The power of the political arena can be utilized to help funding and research and assistance to help in miscarriage. There's no reason you couldn't do this, as opposed to using it to penalize women you feel shouldn't get an abortion.
I prefer to address the root cause of the estimated 850,000 contract killings that are performed in this nation annually for convenience purposes. These procedures are unnecessary and could be prevented by very simple modifications in personal behavior. This would not be a penalty for abortion, but an incentive to help encourage responsibility to help prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place.
I don't want to list a few things. When you get pregnant, I'll be find your trials relevant.
You already did list a few things - If you were at all concerned about unwanted pregnancy, you would advocate prevention instead of advocating abortion as a method of birth control
Huh? You know how schools are funded correctly? I mean... I don't live in the same state of locale, so such assistance I provide is limited to my income and the distance I am from you, and how much federal assistance your school district has received.
I asked how your taxes help fund my family and you bring up schools. My teen son will be attending the university after summer break, which is all but here already. He's 18 but that is beside the point isn't it? I don't recall your tax dollars ever being used to fund anything in my local area. If you are going to make a statement like that, then you need to back it up with relevant data.
A correlative relationship in statistics are when any two numerical factors share any sort of statistical relationship (such as an inverse relationship).
Between women who have abortions, and numerous other imagined and unimagined numbers will correlate. An easy example would be between people who have abortions, and people who are women. There is a direct correlation. So the fact that lower positions on the economic scale inc
This is relevant how exactly?
I find it hard to believe that someone who wishes to tax people 5% to 10% of there income because they got an abortion you don't personally agree with, have invested much time into helping people. Poor people don't need to paying more taxes... that's just going to make it harder for people to not be poor.
I'm not concerned with preventing abortion nor am I advocating taxing them. I'm rather concerned with the prevention of unwanted pregnancies. Unwanted pregnancies result in an estimated 850,000 human lives being terminated annually, which you don't seem to care about. Prevent unwanted pregnancies and many lives will be saved. You advocate killing unborn human lives. I advocate prevention of unwanted pregnancies. I support a woman's right to choose, but I likewise acknowledge the root cause of abortion itself.
Wait. If I was going to get a girl pregnant, and she to have an abortion, but I decided not to because I was going to get taxed 5% (by the way, I would just stop working to not pay the tax) then whose life was saved? How is an fetus's life saved from preventing from having been conceived?
That's why this doesn't address abortion, or saving lives directly. This incentive is to help encourage responsible behavior before an unwanted pregnancy occurs at all. . After the fact, I'd suggest some accountability to be accepted by both parties involved. It was an irresponsible choice made by both parties that a pregnancy occurred after all. This incentive would be applied based on actions so irresponsible that a human life is terminated.
And the evidence that supports this affirmative Yes?
It would help, not solve. It would encourage, not fix. This thread alone illustrates how much more value is placed on the wallet than on unborn human lives. Threaten the wallet and the result will be encouragement and an avoidance of the tax. It's far easier to focus on prevention than to quit working (as you said you would do) in attempt to evade. Tax evasion is far more difficult than being responsible before a pregnancy occurs. Of course some will likely thumb their nose at such a noble attempt to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Others, however, will start making more responsible decisions. Not everyone has the luxury of not working like you, so it would be imperative for them to practice more responsible behavior to avoid being taxed for life for something that is easily modified and fixed by them.
No, just the people who get them.
If you're suggesting that only those who choose to abort are to be taxed you are correct. This isn't an attack, however. It is simply a tax initiative to help encourage responsible behavior. It's too late after a pregnancy occurs, which is why the focus is placed on the prevention of unwanted pregnancy and responsibility .
At the end of the day, a woman can have an abortion until the point of viability for any reason she so pleases. It doesn't really matter if you find people irresponsible who don't want to have a kid despite the fact they got pregnant. Can be completely out of leisure. The only person that pays for an abortion or has to deal with any issue is the mother and father, and that's it. So, no there isn't really a monumental responsibility issue that needs to be addressed. People weren't put on this planet to live up to anyone particular notion of responsibility. I think its often irresponsible to have a kid that you clearly can't afford or pay for or emotionally or intellectually give anything to, and simply having a baby because society deems a bad person otherwise. At the end the day, the only person whose call it is is the person actually gestating the thing for 9 months, and to a significant but lesser extent, the person who put the stuff there in the first place.
You're are correct for the most part, but given that there are an estimated 850,000 unwanted pregnancies that end in convenience abortions annually in this nation there most certainly is an issue of responsibility that needs addressing. Choice remains a personal decision, but the tax would help encourage more responsible behavior by both genders once implemented.
