HOME | DD
AtheosEmanon — Adoption will NOT solve the abortion problem
by-nd
Published: 2012-08-15 05:35:47 +0000 UTC; Views: 11028; Favourites: 154; Downloads: 11
Redirect to original
Description
Numbers are accurate as of August 15, 2012 when this was postedA common Anti-choice aka Pro-life Argument is that every person who has an abortion is selfish and just should give them up for adoption because we can adopt out all of the fetuses that are aborted...
Let us look at the numbers, shall we?
Average numbers of abortions per year in America: 1 million plus
www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_ind…
www.abort73.com/abortion_facts…
-abortion 73 is an anti-Abortion site, I figured if this has similar numbers to the other site no one would claim that it is biased towards pro-choicers …
Average number of adoptions per year in America: 122,000
According to the Administration for Children & Families
www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/st…
This of course is on top of the 400,540 that are currently in foster care system according to the Administration for Children and Families
www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/st…
As well as the 150K kids that enter the system every year permanently [the system gets 450-600k+ kids enter the foster care system every year, the bulk of these children do eventually return home after a short period of time in the system; yet 150K of them are never returned home and stay in the system:
Administration for Children & Families: www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/st…
Children Rights website: www.childrensrights.org/issues…
^^Looking at just this, NOT EVEN CONSIDERING THE 400k PLUS CURRENTLY IN THE SYSTEM, if you just look at the 150K + kids who go into the system permanently EACH YEAR, vs the number of kids who are adopted out EACH year [122K], that is still a net positive number of over 28,000 kids that will go into the system and stay each year even after you deduct the number of adoptions.
While not all, many “pro life” people love to demonize people who believe a woman should have the choice as pro-abortion, which could not be further from the truth. I do not know anyone who is pro abortion in a serious way of KILL ALL FETUSES, NO MATTER WHAT. On the contrary, I believe that something should be done to decrease the numbers of unwanted pregnancies, not just abortions.
For me, I believe education is the key to all things on this.
What is it that we know? Schools that have an in depth sex education course in their curriculum, after a few years of the program being implemented had a decrease in teen pregnancy, as well as a rise on the average age that the kids have sex, [meaning both males and females wait just a bit longer before having sex]
www.plannedparenthood.org/file…
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/…
www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-Tee…
www.sciencedaily.com/releases/…
I am not just speaking of sex education because what else do we know, in America? In general the more intelligent a person is, the more likely they are to family plan, as well as the more intelligent a person is in general the least amount of kids they will likely have.
www.asanet.org/press/20100223/…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilit…
Everyone knows that as many of my written pieces in my gallery, suggest that education is the all to end all to address pretty much everything from decreasing number of unwanted pregnancies, to of course strengthening the education system, to decrease the number of people on welfare, as well as prison… it is a core part but is not the only part with respect to welfare and prison reform of which I may do a piece later on that.
I am not saying I am anti-adoption, in fact I believe we should try to make it easier to adopt people, by …hiring more case agents, which would lessen the case load of each agent allowing for them to do more home checks, background checks on potential parents etc
So, the point of this stamp was to somewhat comment on the other stamps that I see on here saying, ADOPT NOT ABORT!!!, where they premise their argument as if adoption will solve our abortion problem which it will not.
Let us look at facts, as previously stated we have 150K+ kids who go into the foster care permanently each year, meaning they will never return home.
We adopt out 122K kids on average..
That alone is a Net Positive of 28,000
Now, using the number above that America average 1,000,000 abortions per year.
Let us say 25% of these women chose to give their babies up for adoption [I am being modest here since I believe if abortion were illegal the real number would be around 50% ..or 500K]
Okay so that is an addition 250,000 kids that will be placed into the foster system every year so a net positive of 278,000 kids that will be in the foster care system
As well as, for many pro life people, not all, but many I see tend to be very conservative and believe we should strip the welfare program, these people are lazy but if you outlaw abortion, that will be an addition 750K kids, mostly to poor and low income people who will in turn, more than likely go on welfare… so I fail to see how this solves the problem.
The solution is not JUST how can we make the adopting process easier, it is also how do we decrease the number of unwanted pregnancies, which would include … better access to birth control for men AND women, so the pill, condoms, etc etc, and an in depth sex education class
Do you not find it a bit odd that the state, Texas, which has stripped an in depth sex education course from its Junior High School and High School curriculum has one of the fastest rising teen pregnancy rates? …. Oops. And Texas also accounts for nearly 9% of all abortions in America … double oops.
www.guttmacher.org/pubs/sfaa/t…
of 579,700 women who got pregnant in that last study only a few years ago, 15% got abortions, meaning 86,955 abortions in Texas alone… so nearly 9% of all abortions for that year and if you look at these links:
www.guttmacher.org/pubs/sfaa/t…
www.dshs.state.tx.us/chs/vstat…
So, the question remains, will we, the people, ensure that there are in depth sex education classes in schools or will we say this does not work even though we know that it does decrease pregnancy rates, and by extension abortion rates.
… though even for the teens or parents who are against abortion, decreasing pregnancy rates, which also by extension decrease the number of teens who have babies and go on welfare… so while adoption will not solve the problem with abortion… the only way to solve the issue of abortion is doing what we know decreases abortion rates.
For me the issue at hand which is more important, is pro-quality of-life. What I generally hear from many pro-lifers is OH JUST LET THE FETUS BE BROUGHT TO TERM!!! ADOPTION.. while they look at underfunded foster care system, with under paid case agents that are trying their hardest… or when the woman does have the baby and keep it, and may need some assistance they demonize her saying, YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD THE BABY IF YOU COULD NOT TAKE CARE OF IT!!!!! .. or wish to cut programs to help such people, yes, welfare is what I am speaking of. Many of the new cases, are low income, women with newborn babies.
For the record, I am not anti, women on welfare, those who I speak with often know that I have some things I believe should be reformed in the welfare system to better the woman, get her more work ready etc but am not against the program in a general sense.
Here are my views on abortion in a generalized sense
Abortion pieces:
[main piece] Abortion: atheosemanon.deviantart.com/ar…
Stamps have same writing but two different stamps
Abortion stamp 1: atheosemanon.deviantart.com/ar…
Abortion stamp 2: atheosemanon.deviantart.com/ar…
Let knowledge be that truth, which portrays humanity, condemns malevolence; that respects the differences in others while abandoning the hatred and misconceptions of the past.
-Emanon
Related content
Comments: 412
She is just a child, so she might have to. If she does at least it will be away from the stepfather and be safe. And if her mother is still with him she is just as bad and she failed her daughter and when that child grows up it will demand "Why did you not leave that man when he raped my mother!?"
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well as with many things concerning minors, in that country her parents, because she is a minor does have some say .. so unsure if her mother would.
The story told of rape but I could find very little on what happened to him, I do hope even with their strict laws on abortion that he was arrested since the age of consent in Paraguay is 14 for male-female sex
^^ wrote that and then googled it, www.cnn.com/2015/05/10/america… he was arrested and denied he did anything but.. DNA would prove his claim to be false so unsure why deny that
chartsbin.com/view/hxj
if that site is true then for female-female sex the age of consent is 16.. unsure why the difference but either way that girl was not 14 even if he tried to say she wanted it
I can find very little on her mother
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
After her mother didn't help her, she has no say about what to do with that baby, because she failed her daughter and she will end up failing that baby.
He better be arrested, people are pissed off about that story because little girl got raped, impregnanted and they don't allow abortions regardless of the situation and the girl could have died and now a baby is involved and someday it will know of its conception and lord knows what it might do to its self worth and self esteem and if the mother will resent it.
He is an IDIOT! She is a little girl, she would NEVER want him he is her stepfather, whether ten or fourteen he should NOT touch her!
Hopefully karma will get her soon.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
There lies the issue, I have read several reports and am unsure if her mother knew..sure she knew once she got pregnant but I mean did she know he was hurting her? sadly many kids will not tell their parent.
well they allow abortions for the life of the mother but that is it. but I agree with the rest.
,,, even if she did she is below the age of consent so if DNA proves it is his kid he cannot say she consented since legally she is not able to until 14..
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sadly that's the truth.
And thing is she is ten and the pregnancy could have killed her. A ten year old's body isn't developed enough for childbirth and yet the government insists that she gives birth. Why? From what I've seen about the country she is init's a pretty poor place, and I have yet to read that they will help support her and the baby.
When the DNA test confirms he's the father he better face the consequences because he ruined TWO lives, the mother's life and that baby's life before it was born.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, Paraguay is a very impoverished play with about 1/3 of the country living in poverty, 1/5 living in extreme poverty.
I await to see what will happen, googling it again it just comes up that he was arrested but other than that does not say much.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
And they think forcing a ten year old to have a baby is a good idea why? Because if the baby was born in the 1/5 extreme poverty the girl won't be able to afford diapers and forumla, or what if the baby gets sick and dies from a disease?
Hopefully we'll see more.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well I highly doubt generally when they drafted the law they were thinking a 10 year old would get pregnant.. but in general, their laws are similar to many countries in the region partially because they are highly religious, majority of them are Catholics and extremely religious.
disease is also common due to or linking what is the usual around poverty and its health effects
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You would think that the Christian's in that country would help everyone in poverty including the children. If they truly believe life is sacred they should do whatever they can to help everyone out of poverty and make sure all those babies get an education, food in their stomach and a good home if the mother's don't want it. Those kind of people piss me off because they would do anything for the unborn but once they're born they're on their own, that's not fair to the mother OR the children.
Exactly, so bringing a child into the world in that condition is a game of chance.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well if you look at even the "middle class" by Western Standards would still be considered poverty ..
The entire country needs economic revitalization but that would mean changing their entire system drastically at which sooner or later they will have to or the poverty will get worse.
So I do not think it is because they do not think life is sacred or that they do not want to help the poor, they have social programs but when the vast majority of your country by our standards are impoverished it is difficult to help the poor when most of your poor are what we would deem poor.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
...Wow.
And if the poverty gets worse more people will die from disease and starvation.
That is sad.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
their GDP has gotten a little better but much more needs to be done to decrease poverty rates but time will tell.
In a country whose entire economy depends on agriculture, you can imagine global warming has the chance of destroying their economy if temps continue to rise in the next few decades..
Aristotle said it best
"One would have thought that it was even more necessary to limit population than property; and that the limit should be fixed by calculating the chances of mortality in the children, and of sterility in married persons. The neglect of this subject, which in existing states is so common, is a never-failing cause of poverty among the citizens; and poverty is the parent of revolution and crime."
"poverty is the parent of revolution and crime."
and with poverty comes a political system in Paraguay that is highly unstable.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Right and they also need to focus more on education and job creation in the country and improve the communities as well as finally legalizing abortion, whether it's because the girl does not want it or if it's bad for her health or she cannot support it. If they do that more people can make smarter choices and can get birth control and when kids are born they will get an education, food, a roof over their head, and more importantly, be loved and wanted.
Exactly, if nothing is done their country will be doomed.
Aristotle couldn't be more right on that. They are focus on property more than people in poverty and children the government forces to be born where they might have little to no chances of having a future and cause more problems to people.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I agree they need to focus more on education in the long run, in the short term they need to make their economy better because if you haven't the money then you cannot properly fund an education system.
They need to also focus more on plumbing, waste water and improper sewage systems especially in the poorest areas are great factors for disease since you have bugs and such that fester in these waters and then bite people.. but all of this is predicated on finances and funding.
I do not see them legalizing abortion or increased contraception since they are still highly religious, in the long run yes - for the simple fact that the more educated a society is the less religious it tends to be.
well I highly doubt in the modern sense he had any writings with respect to abortions and government, but he did write a great deal on poverty and the issues of a society with it
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Right, they need to solve their financial problem first, baby steps.
Exactly, because you can't have a society if people are getting sick and are dying.
The politicians want to keep religion in order to control people, that's why they are probably against people learning and using birth control and want more people to make them rich.
Yep, not to mention in Aristotles time tansy was used for women to have birth control and abortions themselves since Hippocrates recommends it to his patients.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It will get there, perhaps diversifying their economy a bit.. opening up new job markets and exports.
Plumping led to great decreasing of diseases in many countries both in modern and historic times, so if you wish to decrease people getting sick and dying then a proper plumbing system at which would carry the waste away rather than it being in the streets would be a great first step or at least a proper "public" restrooms which would do great in the short term until you can figure a way to properly give all of the homes plumbing.
Well you must realize, this is South America, so with or without politics, that region has been very religious for centuries .
Birth control would go a long way even if you kept abortion banned but they are either against that or.. once again lack the funds for a meaningful system ...on a separate note, people are often amazed when you tell them that Margarate Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood was actually against abortion simply for population control or just cause.. she called it
www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/we…
"Although abortion may be resorted to in order to save the life of the mother, the practice of it merely for limitation of offspring is dangerous and vicious. I bring up the subject here only because some ill-informed persons have the notion that when we speak of birth control we include abortion as a method. We certainly do not. Abortion destroys the already fertilized ovum or the embryo; contraception, as I have carefully explained, prevents the fertilizing of the ovum by keeping the male cells away. Thus it prevents the beginning of life."
conservatives in America are surprised to hear that as well..
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's what must be done.
That would be a GREAT service to anyone, plumbing is the only way to stop the serious diseases in that country and any other country.
Oh that's gonna be tough.
I remember that, people say Maragarate Sanger was for abortion to get rid of African American's from populating. I am so glad you found this quote, and the best way to lower abortion rates is not only birth control but also sex education and teach people about their bodies.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Agriculture is well and good but without a diverse market , I would expect continued high poverty 
Well if you looked at her quotes one can misconstrue her words to say African Americans since Blacks were and are still at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder, and yet she personally thought that if you cannot take care of the child or cannot support a child financially then you should not have one that is why she pushed for birth control heavily.. BUT SHE DID THINK IT WAS A WOMAN'S CHOICE EITHER WAY but she personally was not in favor of abortion as a means of population control,
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Which is what the government must fund it to.
Only time will tell.
I agree with her, abortion is not a fun thing to go through for most women and it is a difficult decision, that's why she was all for birth control so not only will people have safe sex, no woman will have to go through that agonizing decision to whether to have the baby or have an abortion and often think "Will I regret the abortion, will I regret my child?" But I'm glad she believed it was a woman's choice, and with the population control thing people should be more worried about what future the child will have.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
For a small nation, it is difficult to do that.. I mean NYC has a larger population than the entire country of Paraguay [NYC not the entire State of NYC which then would be over 3x their population]
back then the birth control was around 80% effective, today it is around 99.9% effective so 1/1000 will still get pregnant .. condoms are I believe 98% effective so 2/100 may still get pregnant .. but of course if the male uses a condom and the woman is on birth control it is even less of a chance for pregnancy ..or STI
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Right, and it will be hard for the Paraguay people to move away from most of their religious beliefs.
There is also a pill for the men to use, thank god. And I also think people should learn more about the ancient contraceptives our ancestors used, including the birth control Casanova used when he was with his many lovers.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I do not want to move away from it per se.. embrace it more, care for the poor people more, feed the hungry, shelter the homeless and all of that stuff they believe Jesus did..
I PrEP but that is not for stopping pregnancy, other than that I use condoms to stop pregnancy and other STIs that PrEP does not cover .
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Right, I mean like the none important stuff.
What's PrEP? I never heard of that.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
www.cdc.gov/hiv/basics/prep.ht…
a daily pill taken to prevent HIV/AIds, I am not a gay dude but they also recommend it for people in high risk factors such as me. a sex addict that has had many sexual encounters with strangers and not all under the usage of a condom.. it does not protect against every disease though and there are some drug resistant strains of HIV/AIDS that this would not help with but a previous study that looked at 600 men in these high risk groups, found that 100% of them remained HIV/AIds free while PrEPping
www.washingtonpost.com/news/to…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
yeah, in these poor areas also tend to have high rates of STDs because the people have plenty of time to engage in sex
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ugh, yes! This! I get so sick of pro-lifers using adoption as the "end all, be all" solution to unwanted pregnancy that I could hurl. The funny thing is, adoption isn't a solution to unwanted pregnancy at all, but to an unwanted born child. Pro-lifers tend to think women/girls who find themselves pregnant when they don't want to be simply don't want a child, when most if not all of them don't even want to be pregnant.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
FULLY AGREED!
I also am of an "eh" feeling when they are okay with exceptions for rape and incest .. so you are so pro life that a child bore of rape has less value in your eyes?
then you have those, the die hard but hey at least more honest ones that do not want any exceptions, I think it horrid especially to make a rape victim carry their baby but at least that group are consistent
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Exactly! I tend to be more tolerant of those who make exceptions for incest and rape, I just think they're intellectually dishonest. The die-hard "no exceptions" pro-lifers are definitely the ones I have a bigger beef with, but I'll give 'em points for consistency. It becomes a bit sticky at voting time, though. I don't trust someone who disapproves of abortion, even if he/she makes exceptions for rape and incest, to vote pro-choice. Ballots tend to be pretty polar on issues: you're either for something or against it. And I'd wager that quite a few "only in cases of rape and incest" pro-lifers consider voting against all abortion to be the lesser of two evils.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I am unapologetic about my liberal, progressive, democratic socialist views.. so in America I am most likely to vote Democratic but I personally am not in a political party so in my State I cannot vote in Primary Elections...
in 2012, I wanted to vote for Jon Huntsman Jr over Obama, but the Republicans chose Mitt Romney and eh .. no thanks, Obama is not my IDEAL candidate but between him and McCain .. I voted for him.. between him and Romney I voted for him because I agreed with him more compared to McCain and Romney
I am glad my favorite Senator, who is a Native of New York but now is a Senator for Vermont, Bernie Sanders is running for President.. sadly Democrats seem so loyal to Clinton that I am doubtful of his chances of gaining the nominee but .. he can at least drag those running to the left
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Pro-lifers might scream "BBBUT MURDER!! GIVE IT UP FOR ADOPTION!!!"
But what they actually mean: "I DON'T CARE WHAT HAPPENS TO THE BABY AFTER YOU GIVE BIRTH TO IT, JUST BIRTH IT, BABY-MAKER!!!!!!!"
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I must sadly agree. Once born they tend not to care what happens.. many of them say HAVE THE BABY.. and then when you may need assistance they say WHY HAVE THE BABY IF YOU COULD NOT TAKE CARE OF IT!!!!! ..
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The right wing is all about pro life untill the babe is born. Then they call them parasites and welfare lifers while ironically these same fools support giving 135 billion dollars to israel because they think they are GOd's people.
Why cant we get real conservatives back like Eisenhower?
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
No i call those Children citizens soldiers doctors scientists police and engineers they need to live for the nation to survive Welfare parasites are lazy people the next generation is not lazy they are thinkers and artists in the making.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Yes, many on the right are pro life... but also very much pro death penalty and some seem to have never met a war that they did not want us to get involved in.
I agree, I may have disagreed with Eisenhower on some things but overall.. I think he was one of the best Republicans and perhaps one of the last great Republican presidents.
thanks for the fave
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I do not like the Right very much, I see them as Scum sometimes. Why? They opposed the 13,th,14th, and 15th amendment, they opposed social security, opposed the 19th amendment, pushed for prohibition,opposed and filibustered all attempts at a civil rights act until we finally got lucky in the 60s, opposed the clean air act,tried to get rid of the civil rights act in the 70s, passed the patriot act,violated the logan act by inviting Netanahu, violated seperation of church and state, opposed the NOW in the 70s, tried to defend plessy vs ferguson, tried to kick Thurgood Marshall off the supreme court, not to mention they have pumped out some of the most racist presidents, Like Woodrow Wilson.(Just because you are a democrat doesnt mean you are a leftwinger) It is ironic how Eisenhower talks about the military industrial complex in his farewell address, even though he fed it like gorilla throughout his presidency. But through the end, he was the best conservative Republican in my opinion.
Back in the days of Thomas jefferson and Abraham lincoln, ect, it seems like the Republicans were the libral party and the Democrats were the conservative. Dont forget the original KKK was pro democrat untill the clan was reborn in the 1920s
so there had to be a switch, possibl during the new deal or ronald reagan's election that switched the roles to how they are now. We cant say there wasnt a switch, because our nation's history says there was.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
They certainly opposed the 13th and 14th amendment, the Democrats were the "right" at that time, and were very racial in their opposing the end of slavery and were the ones who voted against the civil rights acts of the 1800s in large margins.. and even the Civil Rights act of 1964.. as a percentage.. more Republicans voted for that than the many, still, southern conservative dems..
To be fair on the "Patriot Act".. 98/100 Senators voted YES on the Patriot Act in 2001 ... and in 2006 89/100 Senators voted YES .. so it was Democrats and Republicans..the right and the left that heavily supported the patriot Act
educate-yourself.org/cn/patrio…
Many Presidents speak a great game but the power of the purse is with congress.. will they veto an entire bill for a few provisions they do not like.. eh some do but most do not.
Well the Klan was started by Democrats .., ,as you got North you also saw some Republicans, like DC Stephenson who were strong Klan members
Republicans were getting much of the Black vote until the late 1800s the Lily-white movement as it was called was when Republicans started adopting Democratic platforms such as segregation, and started kicking blacks out of the party etc ...
Well the new deal is what realigned the parties to what is still the Democratic Base..
www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNpPj6…
^^ a great video that explains it very simply the dealignment and then realignment that led to what is the Democratic base.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
yeah i know of alot of what you said, though I think a conservative republican party was a error for us
oh, the patriot act was 98/100 and then 89/100
wow, maybe those Sacco and Venseti dudes were right..
nah probably not lol
personally i think the patriot act should be renamed to the traitor act.
And AIPAC should be renamed to IPAC
The bill of rights is toilet paper, the poor old document is fading away and the tyrants are laughing all the way to the bank.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I think conservative in general are regressives .. the only thing in general I agree with them on are guns.. I personally am against gun and ammo bans, I love shooting, but.. I live in NY which has very strict gun laws and I often Disagree with dems when it comes to guns in general.
lmao, Anarchists and anarchy in general have some appealing aspects, but I say we try reform before revolution.. we have not yet passed the point where reform can work.
The Patriot Act for me was way too broad.. if you said that we found the number of an American who had contacts with a terrorist and we would like to map 6 contacts over and investigate .. I would have no general issue with that if you got a warrant.. but the mass data collection is dumb.. I mean would it not be easier to find records from the few targeted people vs taking the data from EVERYONE and then having to try to search through the hundreds of billions of pages for this or that connection?... So on that front they did WAY too much .. not only did they produce more work for themselves but violated people's right.. but the issue is that the FISA court needs someone arguing against the government.. now it does not so the FISA court just pretty much rubber stamps what the government wants.. so .. if we had someone arguing against the government in court at least it would be more detailed and not as wide.
Well many nations actually have lobbyists in America, AIPAC is just the largest and strongest because.. Israel gets more money than pretty much any nation.
I have no issue with foreign aid, I would say in exchange for such that we treat our so called "greatest ally" like we do everyone else.. if any other country bombed 2 UN buildings when they were told it was full of civilians.. America would call for their head..and yet with Israel, we voted sanctions against them. If any other country had temporary sterilized a group of people over a decade.. a human rights violation as Israel did with the Somalian refugees.. we would be calling for their head, ... yet with Israel, once again, when the UN tried to sanction them.. America vetoed it.. then there is the killing of those4 boys on that beach and the border pushing etc etc..
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
good views bro, I think the US is Israel's bitch. They turn around and buy treasury notes and charge US tax payers interest WITH THE FUCKING MONEY WE GAVE THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE!
AIPAC determines all of the foreign policy dude, yeah, Israel gets more than any other nation. Only a couple hundred billion dollars, what is the problem? Meanwhile Cities like Detroit and countries like Haiti..
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
It's more of the opposite Israel is our bitch.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
It is a bit funny as well, do you remember the Snowden documents? Israel was the 3rd most nation according to our own NSA that kept trying to breach our cyber security. Russia and China were one and two but we expect that.. I mean Russia and China are not exactly allies so you expect them to try and hack your secrets as I am sure we are trying to do to them.. but Israel? our so called closest ally being the 3rs most nation trying to hack us? .. like really?
We could both give to Israel, they get a few billion a year .. we need around www.infrastructurereportcard.o… 4 trillion so the few billion we give them will help but not the 360B annual we would need if we addressed it seriously ..
Congress needs to address it seriously but a certain party, I will not say who.. has been trying to cut infrastructure ..
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, Israel has fucked us in the ass plenty of times. And many of the evangelical christians in america think those jerks are the chosen people. LMAO
If i was in charge of the USA I would pull a andrew jackson. Take my army and destroy the federal reserve, then oust AIPAC and tell Israel that they can either give us back our billions or stop acting like they are the best in the middle east because they are "jewz"
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I have family there so of course I do want them safe but not at the cost of letting them do whatever they want and America continuously blocking any sanctions against Israel for whatever wrong they have done.
Federal Reserve makes for an easy target and that all it is .. an easy target. It is easy to attack that because that means they will not have to actually pull up their sleeves and get to work. I am all for auditing the federal reserve, I doubt I would be for completely doing away with it.
That is a mere smokescreen. The issue is the fault of congress, not the federal reserve.. Do recall 2013 the Presidential budget called for a 15% increase in infrastructure spending.. the Senate budget at the time controlled by the Democrats wanted a 10% increase.. but what happened? Republicans kept filibustering and filibustering because their bill called for nearly a 20% cut on infrastructure .. in the end the agreed budget cut infrastructure by 5% .. cut .. at a time when we should be spending more.
so the issue is congress, not the federal reserve.
I would not oust AIPAC, I would agree America should show more spine at the UN rather than veto every action against Israel. But let us be realistic, almost every country has a lobbying group in Washington that seeks to try and get aid for their country from America... AIPAC may be powerful but they are one of many.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I say why not just annex Israel not like any country is gonna help them plus any resistors will just be executed without mercy.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I personally support a two state solution, by mostly blood but also marriage I have fam in Israel, Palestine and the surrounding nations but I want America to be evenhanded in their views.
If Israel commits a war crime as they did when they bombed those two UN buildings or commits a human rights violation as they did when they were giving temp sterilization shot to some of their African immigrants ..and we admit that they did it..when the UN tries to sanction em I see no need for America to veto every Sanction. Now, if they are being unfairly sanctioned then sure veto
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
All i'm saying is take out Israel's Government and replace it with an American government and i now realize how bad that sounds. But anyways peace can't be achieved with both Israel's and Gaza's current ruling parties there to war like.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>