Now
Fair
51°
High
51°
Low
29°
Full Forecast

Jobs

Cars

Homes

Rentals

Alerts

Subscribe
Home > Opinion > Letters
Bookmark Us   •   Make Us Your Homepage

Letters, 10/1: Not ready for no abortions

Comments 72 comment(s)  
E-mail Story E-mail Story
Print Story Print Story
Share  Share
Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

Wednesday, Oct 01, 2008 - 12:50:24 am CDT

While I agree with Jennifer Gutierrez’s opinion (LJS, Sept. 27) that abortions should not need to happen and that all children should be welcomed into loving and nurturing homes, I’m not ready to make them illegal, yet.

It concerns me that the anti-abortion, right-to-life crowd always ends their debate with a warm and healthy child emerging from the womb. However, while they are jumping around and high-fiving each other celebrating the arrival of yet another baby in the world, I am doing some math.

Jennifer states that 700 children are aborted each year in Lancaster County. That’s one giant high school graduating class. Where will the tax dollars come from to build the massive schools these infants will one day need?

While we’re at it, they also might enjoy some parks, day-care centers and clinics. We might even want to staff them with qualified nurses and teachers.

I will make the right-to-lifers a deal. The day they finish construction on the first high school, middle school, grade school, clinic, park and day-care center and pass the massive tax increase to finance the continued construction and staffing requirements year after year after year, I will relent and cast my vote to outlaw abortion.

Paul Knopp, Lincoln

Intermill better candidate

I was one of the dozen or so in attendance at last week’s County Board debates sponsored by the Lincoln/Lancaster League of Women Voters. It is now clear to me who the better candidate is: Nancy Intermill.

Mr. Bernie Heier, her opponent, spent most of his time talking about continuing to do things the way he’s always done them. Ms. Intermill talked about her vision for more city-county coordination, a more in-depth look at undertaking large spending projects and thoughtful examination of greenbelt exemption policy, which impacts all Lancaster County residents whether they farm or not.

I was also displeased to see Mr. Heier attack Ms. Intermill by saying her support of community corrections programs would put violent criminals out on the street. That’s not the case, and she said so. Mr. Heier should be ashamed of his performance.

I hope others go to the city Web site, where they can watch the debate firsthand. They will see that the choice in this race is clear.

C.J. Zimmer, Lincoln

Right road not right choice

We are standing at the fork in the road. The left fork leads to a collapsed economy, a depression, a hard existence. The right fork leads to a socialist government. It sure looks like a simple choice: Take the right road. But is that the right choice? There’s an expression “no pain, no gain,” which truly fits here.

If we bail out the financial sector, we’ll have no pain, but we lose. Our life will be at the whim of the government. They will own everything. If we take the left road, it’ll be a hard road, but we’ll have opportunities and chances. We can rebuild this nation. It will be painful, but we have so much to gain by taking the left road.

Jo-Ann Feller, Lincoln

Huskers give hospitality

I’m a Colorado Hokie who just returned home from the Virginia Tech/Nebraska game Saturday night. It was the first home Husker game I ever had the privilege of attending, and I certainly hope to do so again.

I had heard about how great Husker fans were, and I’ll have to say they exceeded my expectations. Everywhere we went, Huskers came up to us and welcomed us to Lincoln and thanked us for coming. Hopefully, Virginia Tech can match that special Husker hospitality next year in Blacksburg. Go Big Red — beat Mizzou!

Dee Laird, Montrose, Colo.

Create incentives to lend

This bailout is for us. It should not be for these corporations. Especially corporations that prey on people. The banks that preyed on people deserve what they have coming to them. This is a classic story of greed and taking advantage of people.

Now the banks want taxpayers to buy their mortgage-backed securities and make them liquid enough to survive. This is the last bastion of the greed scenario. This is a continuation of the greed and trying to fleece people.

What we need is an incentive to lend. I am OK with helping the banks if it helps Americans. I like the idea of giving lenders insurance and guarantees of profitability if they follow prudent rules lending to people. There would be different standards/rules for different types of loans. The borrower and lender must follow the provisions to be guaranteed a certain percentage of the loans would be paid back in default. (For example, 80 cents on the dollar for credit card debt, 98 cents on the dollar for housing debt, etc. …) This would be a two- to five-year deal with it scaling back in years three, four and five. This would allow prudent lenders who got caught up in the lending frenzy a way to earn their way out of their problems.

The incentive should be geared toward lending and away from buying bad assets.

That way, we encourage the banks that have made better decisions to make good decisions going forward. If we don’t create incentives to lend, they won’t lend except to the top creditworthy clients.

Joe Slechta, Lincoln


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Letters > Back to Top of Story

Post Your Comment

Standards and Rules
All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Hide Comments Hide Comments   Newest First Newest First  
No to status quo wrote on October 1, 2008 1:24 am:
" It is time to change the status quo and get some fresh ideas on the board. Bernie and Larry have been at it too long. Vote smart this year and vote the good ole' boys off the board. "

 The two forks... wrote on October 1, 2008 4:52 am:
" Unfortunately Jo-Ann, both roads lead to a collapsed economy. One is backed by the deep pocketed federal government though, and is thus a safer option. Moronic people making moronic decisions led to this crisis. And morons don't deserve to, nor have they the ability to succeed in a free market economy. People are lucky the government is likely going to swing this bailout. That is, if you ever want to be able to take out a loan again, or if you ever want to have a job where your employers can take out short term loans for payrolls to pay you. "

 Ken wrote on October 1, 2008 6:10 am:
" Mr. Knopp
It appers your concern is strictly financial, so I guess because we are having financial difficult in our school system now we should just illiminate a few teenagers? Look at the money they are costing us. Where do you suggest we stop with this disregard for human life?

Jennifer states that 700 children are aborted each year in Lancaster County. That’s one giant high school graduating class. Where will the tax dollars come from to build the massive schools these infants will one day need?

While we’re at it, they also might enjoy some parks, day-care centers and clinics. We might even want to staff them with qualified nurses and teachers. "

 bail out wrote on October 1, 2008 6:26 am:
" the other set of people that need to loose there shirt in this is americans borrowed more than they can afford. they need to refinance or sell there house and buy something that they can afford or else the problem won't be fixed. and banks need to make sure that they don't loan to people with bad credit and they don't hand out arm home loans like candy. stop lending to people who can't afford what they are trying to buy!! "

 Ray-J wrote on October 1, 2008 6:50 am:
" Re abortions:

I am all for abortions when the safety of the mother is in jeprodary, in cases of rape or incest and other very limited circumstances.

But, abortion should not be used as a last chance contraceptiave and unfortunatly that is happening a lot. Can there actualy be 700 peoole a year in Lancaster Co. that don't know how to use birth control? The argument of "it's my body, I should have the right to decide" stops at my billfold as far as I am concerned. "

 Yup wrote on October 1, 2008 7:47 am:
" People don't seem to take responsibility for anything they do these days and expect to get bailed out. They want a home, not the one they can afford, but the one that the Jones have, so they shop around until they find a no down, 100% financed, ARM and a lender willing to say yes to their dream. 5 years later, when the real payments hit the fan, they can't afford them. Now they expect to be bailed out, but they'll still get to live in the house they can't afford, while I'm living in the older, smaller house that I bought because it was what I could afford. I wanted the Jones house myself, but I knew I wouldn't be able to afford it. Same with having children. People have a child, but don't take the responsibility of raising the child. They expect someone to bail them out with WIC, welfare, housing assistance. If we make abortion illegal, there will be hundreds more that we will be raising. I had two children, because I knew I couldn't financially raise any more. Paul is right, as cruel as it sounds, it does come down to a financial decision. "

 Mom of 6 wrote on October 1, 2008 8:05 am:
" And the part that really irritates me is that the people who are against abortion are also against welfare, food stamps, WIC, etc. Do you not realize that sometimes people have to make that decision because they cannot AFFORD another child. Not everyone is living in ya'll rosy little worlds where everything comes easy. And yes, accidents happen. "

 Realist wrote on October 1, 2008 8:06 am:
" Our world is going to pot-global warming, over-population, war, economic chaos, disease, crime, etc . . . I'm in favor of abortions and actually would like to see the numbers of abortions rise. We shouldn't bring children into this awful world. I would suggest we put a cap on births, much like China did, and should either heavily tax those that have more than one kid OR require that they have an abortion. Please vote for Obama so we can save our planet for those of us who are already here occupying it. "

 LMR wrote on October 1, 2008 8:11 am:
" Seems Mr. Knopp has a ignorant view on how a thriving civilization works. When you don't have young workers to replace old ones you have to import them (or the education system in place for our high tech society). When the birth rate of a civilization drops below replacement it is for certain the population ages. With fewer working people to support more retired people, it puts a CRUSHING tax burden on the smaller group of working age people. As a result young people delay marriage and having a family. Once this trend starts, the downward spiral only gets worse. Western civilization seems to have forgotten what every primitive society understands-you need kids to have a healthy society. They're huge consumers and they grow up to be tax payers. "

 getting older wrote on October 1, 2008 8:33 am:
" If you use Mr. Knopp's logic, we shouldn't be providing Medicare for the older people of our civiization. They will only cost us money by having to build more retirement centers that are subsidized by the Medicare system. Are we to assume, Mr. Knopp, that you are in favor of removing these older people when they are no longer useful? Please come up with a better reason. "

 JohnK wrote on October 1, 2008 8:52 am:
" How many of you know anyone who's ever had an abortion? If you even know a single one, did they use it as a cheap, afterthought contraception? It's always claimed that women are just out there having abortions because they're too stupid or lazy to use contraception and need an easy way out, but if you'd go out of your way to speak to someone who's actually been forced into the position to make that choice it wasn't an easy one. One of my friends cries years later about the abortion that she had but she still admits that it was the right choice. It wasn't easy. It wasn't a contraception. It was the only choice - but thankfully still HER CHOICE. "

 Ned wrote on October 1, 2008 8:53 am:
" Jo-Ann, the right fork got us in this mess. Let's give the left fork a chance as that is the fork that got us out of the great depression.It also had prosperity during the 90s. "

 hey dee wrote on October 1, 2008 9:03 am:
" if nebraska beats missou, that helps virginia tech in the ratings don't it? Come back saturday and see the fans after they've spent the day prior to kickoff in a bar. "

 ET wrote on October 1, 2008 9:06 am:
" Sorry to say, LMR, the population can't grow forever, so eventually, it's going to have to contract. And I fail to see where it is the young peoples' responsibility to support everyone that came before them. The notion of 'retirement' is never going to materialize for the younger generations - we're not going to have social security, for instance, so many will continue working until they are extremely old - or just die. I don't know where you get the idea that it is somehow some sort of entitlement to spend 30-35 years not working before you die. Retirement, just like marriage, is an old idea and it's time to retire it! "

 To JohnK wrote on October 1, 2008 9:40 am:
" John, I have met hundreds of women who have had abortions....Most that I have met wish they could take it back and it pains them for the rest of their life. One woman said she has woken up everyday for 30 years and wished she could have her child back. Where is the all-wonderful Planned Parenthood in the healing process for women....if it is just a blob of tissue why does so many women experience depression after...apparently its not just like any other surgery.
Check out www.silentnomore.com "

 Jeff wrote on October 1, 2008 10:10 am:
" Joann - really.... the government would own "everything"? Are we not exagerating a little to much there? the government would own a bunch of mortgaged properties, which it would then be trying to sell. Let's not overstate the position. It is odd to have an 80% stake in AIG, but once again, the goal is to sell the assets and perhaps actually make money. If we do that, we don't have to (gasp) think we are becoming a socialist nation. We do need to put the proper regulations and oversight in place to make this a one time deal and not a precendent. "

 To LMR wrote on October 1, 2008 10:29 am:
" I agree with your statement that young workers need to replace the old workers. I can't agree with your statement on importing workers if we don't have young to take over the jobs. In a perfect society, all young people would be employed, and would get married, have children and the cycle would go on. In OUR less than perfect society, many (please forgive me responsible ones) young people don't seem to want to work, they have children when they don't have jobs or health insurance. The older workers who have worked all their lives who would like to retire, now can't retire because no one will take their place and the old workers continue to pay to support the young. That's kind of reverse to what it should be. And yes, I know that there are a lot of great young people, working, studying and making their way in this world and I thank you for that. "

 mom of 4 wrote on October 1, 2008 10:38 am:
" Two examples of the lie of over population. China has too many men and not enough women because of the one child limit in a society that values men over women. Germany which hit zero population growth some years ago had to start importing workers and rewarding families to have more than one child. While I am pro life I am not so ignorant to think it should be out lawed and driven in the the back alleys where both the women and child will die. But it should not be used as back up contraception. Nor is it the answer to the supposed over population of the world which is really a distribution of goods issue. We live in a country that uses more than its fair share of resouces. We must stop looking to one issue and start looking to change how we treat people here and now. If we befriend the single pregnant girl and show her how she can go thru with the pregnancy and give the baby up for adoption instead of hassling her about killing her baby both the girl and the baby win. "

 Liberal Agenda wrote on October 1, 2008 10:48 am:
" I encourage all the rabid anti-abortion advocates to do their part and adopt a baby. "

 Valid Argument wrote on October 1, 2008 11:02 am:
" I realize that the financial impact of abortions is not a popular impact and that pro-lifers have no idea how they would take care of all of these children if abortion was outlawed. Here are a few statistics for you from www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html.
42 million abortions worldwide each year.
1.37 million per year in the United States. 50 million abortions since it was legalized.
Can you imagine the financial problems this country would be, aside from those we are already in, if we had another 50 million people to take care of. We can't employ the people we have how would we employ an additional 25 million that would be working age? "

 Adoption wrote on October 1, 2008 11:12 am:
" There is waiting lists all over the country to adopt children...why do think americans are going elsewhere. There are plenty of adopters out there...not the problem, try again liberal agenda. "

 To To Johnk wrote on October 1, 2008 11:29 am:
" I'd be interested in seeing statistics for your comments on "so many women suffering depression after an abortion." I have had two abortions and suffer no depression from having abortions. I have two very close friends who suffer no depression from having had an abortion. We all felt relief because none of us were in no situation to have completed the pregnancy. We are all happy, healthy mothers/wives with happy, well-adjusted children and grandchildren.

If you were to check out Planned Parenthood for yourself instead of regurgitating what you only hear, you would find they provide all the support and information that's needed. And, guess what, they don't find much need for post-abortion support because the women, even though it was a very difficult decision, generally feel relief. "

 To Adoption wrote on October 1, 2008 11:33 am:
" There are no waiting lists for older, colored, emotionally, developmentally and physically disabled children and babies. THOSE kids are the ones that need adoption. "

 Not true wrote on October 1, 2008 11:40 am:
" Parents that adopt children from other countries do it for a varity of reasons. Some do it because they feel children in 3rd world countries won't have a chance in their country, some do it because they want a diversified family, some (like hollywood) do it for a status symbol. Unfortunately, there isn't a shortage of children to adopt in either the USA or the rest of the world. "

 To Adoption wrote on October 1, 2008 11:41 am:
" Do you have 1 million people to adopt these children? Even if you do, will you have another 1 million the next year, and the next and the next? Again the pro lifers never think of the consequences. We would need to build orphanages to take care of these children. "

 MYOB wrote on October 1, 2008 11:50 am:
" Plain and simple, a woman's choice to have an abortion is not your business. "

 sue wrote on October 1, 2008 12:04 pm:
" Dee - I'm so glad you were treated well.... unfortunately the Bill Callahan era has turned some of our fans into not so nice fans anymore. A friend of mine told me that the VT players were booed when they came on the field? Those that booed should be ashamed of themselves. "

 Ryan wrote on October 1, 2008 12:08 pm:
" Ken, it is a huge financial burden to the rest of society when children that are not wanted are brought into the world. I wish it was not that way but it is. I believe all life is sacred and none should be terminated unless there is or will be a serious problem for that life. Many times children are born into the world to females that didn't want to get pregnant but did. The father doesn't want anything to do with them either. So what are we to do with the unwanted children. We can't give them away for free. It costs thousands of dollars to adopt so this might not be an option either. I guess we should just let the rest of society take care of everyone else's problems just like we always do. I think that if a female goes in for an abortion that they should be legally sterilized. The problem would be solved right there. Once they have one that they didn't plan and they see all that free money coming in from the taxpayers, more are usually seen to follow. Maybe then women would learn to say no and men would start using condoms when they see what their wife, girlfriend, fling for the night will have to go through if she is pregnant unexpectedly. But all of the right wingers out there will still want these illigitimate children born into the world without a fighting chance right off the bat. Once they are born you don't want anything to do with them. Then it's up to the state and the taxpayers to bring up the child. How about all those that voice their opinion freely about pro-life give 25-50% of their annual earnings for the welfare of these kids when they are born? Then all would be well. I hate to make it sound like a financial burden when it comes to a life but in all reality, what kind of "life" will these kids have if they are born into this world unwanted? They might not be brought up the way you like and they will be the one's we not only pay for while they are kids and teens but we'll end up paying for their way once they are in jail too because of the lack of caring while growing up. It should be called "in-utero euthansia" to save the child a life of despair. "

 To JohnK wrote on October 1, 2008 12:15 pm:
" I know a handful of women who have had abortions. Some have used it as a means of birth control, some as a more precise means of control when their original method was unsuccessful, and most used it when their health would not have allowed them to carry a child to term (according to their doctors). "

 Chip wrote on October 1, 2008 12:19 pm:
" VT wasn't booed coming off the field. Some stands applauded, but most just left early from that section. I stood by to watch to see what was going to happen. "

 goodQuestionPaul wrote on October 1, 2008 12:27 pm:
" ...but, there are more things to consider. As for needing to build schools, etc. to support these 700 - I am willing to bet those 700 would be spread around to multiple towns and school districts, not just in one location. I would also be willing to bet that a fair share of these 700 would have been from college students, who probably would have moved back home (likely outside of Lancaster County, probably even outside of NE) after having delivered their baby.

But - given your rationale - what do we do with families who decide to move to Lancaster County?? Do we demand that they have no children? And, what about those families that have more babies?? Are you saying we should NOT provide them with the same facilities you are talking about if the current facilities are outgrown?? For anyone born after (yesterday?), no schools, parks, health care, etc. will be provided for them...??

Sorry sir, but your argument doesn't hold water... "

 Dianne wrote on October 1, 2008 12:56 pm:
" Why would those who have had abortions feel guilt and remorse after? Oh, I don't know, but I'm sure it has nothing to do with the rabid anti-abortion crowd throwing their fearmongering and guilt tactics right in their faces to make them feel this way. It's sick and disgusting how the "pro-lifers" do everything they can to make these women feel even more guilty for something they already do not feel happy about. i wish we could stop abortions, but we never will. That's a fact. But the "pro-life" people make me far more disgusted than anyone who has ever had to have an abortion. "

 Potential wrote on October 1, 2008 1:23 pm:
" I don’t think that arguing that we need abortion for population control is a good argument. I hate the idea of abortion, and think it should be done only sparingly.
But I also think it is about a women’s right to choose what to do with her body, or rather to protect her from the government telling her what to do with her body.
I’m sure some would ask, what about the baby’s rights? As much as you might want to call a collection of cells that are wholly dependent on the women’s body for survival, a "baby", it is not. It is “potentially” a baby. Much like the eggs you ate for breakfast were a potentially a chicken, or the corn you ate for lunch were potentially a corn field.
One thing is not the other without going through the whole process. "

 Phylis wrote on October 1, 2008 1:31 pm:
" I'm really glad for Mr. Knopp that his mother wasn't thinking about how much it was going to cost taxpayers to raise him or he wouldn't be writing his letter.
How can you base the sanctity of human life on money. The answer is to educate boys and girls in the consequences and prevention of teen pregnancy. And the adult males and females need to take responsibilty for there choices. There are plenty of parents who can't have children that would give anything to have a baby. "

 Always Amazed wrote on October 1, 2008 1:46 pm:
" Politics are operating at warp speed in Washington and you are all on here debating a 50 year old argument. Soon we will be a socialistic nation and we can discuss what everyone should have. "

 Own Body wrote on October 1, 2008 1:50 pm:
" Everyone keeps saying the woman should have a right to choose because it is their body...
Then what is the difference between the womans right to choose and a persons right to choose to have their life terminated because they are terminal as it is?
The debate never ends. "

 Adoption wrote on October 1, 2008 1:57 pm:
" Actually there are people to adopt the "older, colored, emotionally, developmentally and physically disabled children and babies." I am involved in the foster care system and there are loving homes to take these children in. I don't know about in other places, but in Lincoln, there is always a family for them. "

 To woman wrote on October 1, 2008 2:02 pm:
" I didn't use any statistics...I said I have met hundreds of them who regret their decision...maybe your situation was different, but there wouldn't be dozens of groups that provide healing for women after an abortion if there was "no need" like you say. I agree that pro-lifers need to change their tactics and making a woman feel guilty should never happen, instead there needs to be an effort to keep that woman out of whatever situation brought her there. "

 Tara wrote on October 1, 2008 2:07 pm:
" Everyone seems to conveniently overlook the fact that even with adoption, a woman would still have to go through 9 months of unwanted pregnancy, many of which are very difficult. A pregnancy that might prevent the woman from working at her usual job, cause her to miss too much work and get fired, go through morning sickness, miss work or school for doctors' appointments, potentially be bed-ridden, potentially develop pregnancy-related sicknesses like gestational diabetes, go through CHILDBIRTH or a C-section, etc. During the first trimester, there is actually less risk in getting an abortion than going through with the pregnancy. There are WAY more considerations to this issue besides whether or not another fetus will become part of the population. There are legitimate health concerns.

Furthermore, you might get 50 million more working taxpayers, but more than likely, you'll get more welfare recipiants, more Medicaid clients, more babies subjected to drugs, alcohol, and cigarettes during the pregnancy, and more criminals. "

 Pro-lifers... wrote on October 1, 2008 2:11 pm:
" Not everyone believes in what you choose to believe in.

It is my body and it is my right to choose. Mind your own business and be concerned about your own wombs. "

 To Ray J wrote on October 1, 2008 2:15 pm:
" The state, as in your taxes, do not pay for abortions. They are paid for by the person receiving the abortion. If you're so worried about your billfold, then you should be glad you're not paying for the welfare for these unwanted children. "

 Hindsight wrote on October 1, 2008 2:31 pm:
" It's so easy 30 years later to long for what was left behind. BUT, there was a reason that woman made that choice 30 years ago. How different--and most likely much more difficult--her life would have been over the past 30 years if she hadn't had an abortion.

I've been on both sides of the fence. At 26, I found myself single, alone, and pregnant. I had the baby on my own. Today, my daughter is a wonderful 12 year old, and I wouldn't trade her for the world. Having said that, it has been a struggle in so many ways for both of us. We've endured it all and we're fine, but sometimes I wondered if we would make it.

I also have a friend who has had two abortions, the first when she was 17 and in high school. She does mention from time to time how old that child would be now, and I'm sure there are times she wonders what her life would have been like had she not had that abortion, but no one can really know, can they? She can't know the struggles--financial, emotional--she would have had to deal with as a result of having that child.

If only we could all go back and change things we wish we had or hadn't done. The problem is, we don't know how those things would have changed other aspects of our lives.

On another note--my life goes to show just because someone is pro-choice, which I most staunchly am--doesn't automatically mean we are pro-abortion. "

 To to Ray J wrote on October 1, 2008 2:52 pm:
" Planned Parenthood receives millions of tax dollars every year....you are wrong, my tax dollars do fund abortions. "

 Same ole wrote on October 1, 2008 3:18 pm:
" What is skirted in all this mess is, these monster salaries & pensions
ALL executives get. McCain got laughed at when he said no executive should
get more than what the President of the U.S. makes. Nothing is going to
change in this country as long as "most" think they are smarter than God
and deserve huge salaries and pensions. Those same people with their
millions are ready and willing to accept their Social Security check when
retirement comes!! But they say, well we paid into it, we deserve it.
I'll guarantee you many many paid the maximum also but did not make the
millions. Paulsen and the Washington bunch sure don't want to talk about
the million dollar salaries but skirt it by saying the "umbrellas" which
are ONLY the ones who have left big companys after a few years, after they
destroyed them and getting the huge exit bucks, are the guilty ones.
Amazing how innocent a person can get when they toes are stepped on.
And all those people making millions year after year after year, do you
see them offering to bail out the mess THEY have created?? Oh no, its
gonna be you "little" good for nothing people making $30,000, $50,000
and retiring with pensions of may $2,000. a month at the most, many
with a pension of $50.00 a month from a company they worked dilligently
all their lives at. I can find you oodles of those whose pension don't
even begin to cover their health insurance premiums!!! You can bet
Paulsen and the rest could care less. No. NOTHING will ever change in
this country. Yeah, they'll dangle the worm until everybodys happy and
years later at retirement, everybody says, what happened?? I've seen it
play out for many many years, but the bate and switch people gottcha!!
Wall street has gotten to be nothing but a giant casino and its in your
pension plans, 401K's any investment vehicle. There are as many different
kinds of hands played in Wall Street as there are laws and pages in the
tax code. Some like Steve Forbes wanted to change the tax code and make
it simple but as usual everybody knew better, they thought and so we all
voted for the no nothing and - well - hows that working for ya??? "

 sue wrote on October 1, 2008 3:22 pm:
" Chip - it was when they CAME on the field. Two friends at the game said fans booed, perhaps it was very section specific. Unfortunately either way. "

 Krist ine wrote on October 1, 2008 3:34 pm:
" No, 'To RayJ'--tax dollars don't pay for abortions. Ever. Know what you're talking about. "

 Real humans wrote on October 1, 2008 3:43 pm:
" so many of you just look at the millions of dollars or talk about the suffering of the woman......so I ask......how many of you "pro-choicers" wish that your mom had aborted you? Do you wish your mom had made a choice to abort you? These are real human beings, not tax dollars or an illness "

 to Pro-Lifers wrote on October 1, 2008 3:56 pm:
" "It is my body and it is my right to choose. Mind your own business and be concerned about your own wombs. "

Great - but what about those of us who are men and believe abortion is murder? And how is it that a man is needed to conceive a baby, but his opinion does not count when the women wants an abortion?

Yes - you can do what you want with your body - but why make a living baby pay for YOUR choices? Are we supposed to turn our backs on what we see as a murderous injustice? That happened for several years in the not-so-distant past. It was called the Holocaust...innocent people paid with their lives then also because of other people's beliefs. "

 Lindsay wrote on October 1, 2008 4:04 pm:
" Here is an incentive for population control as well: how about a tax credit for NOT having children? I think if there was an incentive to not have children, maybe so many of these "welfare mothers" that are spoken of on this forum wouldn't be reproducing so often? Heck, it might even make people more careful when it comes to having sex, therefore fewer abortions. If this society maybe wasn't so centered around "teh children" we wouldn't be having so many arguments about abortion and welfare. "

 Tax Dollars wrote on October 1, 2008 4:17 pm:
" Someone please prove to me that the tax dollars that Planned Parenthood receives do NOT go to abortions. The only financial form they have which is public is their 990 Tax Return....it sure doesn't show that tax dollars are not used on abortions. When PP receives millions in tax dollars every year, how can you claim they don't fund abortions? "

 Middle Fork wrote on October 1, 2008 5:05 pm:
" There has been a lot of rhetoric said over the last week. Washington should have gotten off there proverbial behinds and explaining this Rescue plan better( Its not a bail out its a rescue of those of us who are on main street).
The result was a disastrous drop in the Stock market which in my opinion should remain closed until this entire matter is resolved. The fact is we need this rescue plan more than ever.
We also need to stop blaming. This current problem is a 30 year or more build-up of bad decisions. Instead of blaming we must move to fix it and then after we have gotten some stability then we can go around and look into the criminal aspect of this issue. "

 Carol wrote on October 1, 2008 5:05 pm:
" Something like 3 or 6% of the services Planned Parenthood provides are abortions. The remaining 94-97% are healthcare services for low income women AND men such as mamograms, annual exams, birthcontrol to prevent abortions, STD screening and treatment, etc. If PP wasn't around, there is NO WAY the rest of the low income healthcare providers could pick up the slack. I think its sick that people want to punish millions of people who rely on PP for basic health care because they disagree with such a tiny percent of the organizations' operations. Would you really deny mamograms and cervical cancer screenings to women on principle? What if that woman dies because her cancer isn't detected because she didn't have the money to go to a regular clinic? Is it worth it? "

 Ryan wrote on October 1, 2008 5:07 pm:
" If I was aborted I wouldn't know the difference. I'd have never gained consciosness and would never know. So I guess I wouldn't care. Oh well. "

 Yes-taxMoneyIsUsed wrote on October 1, 2008 5:59 pm:
" For everyone saying no tax money is used for abortions - please check the wikipedia definition for Planned Parenthood! Facts from their definition show that Planned Parenthood provided 289,750 surgical and medical abortions. They also get almost a third of their money from GOVERNMENT grants and contracts. That GOVERNMENT part...that's from you and me paying taxes... "

 Mr. T wrote on October 1, 2008 6:11 pm:
" "Where will the tax dollars come from to build the massive schools these infants will one day need?"

Are you kidding me? Babies should be aborted so we don't have to provide care for them? What a joke. I guess if people could not have abortions world-wide we'd probably have to build an island for all of these babies to live on. Tax dollars come from people, thus the more people in this county/country, the more taxes there will be. "

 Just because youre not ready wrote on October 1, 2008 7:03 pm:
" The argument that Mr Knopp makes is highly flawed in the realm of logic.
Just because he feels that hypothetically society would not be able to care for and educate all of the children who are aborted that does not mean that they should be aborted.

Abortion is not a question of personal preference.
It is a question of rights and the basic moral underpinning of society.
Most of the founders of this country owned slaves and they would have told you that a black person was not a full human being.

Most people who are in favor of abortion would tell you that a developing child in the womb is not a full human being.

Unborn children are human beings and deserve full protection under the law whether they are convenient or not. Murder is murder and murder is against the law. "

 ugh wrote on October 1, 2008 8:16 pm:
" joanne stop being so dramatic. one of these days you'll realize you live your life in fear because of the right wing fear mongers who's sole pleasure in life is to see who they can hoodwink today. 'socialism' is the current bogeyman according to them but it was their 'deregulation' got us into this mess. "

 Murder is murder eh... wrote on October 1, 2008 8:32 pm:
" How many of you who say that believe that this war in Iraq is immoral? In any case, how about we all mind our business. Take care of yourself and your family... if you can do that well, you are succeeding. "

 RussianMike wrote on October 1, 2008 8:33 pm:
" Rather than take Mr. Knopp's letter literally, consider the basic principle. The strictest pro-lifers I know are also the first to complain about the government (MY TAX DOLLARS!!!) picking up the slack for anyone else.

Do you care nothing for the quality of life of the children you were so adamant about saving? Are you willing to pony up your own dollars to improve a life the mother was unsure she would be able to support? "

 Planned Parenthood wrote on October 1, 2008 10:01 pm:
" services by percentage: Contraception = 38%; STD testing and treatment = 29%; Cancer Screening = 19%; Other Services = 11%; Abortion Services = 3%;

There you have it. "

 dir wrote on October 1, 2008 10:25 pm:
" To Yes-Taxpayer use

You got your facts from Wikipedia? Might want to try a RELIABLE source before you quote "facts." "

 Ken wrote on October 2, 2008 6:26 am:
" To Own Body: Well said, whats good for the goose is good for the gander. The only problem I have with your post is you refered to "terminal as it is". I don't see the difference even if being terminal is not in the question. ie suicide.

And to Ryan So life is a huge financial burden to the rest of society. Older children are not wanted everywhere. What do you want to do with them? At least they have a chance to live. A baby isn't given that option.

If you truly believe all life is sacred then the reason for exterminating anyone cannot be reduced to the financial cost of life. Look at third world countries that are starving their population. They just continue to having babies. To have or not have a baby is a decision to be made before sex, not after sex. "

 Julie Schmit-Albin wrote on October 2, 2008 9:14 am:
" Who are these pro-lifers that you claim attack women for having abortions? I've been a pro-life activist for 27 years and the great majority of folks who are at abortion facilities are offering calm and kind assistance to women and young girls as they arrive for abortions. Not only that, these same people are there when people come out of the abortion facility to offer them free post-abortion counseling referrals. I don't see angry crowds blaming women. The vast majority of pro-lifers view the woman as the second victim in every abortion. It sounds like you are dredging up a stereotypical response fostered by the mainstream media that all pro-lifers at abortion facilities are maniacal, hateful people and that is not the case. "

 Tell me how wrote on October 2, 2008 9:24 am:
" How are tax dollars being used for abortions? Explain. Because when you have the procedure, and I've had the procedure, there wasn't an option for 'tax dollars'. Seriously--are you referring to medicaid, maybe? And what's with the assumption that this is a 'welfare mother' issue??? The blatant ignorant stereotyping is staggering. "

 to RussianMike wrote on October 2, 2008 10:06 am:
" We are saying DO NOT use our tax money to kill children - we are fine with using that money instead for making society better. So, yes, that would include building schools, providing health care, etc. All we have to do is shift the tax money that is going to Planned Parenthood's abortion money to instead go to these programs. "

 Tax dollars wrote on October 2, 2008 10:48 am:
" If planned parenthood received no federal funding, would they increase the price of an abortion? My guess would be yes, if they lost that funding they would have to increase abortions to cover the lost funding. Therefore, my tax dollars ARE paying for abortions, so don't tell me to mind my own business. "

 And my wrote on October 2, 2008 1:34 pm:
" tax dollars are funding a war that I have never agreed with. And my tax dollars are supporting a "abstinence-only" sex education format that I don't approve. "

 Tara wrote on October 2, 2008 1:56 pm:
" Analogize all you want, but at the end of the day, a fetus is biologically dependant on another human being whereas a black person is not. Until a black person (or an infant or an elderly person) cannot function without imposing on another living person's autonomy, it isn't the same thing.

There is simply no other situation where an autonomous person is REQUIRED to provide their body for another's use. "

 To and my wrote on October 2, 2008 4:06 pm:
" is anyone telling you that you can't have an opinion on those issues? That's the beauty of the United States, we can debate all these issues, but what I can't stand are people telling me to mind my own business....they are as bad as the "fearmongoring" pro-lifers. Lets debate the issue on its merits and realize that abortion affects us all and tax dollars are used. "

 700 more children wrote on October 2, 2008 10:25 pm:
" Just because there were 700 abortions does not mean that all 700 hundred would stay here in Lincoln. Just b/c someone choses not to have an abortion does not mean they will keep the baby themselves. BTW the many point of reducing the number of abortions is not to get people to keep or adopt children, it is to shift to not getting pregnant in the first place. Be responsible. It is disconcerting with all of the birth control out there that there are so many ooops conceptions. "

 responsibility wrote on October 2, 2008 10:38 pm:
" Yes it is a woman's right to chose. If you cannot afford a child, do not want a child, have health issues, protect yourself or do not have sex. With all the types of birth control and charting, the number of accidental pregnancies would go down. Take you birth control on time. If you are not able to remember to take birth control responsibly or use multiple forms of contraceptives, then abstain. Take responsiblity for your body.

Yes there are failures. If you do not want a pregnancy, be responsible or do not have sex.

Third trimester fetuses are more than just cells. I was born at at 35 weeks and did not stay in the hospital longer than any other baby born at that time (1970s). There needs to be some regulation. First trimester, you can talk about viability of the fetus. Second trimester, similar argument at the beginning and slowly gets more difficult as you approach the end. Third trimester, not just the woman right to her body but also a viable fetus that could survive outside the womb.

It is not all or nothing. "

 Tara wrote on October 3, 2008 10:15 am:
" Third-trimester abortions are illegal and always have been except in life-of-the-mother situations. I don't disagree with that. The decision needs to be made before the fetus is viable.

I also agree that people who don't want to get pregnant should take precautions to avoid getting pregnant. However, people who are too irresponsible to take these steps are also more likely to be too irresponsible to 1) take care of themselves and their fetus during a pregnancy, 2) make an honest determination as to whether they are financially and emotionally able to raise a child (whether to give it up for adoption). To expect inherently irresponsible people to suddenly take responsibility for themselves is just not going to happen and using a child as a punishment for that is only going to create more problems "

Ads by Yahoo!