Palin: No abortions, No exceptions???

[Eeyores Butterfly]

Now I'm curious, does she not believe in exceptions of the woman was raped?

Let me preface this: I am pro-life, but I also don't think at this time illegalizing abortion is socially responsible. We need to first change the attitudes in our society that lead to the decision in the first place, and offer more support for the mother and child, and require more accountability (including time) on the part of the father. Still, if it were ever illegalized again, I wouldn't shed tears over it. That being said, I would want there to be exceptions for the mother's life and cases of rape.

If I were raped, I would hope that I would be able to carry the child and either raise it or give it up for adoption. I can't condemn a woman who would choose otherwise however. I imagine that for some, living every minute of every day for 9 months with a tangible reminder of such a heinous crime perpetrated against you would be more than some women could handle. I have always heard rape cited as an exception for this reason, so I am a bit surprised that it *appears* that Palin does not believe in this exception. So I'm curious. It won't change who I am going to vote for, but I do like to be informed.

 

[AlexTina]

IMHO abortion should not be availabel unless the mothers life is at risk! No exceptions!!

I had an abortion when I was 17, it is what my mother and my DBF(who is now my DH wanted). When you arrive at the clinic they first do a sonogram and then you go back to the waiting room. After the sonogram and seeing my baby I tried everthing I could think of at the time to convince dh that this was a life, this was our child and we should leave ASAP. Needless to say he disagreed and I went through with the abortion. I am now 34 years old and have 3 beautiful children and would love to know what my first child would be like. I am tearing up typing this and want everyone to understand the incredible guilt that is involved. Even if I had given that child up for adoption I would have the ability to try and reconnect if I choose to do so. Unfortuantely the decision I made on that day ended my childs life. For the past 17 years I have thought of that child at least once a day and wondered what they would be like, was it a boy or a girl (I'll never know). I feel that this is a decision that people make much to lightly, I also believe that the decision is very often not made by the mother but others around her. I love my children more than life itself and it just about kills me to know that I have another child that I killed. There are so many people that want a child so badly and can't have their own why not give them the opportunity to be parents. I just don't think that all these people who support a womans right to choose realize that more often than not it isn't actually the woman who is choosing. This is a life altering decision and although there are surely some who just don't care, this is a decision that will haunt most for the rest of their lives.

Tina

 

[perla75]

Now I'm curious, does she not believe in exceptions of the woman was raped?

Let me preface this: I am pro-life, but I also don't think at this time illegalizing abortion is socially responsible. We need to first change the attitudes in our society that lead to the decision in the first place, and offer more support for the mother and child, and require more accountability (including time) on the part of the father. Still, if it were ever illegalized again, I wouldn't shed tears over it. That being said, I would want there to be exceptions for the mother's life and cases of rape.

If I were raped, I would hope that I would be able to carry the child and either raise it or give it up for adoption. I can't condemn a woman who would choose otherwise however. I imagine that for some, living every minute of every day for 9 months with a tangible reminder of such a heinous crime perpetrated against you would be more than some women could handle. I have always heard rape cited as an exception for this reason, so I am a bit surprised that it *appears* that Palin does not believe in this exception. So I'm curious. It won't change who I am going to vote for, but I do like to be informed.

Smart answer, thank you I appreciate that you are looking at this from various angles.

Yes, I was surprised at that statement of "no exceptions" as well, which is why I second guessed it. and I like to be informed as well. No matter who I vote for, it is obviously a possibility that Palin could potentially be VP...or president so it is important to be aware of what kind of changes to our laws could potentially occur.

 

[perla75]

IMHO abortion should not be availabel unless the mothers life is at risk! No exceptions!!

I had an abortion when I was 17, it is what my mother and my DBF(who is now my DH wanted). When you arrive at the clinic they first do a sonogram and then you go back to the waiting room. After the sonogram and seeing my baby I tried everthing I could think of at the time to convince dh that this was a life, this was our child and we should leave ASAP. Needless to say he disagreed and I went through with the abortion. I am now 34 years old and have 3 beautiful children and would love to know what my first child would be like. I am tearing up typing this and want everyone to understand the incredible guilt that is involved. Even if I had given that child up for adoption I would have the ability to try and reconnect if I choose to do so. Unfortuantely the decision I made on that day ended my childs life. For the past 17 years I have thought of that child at least once a day and wondered what they would be like, was it a boy or a girl (I'll never know). I feel that this is a decision that people make much to lightly, I also believe that the decision is very often not made by the mother but others around her. I love my children more than life itself and it just about kills me to know that I have another child that I killed. There are so many people that want a child so badly and can't have their own why not give them the opportunity to be parents. I just don't think that all these people who support a womans right to choose realize that more often than not it isn't actually the woman who is choosing. This is a life altering decision and although there are surely some who just don't care, this is a decision that will haunt most for the rest of their lives.

Tina

Thank you for sharing your opinion & also your story. I can't imagine the pain that you went through & are still going through, except to say that it is true that personal experience & what you gathered from it can have a great effect on a person's point of view.

 

[chris1gill]

Thank you Chris-you win the award for being the most mature & helpful response so far!

So, she used to believe no exceptions, but changed her stance. That makes sense where the commentator went wrong on the news channel.

So, her focus would be to increase adoption funding and services. This would be an idea...

Thank you again Chris. I very much appreciate your mature response.

You're welcome Perla, however, I don't believe adoption funding and services costs were increased, but I can see where that would be a priority.

 

[perla75]

You're welcome Perla, however, I don't believe adoption funding and services costs were increased, but I can see where that would be a priority.

I would be curious to read an interview with her where she discusses this in more detail. I would think that someone would have asked her about adoption funding.

 

[castleview]

... Since in her own state she cut aid (slashed it really) for unwed mothers, what else would there be other than adoption?

This will sound callous, but in CT we have generous funding for unwed mothers and I really with it was slashed. Taxpayers are funding insurance, pre-school, and general life costs for these mothers/kids. I know of many moms who won't get married to their baby daddys because that would require them going off state welfare.

I am happy, she regards adoption as the best thing for foster kids. In my teaching days, it was absolutely disgusting how many kids lived very unstable lives while waiting for their parents to get their act together.

 

[Charade]

Originally Posted by chris1gill
... Since in her own state she cut aid (slashed it really) for unwed mothers, what else would there be other than adoption?

The funding was cut from 5mil to 3.9mil.

The next questions should be "is 3.9mil enough?" and "was 3.9mil and increase over last year".

If the answers are yes, then this is a typical ploy by the manipulators.

 

[Patch'sD]

I am awaiting the next thread, Palin will cut Social Security Payments to Seniors and Widows with Lots of Children.

 

[joviroxx]

... Since in her own state she cut aid (slashed it really) for unwed mothers, what else would there be other than adoption?

The funding was cut from 5mil to 3.9mil.

The next questions should be "is 3.9mil enough?" and "was 3.9mil and increase over last year".

If the answers are yes, then this is a typical ploy by the manipulators.

She actually raised the funding to 3.9 million. They had requested 5 million and she cut the REQUEST.

This is three times more than Covenant House Alaska received from government grants in 2007. According to records on the Covenant House Alaska website, the organization received just over 1.3 million dollars from grants in 2007 and nearly 1.2 million in 2006. So she raised it to 3.9 or tripled it.

 

[Charade]

She actually raised the funding to 3.9 million. They had requested 5 million and she cut the REQUEST.

This is three times more than Covenant House Alaska received from government grants in 2007. According to records on the Covenant House Alaska website, the organization received just over 1.3 million dollars from grants in 2007 and nearly 1.2 million in 2006. So she raised it to 3.9 or tripled it.

Well there you go. Like I said, someone is deliberately trying to manipulate the public's perception. And sadly, it worked on some people.

 

[xoprincessmomxo]

This will sound callous, but in CT we have generous funding for unwed mothers and I really with it was slashed. Taxpayers are funding insurance, pre-school, and general life costs for these mothers/kids. I know of many moms who won't get married to their baby daddys because that would require them going off state welfare.

I am happy, she regards adoption as the best thing for foster kids. In my teaching days, it was absolutely disgusting how many kids lived very unstable lives while waiting for their parents to get their act together.

Well, my views on that are if Palin is wanting to force unwed mothers to have their children, then somebody needs to help them take care of those children. You can't force women to give their babies up for adoption just as you can't force someone to have an abortion. The thing is, yes, some of those women will take advantage of the situation. But without the help, it is the children who will suffer. I, personally, would not want to live in a society that believes it's ok to let children suffer simply because they were born to financially impaired parents.

 

[Charade]

Well, my views on that are if Palin is wanting to force unwed mothers to have their children, then somebody needs to help them take care of those children. You can't force women to give their babies up for adoption just as you can't force someone to have an abortion. The thing is, yes, some of those women will take advantage of the situation. But without the help, it is the children who will suffer. I, personally, would not want to live in a society that believes it's ok to let children suffer simply because they were born to financially impaired parents.

You did read that she nearly tripled the annual budget of Covenant House?

 

[xoprincessmomxo]

You did read that she nearly tripled the annual budget of Covenant House?

Actually, my post was in response to a PP that personally wants the government to slash funding of unwed mothers.

 

[joviroxx]

Well, my views on that are if Palin is wanting to force unwed mothers to have their children, then somebody needs to help them take care of those children. You can't force women to give their babies up for adoption just as you can't force someone to have an abortion. .

Just a question, hypothetically speaking, if a woman is forced to have a baby why would she even want to keep it? If she wanted to keep it and not give it up, why would she have had an abortion anyway? You would think that if a woman were forced to have the child but didnt want to, she would not want to keep it, right?

 

[castleview]

Well, my views on that are if Palin is wanting to force unwed mothers to have their children, then somebody needs to help them take care of those children. You can't force women to give their babies up for adoption just as you can't force someone to have an abortion. The thing is, yes, some of those women will take advantage of the situation. But without the help, it is the children who will suffer. I, personally, would not want to live in a society that believes it's ok to let children suffer simply because they were born to financially impaired parents.

Yes, but it's tough to keep breaking the backs of the middle class and allow their tax dollars to give to people who knowingly get themselves into that situation. If the govt. wants to force those unwed moms into finishing their educations, get some job training, and get a job - I don't see the problem with that. It's better than just giving them money and free healthcare. I know a lot of moms who need to go back to work for financial reasons. Yet, their tax money is going to people who won't go to work. How does that make sense?

 

[xoprincessmomxo]

Yes, but it's tough to keep breaking the backs of the middle class and allow their tax dollars to give to people who knowingly get themselves into that situation. If the govt. wants to force those unwed moms into finishing their educations, get some job training, and get a job - I don't see the problem with that. It's better than just giving them money and free healthcare. I know a lot of moms who need to go back to work for financial reasons. Yet, their tax money is going to people who won't go to work. How does that make sense?

I get what you're saying there! While I do agree with the free healthcare (no child should be without no matter what their financial situation! Iowa's great for that!) the welfare is a bit of an issue for me. I still believe that the government has a roll in helping to support them, but it would be nice to have some job placement and education incentives with it.

 

[perla75]

Well, my views on that are if Palin is wanting to force unwed mothers to have their children, then somebody needs to help them take care of those children. You can't force women to give their babies up for adoption just as you can't force someone to have an abortion. The thing is, yes, some of those women will take advantage of the situation. But without the help, it is the children who will suffer. I, personally, would not want to live in a society that believes it's ok to let children suffer simply because they were born to financially impaired parents.

Yes, I agree with this. Has Palin discussed giving any money to educational programs like WIC, birth control, preventative education, parent education, etc...? I am not asking in an accusatory tone, I am asking as a knowledge-seeking question. and what about children born terminally ill with no health care? Has she discussed funding to pay for that medical care? Adoption is a great option, but certainly not the only answer. A terminally ill child still needs to be paid for even if it is adopted.

Just a question, hypothetically speaking, if a woman is forced to have a baby why would she even want to keep it? If she wanted to keep it and not give it up, why would she have had an abortion anyway? You would think that if a woman were forced to have the child but didnt want to, she would not want to keep it, right?

I don't think a question like that is as black & white as you might think. I think unless you have been in that situation, you cannot make those assumptions. It's not like selling your house-there are actually emotions involved when a woman carries a child to full term with her pregnancy and gives birth. Also, you cannot force a woman to give her child up for adoption and I fear for our society if it ends up that way.

But I still have not heard what Palin's or McCain's plans are for this. This is a very complicated issue & IF they win & decide to do away with Roe V. Wade, it becomes even more complicated. There are alot of potential scenarios to consider. I guess I'll keep searching on the internet for Palin & McCain's plans on abortion because if adoption is their only solution, this country is in big trouble...

Yes, but it's tough to keep breaking the backs of the middle class and allow their tax dollars to give to people who knowingly get themselves into that situation. If the govt. wants to force those unwed moms into finishing their educations, get some job training, and get a job - I don't see the problem with that. It's better than just giving them money and free healthcare. I know a lot of moms who need to go back to work for financial reasons. Yet, their tax money is going to people who won't go to work. How does that make sense?

I absolutely agree with setting up very strict contingencies of education, job training, & employment on unwed mothers, as long as the government is going to provide child care services for those mothers while they are going through the process. Otherwise, you are setting up that mother for failure & the child to be in a neglect or abusive situation.

BUT, what do you mean by "knowingly put themselves into that situation"? I hope you are not referring to the mother always knowingly becoming pregnant....

 

[castleview]

Yes, I agree with this. Has Palin discussed giving any money to educational programs like WIC, birth control, preventative education, parent education, etc...? I am not asking in an accusatory tone, I am asking as a knowledge-seeking question. and what about children born terminally ill with no health care? Has she discussed funding to pay for that medical care? Adoption is a great option, but certainly not the only answer. A terminally ill child still needs to be paid for even if it is adopted.



I don't think a question like that is as black & white as you might think. I think unless you have been in that situation, you cannot make those assumptions. It's not like selling your house-there are actually emotions involved when a woman carries a child to full term with her pregnancy and gives birth. Also, you cannot force a woman to give her child up for adoption and I fear for our society if it ends up that way.

But I still have not heard what Palin's or McCain's plans are for this. This is a very complicated issue & IF they win & decide to do away with Roe V. Wade, it becomes even more complicated. There are alot of potential scenarios to consider. I guess I'll keep searching on the internet for Palin & McCain's plans on abortion because if adoption is their only solution, this country is in big trouble...



I absolutely agree with setting up very strict contingencies of education, job training, & employment on unwed mothers, as long as the government is going to provide child care services for those mothers while they are going through the process. Otherwise, you are setting up that mother for failure & the child to be in a neglect or abusive situation.

BUT, what do you mean by "knowingly put themselves into that situation"? I hope you are not referring to the mother always knowingly becoming pregnant....

I'm saying the women that recklessly get pregnant knowing they can't afford to take care of a child. Unfortunately, I have seen women get pregnant just to get on welfare. A woman in my old church is now pregnant again and she said flat out that she was losing her benefits because her two oldest kids are over 18 now.

I realize stuff happens and I'm all for a safety net, but term limits would be nice too. I do agree that it comes down to providing child care for these women.

 

[perla75]

I get what you're saying there! While I do agree with the free healthcare (no child should be without no matter what their financial situation! Iowa's great for that!) the welfare is a bit of an issue for me. I still believe that the government has a roll in helping to support them, but it would be nice to have some job placement and education incentives with it.

I agree with this too. I am completely supportive of the idea of the welfare system, but not the way it stands as of now. If they were stricter and set up stricter contingencies & more training programs, I would feel much better about where my tax dollars are going.

Massachusetts, by the way, also has a great free health care system for those who qualify, including children & a separate program for children with special needs. I also love the fact that it is now mandatory in Mass. to get health insurance & they have set up programs to allow it to be affordable for families that qualify.