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

Popular posts from this blog

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7495649/Donald-Trump-says-Nobel-Peace-Prize-gave-fairly.html I am sure that anyone willing to blow another country off the map deserves a Nobel Peace prize, or maybe not.  But no matter, he could probably buy one like he did for his Purple Heart, with just as much meaning behind his acquiring it.  This, by the way, is how he creates his 'machismo' with all those super-models.  Ya know, if you can not earn it, buy it.
I have heard that the National Rifle Association has tax exempt status. Why is that? I find it hard to believe that they deserve it, unless you think it is a religious organization. I do not approve of their propaganda about guns, and do not think that they deserve being tax exempt.

Politics and Economics

06/06/12 08:33:26 PM Politics and Economics Politics: the Art of how resources are shared (someone said the Aristotle said this). It really makes politics sound easy: whose gold is it? whose land is that? who has rights to the waterhole? Etc, etc. Economics is something else altogether. I do not have a succinct definition for it, but we all know it is the study of resources and how they effect society. Our national debt is one resource that is in the public eye because there is so much of it and controversy. Like the laws of the United States of America, there is not a definitive book or source of information about it. You know it is there and some have an idea of how much it is and how it accumulates, but just how much it is and who it is owed to is ambiguous. It is obvious what our national debt is for: to pay for stuff we want as dictated by our representatives in Congress. The politics comes in here: do we pay for a war? do we pay unemployment? do we pay for ...