Ignore Ron Paul are the new marching orders?

[CA renter]

[quote=ucodegen][quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2]You have to fix housing or wait for it to fix itself that is the only way you will get out of the current high unemployment problems (and no there are not too many houses at least not in socal).[/quote]
I don’t think housing will lead us out of this one. Functionally, housings biggest single cost item is land. Land is not produced in a factory nor does the sale of land create jobs. It does pay the ‘landed wealthy’ though when they can sell parts of parcels they own. The concentration needs to be on jobs, not saving Real Estate. Tweaking rates, mortgage terms etc to allow a how to sell at a higher price may help the one selling, but it doesn’t help the one buying.

I am going to add the following – because I just got through dealing with it. We are shipping too much of our labor overseas, and it really doesn’t pay off. Too many companies are looking at the raw labor cost not factoring in production rate and quality. The reason this came up: I had to deal with Oracle support (MOS). On one issue, I had to deal with support based in China. The experience was almost like “Who’s on First”. Fine if I was wanting entertainment, but I have to deal with a system with reduced functionality – needs to be fixed. Part of the discussion ended up with the support person repeating everything I had entered, but in the form of a question.[/quote]

Bingo!!!!!!

Well said, ucodegen.

[CA renter]

[quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2][quote=ucodegen][quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2]You have to fix housing or wait for it to fix itself that is the only way you will get out of the current high unemployment problems (and no there are not too many houses at least not in socal).[/quote]
I don’t think housing will lead us out of this one. Functionally, housings biggest single cost item is land. Land is not produced in a factory nor does the sale of land create jobs. It does pay the ‘landed wealthy’ though when they can sell parts of parcels they own. The concentration needs to be on jobs, not saving Real Estate. Tweaking rates, mortgage terms etc to allow a how to sell at a higher price may help the one selling, but it doesn’t help the one buying.

I am going to add the following – because I just got through dealing with it. We are shipping too much of our labor overseas, and it really doesn’t pay off. Too many companies are looking at the raw labor cost not factoring in production rate and quality. The reason this came up: I had to deal with Oracle support (MOS). On one issue, I had to deal with support based in China. The experience was almost like “Who’s on First”. Fine if I was wanting entertainment, but I have to deal with a system with reduced functionality – needs to be fixed. Part of the discussion ended up with the support person repeating everything I had entered, but in the form of a question.[/quote]

Nope it’s the same problem we had in 2008 and 2009.
HOUSING !!
In CA approx. 30 % of home owners with a mortgage owe about 100K more than they can sell for, sorry you just cannot have an economic recovery in conditions like that.

Personally I don’t know any tech people out of work.[/quote]

It doesn’t matter how “underwater” a home “owner” is. What matters is whether or not they can afford their mortgages.

Using your house as collateral for consumption debt was ALWAYS a bad idea. Very, very bad.

If these underwater “owners” need to sell, they can easily do a short sale.

HIGH housing prices (and the debt that went with them) was the PROBLEM. Falling prices are the solution. It is being worked out, but the more the Fed/govt try to intervene in the correction, the longer it will take to play out. They cannot stop prices from falling, they are only delaying the inevitable.

Our problem is a **LACK OF JOBS.** Fix that, and everything else — housing, govt debts and deficits, etc. — will fall into place.

[CA renter]

[quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2][quote=ucodegen][quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2]You have to fix housing or wait for it to fix itself that is the only way you will get out of the current high unemployment problems (and no there are not too many houses at least not in socal).[/quote]
I don’t think housing will lead us out of this one. Functionally, housings biggest single cost item is land. Land is not produced in a factory nor does the sale of land create jobs. It does pay the ‘landed wealthy’ though when they can sell parts of parcels they own. The concentration needs to be on jobs, not saving Real Estate. Tweaking rates, mortgage terms etc to allow a how to sell at a higher price may help the one selling, but it doesn’t help the one buying.

I am going to add the following – because I just got through dealing with it. We are shipping too much of our labor overseas, and it really doesn’t pay off. Too many companies are looking at the raw labor cost not factoring in production rate and quality. The reason this came up: I had to deal with Oracle support (MOS). On one issue, I had to deal with support based in China. The experience was almost like “Who’s on First”. Fine if I was wanting entertainment, but I have to deal with a system with reduced functionality – needs to be fixed. Part of the discussion ended up with the support person repeating everything I had entered, but in the form of a question.[/quote]

Nope it’s the same problem we had in 2008 and 2009.
HOUSING !!
In CA approx. 30 % of home owners with a mortgage owe about 100K more than they can sell for, sorry you just cannot have an economic recovery in conditions like that.

Personally I don’t know any tech people out of work.[/quote]

It doesn’t matter how “underwater” a home “owner” is. What matters is whether or not they can afford their mortgages.

Using your house as collateral for consumption debt was ALWAYS a bad idea. Very, very bad.

If these underwater “owners” need to sell, they can easily do a short sale.

HIGH housing prices (and the debt that went with them) was the PROBLEM. Falling prices are the solution. It is being worked out, but the more the Fed/govt try to intervene in the correction, the longer it will take to play out. They cannot stop prices from falling, they are only delaying the inevitable.

Our problem is a **LACK OF JOBS.** Fix that, and everything else — housing, govt debts and deficits, etc. — will fall into place.

[CA renter]

[quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2][quote=ucodegen][quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2]You have to fix housing or wait for it to fix itself that is the only way you will get out of the current high unemployment problems (and no there are not too many houses at least not in socal).[/quote]
I don’t think housing will lead us out of this one. Functionally, housings biggest single cost item is land. Land is not produced in a factory nor does the sale of land create jobs. It does pay the ‘landed wealthy’ though when they can sell parts of parcels they own. The concentration needs to be on jobs, not saving Real Estate. Tweaking rates, mortgage terms etc to allow a how to sell at a higher price may help the one selling, but it doesn’t help the one buying.

I am going to add the following – because I just got through dealing with it. We are shipping too much of our labor overseas, and it really doesn’t pay off. Too many companies are looking at the raw labor cost not factoring in production rate and quality. The reason this came up: I had to deal with Oracle support (MOS). On one issue, I had to deal with support based in China. The experience was almost like “Who’s on First”. Fine if I was wanting entertainment, but I have to deal with a system with reduced functionality – needs to be fixed. Part of the discussion ended up with the support person repeating everything I had entered, but in the form of a question.[/quote]

Nope it’s the same problem we had in 2008 and 2009.
HOUSING !!
In CA approx. 30 % of home owners with a mortgage owe about 100K more than they can sell for, sorry you just cannot have an economic recovery in conditions like that.

Personally I don’t know any tech people out of work.[/quote]

It doesn’t matter how “underwater” a home “owner” is. What matters is whether or not they can afford their mortgages.

Using your house as collateral for consumption debt was ALWAYS a bad idea. Very, very bad.

If these underwater “owners” need to sell, they can easily do a short sale.

HIGH housing prices (and the debt that went with them) was the PROBLEM. Falling prices are the solution. It is being worked out, but the more the Fed/govt try to intervene in the correction, the longer it will take to play out. They cannot stop prices from falling, they are only delaying the inevitable.

Our problem is a **LACK OF JOBS.** Fix that, and everything else — housing, govt debts and deficits, etc. — will fall into place.

[CA renter]

[quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2][quote=ucodegen][quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2]You have to fix housing or wait for it to fix itself that is the only way you will get out of the current high unemployment problems (and no there are not too many houses at least not in socal).[/quote]
I don’t think housing will lead us out of this one. Functionally, housings biggest single cost item is land. Land is not produced in a factory nor does the sale of land create jobs. It does pay the ‘landed wealthy’ though when they can sell parts of parcels they own. The concentration needs to be on jobs, not saving Real Estate. Tweaking rates, mortgage terms etc to allow a how to sell at a higher price may help the one selling, but it doesn’t help the one buying.

I am going to add the following – because I just got through dealing with it. We are shipping too much of our labor overseas, and it really doesn’t pay off. Too many companies are looking at the raw labor cost not factoring in production rate and quality. The reason this came up: I had to deal with Oracle support (MOS). On one issue, I had to deal with support based in China. The experience was almost like “Who’s on First”. Fine if I was wanting entertainment, but I have to deal with a system with reduced functionality – needs to be fixed. Part of the discussion ended up with the support person repeating everything I had entered, but in the form of a question.[/quote]

Nope it’s the same problem we had in 2008 and 2009.
HOUSING !!
In CA approx. 30 % of home owners with a mortgage owe about 100K more than they can sell for, sorry you just cannot have an economic recovery in conditions like that.

Personally I don’t know any tech people out of work.[/quote]

It doesn’t matter how “underwater” a home “owner” is. What matters is whether or not they can afford their mortgages.

Using your house as collateral for consumption debt was ALWAYS a bad idea. Very, very bad.

If these underwater “owners” need to sell, they can easily do a short sale.

HIGH housing prices (and the debt that went with them) was the PROBLEM. Falling prices are the solution. It is being worked out, but the more the Fed/govt try to intervene in the correction, the longer it will take to play out. They cannot stop prices from falling, they are only delaying the inevitable.

Our problem is a **LACK OF JOBS.** Fix that, and everything else — housing, govt debts and deficits, etc. — will fall into place.

[CA renter]

[quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2][quote=ucodegen][quote=Nor-LA-SD-GUY2]You have to fix housing or wait for it to fix itself that is the only way you will get out of the current high unemployment problems (and no there are not too many houses at least not in socal).[/quote]
I don’t think housing will lead us out of this one. Functionally, housings biggest single cost item is land. Land is not produced in a factory nor does the sale of land create jobs. It does pay the ‘landed wealthy’ though when they can sell parts of parcels they own. The concentration needs to be on jobs, not saving Real Estate. Tweaking rates, mortgage terms etc to allow a how to sell at a higher price may help the one selling, but it doesn’t help the one buying.

I am going to add the following – because I just got through dealing with it. We are shipping too much of our labor overseas, and it really doesn’t pay off. Too many companies are looking at the raw labor cost not factoring in production rate and quality. The reason this came up: I had to deal with Oracle support (MOS). On one issue, I had to deal with support based in China. The experience was almost like “Who’s on First”. Fine if I was wanting entertainment, but I have to deal with a system with reduced functionality – needs to be fixed. Part of the discussion ended up with the support person repeating everything I had entered, but in the form of a question.[/quote]

Nope it’s the same problem we had in 2008 and 2009.
HOUSING !!
In CA approx. 30 % of home owners with a mortgage owe about 100K more than they can sell for, sorry you just cannot have an economic recovery in conditions like that.

Personally I don’t know any tech people out of work.[/quote]

It doesn’t matter how “underwater” a home “owner” is. What matters is whether or not they can afford their mortgages.

Using your house as collateral for consumption debt was ALWAYS a bad idea. Very, very bad.

If these underwater “owners” need to sell, they can easily do a short sale.

HIGH housing prices (and the debt that went with them) was the PROBLEM. Falling prices are the solution. It is being worked out, but the more the Fed/govt try to intervene in the correction, the longer it will take to play out. They cannot stop prices from falling, they are only delaying the inevitable.

Our problem is a **LACK OF JOBS.** Fix that, and everything else — housing, govt debts and deficits, etc. — will fall into place.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=jpinpb]Agreed. But they all have their stand on it and divide voters. If they are taking a position on it, I will make my decision based on it as well, as others will also. Good way to alienate and/or win votes.

But at this point, I honestly think they need to lay it to rest. We have universal healthcare. We have people w/money having medical surgery to enhance their body. Yet there are people still wanting to make it illegal for a woman to terminate a pregnancy, claiming there are no health issues that can arise to justify aborting. Beyond my comprehension.[/quote]
Maybe you should read the reason why he’s anti-abortion: http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/abortion/.

Let me start off by saying, before I have kids, I was 100% pro choice and can’t understand why anyone would be pro life. What opened my eyes was going to the very first ultrasound and hearing the heart beat after 8 weeks. I now understand why many people are pro life. Although I’m still pro choice when it come to situation where the mother’s life is in danger, I’m now leaning toward pro life for your average abortion. The reason people are pro life is because they want to be the voice for those babies who are being killed.

Do you know Planned Parenthood don’t let the mother see the ultrasound screen and they turn off the volume? I know a NP who works there and she said if they let them see the screen and hear the heart beat, many would probably back out. I know I did when I saw the first ultrasound and hear the 1st heart beat. I still support Roe v Wade, but only for cases where it would kill the mother if the abortion wasn’t done. Ron Paul’s point is, Life > Liberty, which is why he’s against Roe v Wade.

My questions to Navydoc is, how many tomb stones can you point to of mothers that died because they didn’t have an abortion vs how many tomb stones you can point to of babies who were aborted who would have grown up to be healthy adults?

I always find it funny that those who are pro choice tend to be anti death penalty and those who are pro life tend to be pro death penalty.[/quote]

Another TMI post, and more anecdotal stuff.

My mother had four abortions before I was born, way back before birth control and before legal abortions were available. She ended up with a staph infection after one of these procedures, which almost killed her.

Outlawing abortions does not stop abortions, it only pushes them underground where doctors are questionable (maybe…IF they are doctors in the first place), regulations are non-existent, and truly sanitary conditions are left wanting. So, while others want to protect the right of embryos and fetuses, I’ll protect the women who will end up going to back-alley clinics in search of these illegal abortions. Do we want our daughters to seek abortions at some questionable clinic in Mexico? Make them illegal, and that’s exactly what will happen.

The decision to get an abortion is never made lightly. It’s an extremely important and personal decision, and the government/politicians (and every other stranger) have absolutely no business trying to force their beliefs on people whose entire lives will be affected by these decisions.

I’m grateful that I was never in a position to have to make this decision, and I’ve felt the awe and pure love as I sobbed my way through those miraculous ultrasounds, so I understand the powerful, emotional reasons behind the Right to Life movement. Still my beliefs are mine, and I do not have the right to force my beliefs on people I do not know, and who will have to suffer the consequences that I will not have to suffer if my will is imposed upon them.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=jpinpb]Agreed. But they all have their stand on it and divide voters. If they are taking a position on it, I will make my decision based on it as well, as others will also. Good way to alienate and/or win votes.

But at this point, I honestly think they need to lay it to rest. We have universal healthcare. We have people w/money having medical surgery to enhance their body. Yet there are people still wanting to make it illegal for a woman to terminate a pregnancy, claiming there are no health issues that can arise to justify aborting. Beyond my comprehension.[/quote]
Maybe you should read the reason why he’s anti-abortion: http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/abortion/.

Let me start off by saying, before I have kids, I was 100% pro choice and can’t understand why anyone would be pro life. What opened my eyes was going to the very first ultrasound and hearing the heart beat after 8 weeks. I now understand why many people are pro life. Although I’m still pro choice when it come to situation where the mother’s life is in danger, I’m now leaning toward pro life for your average abortion. The reason people are pro life is because they want to be the voice for those babies who are being killed.

Do you know Planned Parenthood don’t let the mother see the ultrasound screen and they turn off the volume? I know a NP who works there and she said if they let them see the screen and hear the heart beat, many would probably back out. I know I did when I saw the first ultrasound and hear the 1st heart beat. I still support Roe v Wade, but only for cases where it would kill the mother if the abortion wasn’t done. Ron Paul’s point is, Life > Liberty, which is why he’s against Roe v Wade.

My questions to Navydoc is, how many tomb stones can you point to of mothers that died because they didn’t have an abortion vs how many tomb stones you can point to of babies who were aborted who would have grown up to be healthy adults?

I always find it funny that those who are pro choice tend to be anti death penalty and those who are pro life tend to be pro death penalty.[/quote]

Another TMI post, and more anecdotal stuff.

My mother had four abortions before I was born, way back before birth control and before legal abortions were available. She ended up with a staph infection after one of these procedures, which almost killed her.

Outlawing abortions does not stop abortions, it only pushes them underground where doctors are questionable (maybe…IF they are doctors in the first place), regulations are non-existent, and truly sanitary conditions are left wanting. So, while others want to protect the right of embryos and fetuses, I’ll protect the women who will end up going to back-alley clinics in search of these illegal abortions. Do we want our daughters to seek abortions at some questionable clinic in Mexico? Make them illegal, and that’s exactly what will happen.

The decision to get an abortion is never made lightly. It’s an extremely important and personal decision, and the government/politicians (and every other stranger) have absolutely no business trying to force their beliefs on people whose entire lives will be affected by these decisions.

I’m grateful that I was never in a position to have to make this decision, and I’ve felt the awe and pure love as I sobbed my way through those miraculous ultrasounds, so I understand the powerful, emotional reasons behind the Right to Life movement. Still my beliefs are mine, and I do not have the right to force my beliefs on people I do not know, and who will have to suffer the consequences that I will not have to suffer if my will is imposed upon them.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=jpinpb]Agreed. But they all have their stand on it and divide voters. If they are taking a position on it, I will make my decision based on it as well, as others will also. Good way to alienate and/or win votes.

But at this point, I honestly think they need to lay it to rest. We have universal healthcare. We have people w/money having medical surgery to enhance their body. Yet there are people still wanting to make it illegal for a woman to terminate a pregnancy, claiming there are no health issues that can arise to justify aborting. Beyond my comprehension.[/quote]
Maybe you should read the reason why he’s anti-abortion: http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/abortion/.

Let me start off by saying, before I have kids, I was 100% pro choice and can’t understand why anyone would be pro life. What opened my eyes was going to the very first ultrasound and hearing the heart beat after 8 weeks. I now understand why many people are pro life. Although I’m still pro choice when it come to situation where the mother’s life is in danger, I’m now leaning toward pro life for your average abortion. The reason people are pro life is because they want to be the voice for those babies who are being killed.

Do you know Planned Parenthood don’t let the mother see the ultrasound screen and they turn off the volume? I know a NP who works there and she said if they let them see the screen and hear the heart beat, many would probably back out. I know I did when I saw the first ultrasound and hear the 1st heart beat. I still support Roe v Wade, but only for cases where it would kill the mother if the abortion wasn’t done. Ron Paul’s point is, Life > Liberty, which is why he’s against Roe v Wade.

My questions to Navydoc is, how many tomb stones can you point to of mothers that died because they didn’t have an abortion vs how many tomb stones you can point to of babies who were aborted who would have grown up to be healthy adults?

I always find it funny that those who are pro choice tend to be anti death penalty and those who are pro life tend to be pro death penalty.[/quote]

Another TMI post, and more anecdotal stuff.

My mother had four abortions before I was born, way back before birth control and before legal abortions were available. She ended up with a staph infection after one of these procedures, which almost killed her.

Outlawing abortions does not stop abortions, it only pushes them underground where doctors are questionable (maybe…IF they are doctors in the first place), regulations are non-existent, and truly sanitary conditions are left wanting. So, while others want to protect the right of embryos and fetuses, I’ll protect the women who will end up going to back-alley clinics in search of these illegal abortions. Do we want our daughters to seek abortions at some questionable clinic in Mexico? Make them illegal, and that’s exactly what will happen.

The decision to get an abortion is never made lightly. It’s an extremely important and personal decision, and the government/politicians (and every other stranger) have absolutely no business trying to force their beliefs on people whose entire lives will be affected by these decisions.

I’m grateful that I was never in a position to have to make this decision, and I’ve felt the awe and pure love as I sobbed my way through those miraculous ultrasounds, so I understand the powerful, emotional reasons behind the Right to Life movement. Still my beliefs are mine, and I do not have the right to force my beliefs on people I do not know, and who will have to suffer the consequences that I will not have to suffer if my will is imposed upon them.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=jpinpb]Agreed. But they all have their stand on it and divide voters. If they are taking a position on it, I will make my decision based on it as well, as others will also. Good way to alienate and/or win votes.

But at this point, I honestly think they need to lay it to rest. We have universal healthcare. We have people w/money having medical surgery to enhance their body. Yet there are people still wanting to make it illegal for a woman to terminate a pregnancy, claiming there are no health issues that can arise to justify aborting. Beyond my comprehension.[/quote]
Maybe you should read the reason why he’s anti-abortion: http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/abortion/.

Let me start off by saying, before I have kids, I was 100% pro choice and can’t understand why anyone would be pro life. What opened my eyes was going to the very first ultrasound and hearing the heart beat after 8 weeks. I now understand why many people are pro life. Although I’m still pro choice when it come to situation where the mother’s life is in danger, I’m now leaning toward pro life for your average abortion. The reason people are pro life is because they want to be the voice for those babies who are being killed.

Do you know Planned Parenthood don’t let the mother see the ultrasound screen and they turn off the volume? I know a NP who works there and she said if they let them see the screen and hear the heart beat, many would probably back out. I know I did when I saw the first ultrasound and hear the 1st heart beat. I still support Roe v Wade, but only for cases where it would kill the mother if the abortion wasn’t done. Ron Paul’s point is, Life > Liberty, which is why he’s against Roe v Wade.

My questions to Navydoc is, how many tomb stones can you point to of mothers that died because they didn’t have an abortion vs how many tomb stones you can point to of babies who were aborted who would have grown up to be healthy adults?

I always find it funny that those who are pro choice tend to be anti death penalty and those who are pro life tend to be pro death penalty.[/quote]

Another TMI post, and more anecdotal stuff.

My mother had four abortions before I was born, way back before birth control and before legal abortions were available. She ended up with a staph infection after one of these procedures, which almost killed her.

Outlawing abortions does not stop abortions, it only pushes them underground where doctors are questionable (maybe…IF they are doctors in the first place), regulations are non-existent, and truly sanitary conditions are left wanting. So, while others want to protect the right of embryos and fetuses, I’ll protect the women who will end up going to back-alley clinics in search of these illegal abortions. Do we want our daughters to seek abortions at some questionable clinic in Mexico? Make them illegal, and that’s exactly what will happen.

The decision to get an abortion is never made lightly. It’s an extremely important and personal decision, and the government/politicians (and every other stranger) have absolutely no business trying to force their beliefs on people whose entire lives will be affected by these decisions.

I’m grateful that I was never in a position to have to make this decision, and I’ve felt the awe and pure love as I sobbed my way through those miraculous ultrasounds, so I understand the powerful, emotional reasons behind the Right to Life movement. Still my beliefs are mine, and I do not have the right to force my beliefs on people I do not know, and who will have to suffer the consequences that I will not have to suffer if my will is imposed upon them.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=jpinpb]Agreed. But they all have their stand on it and divide voters. If they are taking a position on it, I will make my decision based on it as well, as others will also. Good way to alienate and/or win votes.

But at this point, I honestly think they need to lay it to rest. We have universal healthcare. We have people w/money having medical surgery to enhance their body. Yet there are people still wanting to make it illegal for a woman to terminate a pregnancy, claiming there are no health issues that can arise to justify aborting. Beyond my comprehension.[/quote]
Maybe you should read the reason why he’s anti-abortion: http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/abortion/.

Let me start off by saying, before I have kids, I was 100% pro choice and can’t understand why anyone would be pro life. What opened my eyes was going to the very first ultrasound and hearing the heart beat after 8 weeks. I now understand why many people are pro life. Although I’m still pro choice when it come to situation where the mother’s life is in danger, I’m now leaning toward pro life for your average abortion. The reason people are pro life is because they want to be the voice for those babies who are being killed.

Do you know Planned Parenthood don’t let the mother see the ultrasound screen and they turn off the volume? I know a NP who works there and she said if they let them see the screen and hear the heart beat, many would probably back out. I know I did when I saw the first ultrasound and hear the 1st heart beat. I still support Roe v Wade, but only for cases where it would kill the mother if the abortion wasn’t done. Ron Paul’s point is, Life > Liberty, which is why he’s against Roe v Wade.

My questions to Navydoc is, how many tomb stones can you point to of mothers that died because they didn’t have an abortion vs how many tomb stones you can point to of babies who were aborted who would have grown up to be healthy adults?

I always find it funny that those who are pro choice tend to be anti death penalty and those who are pro life tend to be pro death penalty.[/quote]

Another TMI post, and more anecdotal stuff.

My mother had four abortions before I was born, way back before birth control and before legal abortions were available. She ended up with a staph infection after one of these procedures, which almost killed her.

Outlawing abortions does not stop abortions, it only pushes them underground where doctors are questionable (maybe…IF they are doctors in the first place), regulations are non-existent, and truly sanitary conditions are left wanting. So, while others want to protect the right of embryos and fetuses, I’ll protect the women who will end up going to back-alley clinics in search of these illegal abortions. Do we want our daughters to seek abortions at some questionable clinic in Mexico? Make them illegal, and that’s exactly what will happen.

The decision to get an abortion is never made lightly. It’s an extremely important and personal decision, and the government/politicians (and every other stranger) have absolutely no business trying to force their beliefs on people whose entire lives will be affected by these decisions.

I’m grateful that I was never in a position to have to make this decision, and I’ve felt the awe and pure love as I sobbed my way through those miraculous ultrasounds, so I understand the powerful, emotional reasons behind the Right to Life movement. Still my beliefs are mine, and I do not have the right to force my beliefs on people I do not know, and who will have to suffer the consequences that I will not have to suffer if my will is imposed upon them.

[Navydoc]

[quote=AN]My questions to Navydoc is, how many tomb stones can you point to of mothers that died because they didn’t have an abortion vs how many tomb stones you can point to of babies who were aborted who would have grown up to be healthy adults?

I always find it funny that those who are pro choice tend to be anti death penalty and those who are pro life tend to be pro death penalty.[/quote]

I think you missed the point of my response. I was reacting to the Ron Paul statement that he never saw an abortion that was necessary to save the mother’s life. They absolutely do happen. You may not know this, but I’m a high risk pregnancy subspecialist, and maintaining healthy pregnancies in women with medical conditions is actually my job. Unfortunately there are times when aborting a healthy fetus IS necessary to protect the mother’s life. Don’t misunderstand me, I detest the concept of abortion, and some of the procedures I’ve performed have left me personally scarred, but the procedure MUST remain legal. I have no interest in placing my professional future at the whim of a court because I perfomed an illegal procedure. What you said about Planned Parenthood is absolutely correct, and the pre-procedure counseling those patients receive can be extremely suspect, especially considering it’s fee for service care.

And there are some people out there who are pro-choice and pro-death penalty. I consider the two concepts completely unrelated.

[Navydoc]

[quote=AN]My questions to Navydoc is, how many tomb stones can you point to of mothers that died because they didn’t have an abortion vs how many tomb stones you can point to of babies who were aborted who would have grown up to be healthy adults?

I always find it funny that those who are pro choice tend to be anti death penalty and those who are pro life tend to be pro death penalty.[/quote]

I think you missed the point of my response. I was reacting to the Ron Paul statement that he never saw an abortion that was necessary to save the mother’s life. They absolutely do happen. You may not know this, but I’m a high risk pregnancy subspecialist, and maintaining healthy pregnancies in women with medical conditions is actually my job. Unfortunately there are times when aborting a healthy fetus IS necessary to protect the mother’s life. Don’t misunderstand me, I detest the concept of abortion, and some of the procedures I’ve performed have left me personally scarred, but the procedure MUST remain legal. I have no interest in placing my professional future at the whim of a court because I perfomed an illegal procedure. What you said about Planned Parenthood is absolutely correct, and the pre-procedure counseling those patients receive can be extremely suspect, especially considering it’s fee for service care.

And there are some people out there who are pro-choice and pro-death penalty. I consider the two concepts completely unrelated.

[Navydoc]

[quote=AN]My questions to Navydoc is, how many tomb stones can you point to of mothers that died because they didn’t have an abortion vs how many tomb stones you can point to of babies who were aborted who would have grown up to be healthy adults?

I always find it funny that those who are pro choice tend to be anti death penalty and those who are pro life tend to be pro death penalty.[/quote]

I think you missed the point of my response. I was reacting to the Ron Paul statement that he never saw an abortion that was necessary to save the mother’s life. They absolutely do happen. You may not know this, but I’m a high risk pregnancy subspecialist, and maintaining healthy pregnancies in women with medical conditions is actually my job. Unfortunately there are times when aborting a healthy fetus IS necessary to protect the mother’s life. Don’t misunderstand me, I detest the concept of abortion, and some of the procedures I’ve performed have left me personally scarred, but the procedure MUST remain legal. I have no interest in placing my professional future at the whim of a court because I perfomed an illegal procedure. What you said about Planned Parenthood is absolutely correct, and the pre-procedure counseling those patients receive can be extremely suspect, especially considering it’s fee for service care.

And there are some people out there who are pro-choice and pro-death penalty. I consider the two concepts completely unrelated.

[Navydoc]

[quote=AN]My questions to Navydoc is, how many tomb stones can you point to of mothers that died because they didn’t have an abortion vs how many tomb stones you can point to of babies who were aborted who would have grown up to be healthy adults?

I always find it funny that those who are pro choice tend to be anti death penalty and those who are pro life tend to be pro death penalty.[/quote]

I think you missed the point of my response. I was reacting to the Ron Paul statement that he never saw an abortion that was necessary to save the mother’s life. They absolutely do happen. You may not know this, but I’m a high risk pregnancy subspecialist, and maintaining healthy pregnancies in women with medical conditions is actually my job. Unfortunately there are times when aborting a healthy fetus IS necessary to protect the mother’s life. Don’t misunderstand me, I detest the concept of abortion, and some of the procedures I’ve performed have left me personally scarred, but the procedure MUST remain legal. I have no interest in placing my professional future at the whim of a court because I perfomed an illegal procedure. What you said about Planned Parenthood is absolutely correct, and the pre-procedure counseling those patients receive can be extremely suspect, especially considering it’s fee for service care.

And there are some people out there who are pro-choice and pro-death penalty. I consider the two concepts completely unrelated.

[Author]

Posts