen. Johnson could say that it is not an impeachable crime, but, as noted above, the legal system disagrees with him. The president should not be above the law. If this o...
Post a Comment
Read more