Thread: House Republicans weigh coup against Boehner after series of political defeats

Originally Posted by MW

Well, just like the so-called fair tax and Keystone pipeline, looks like there is another issue we strongly disagree on.

As for a 14 year old girl not needing parental involvement in a medical procedure such as abortion, you're definitely to the extreme left of me and most other parents in the free world. As a parent, you're darn skippy I support parental involvement in ANY medical procedure involving one of my CHILDREN. We're talking about children here, not adults. Heck, we don't even allow children to drive until they are 16, or join the military until age 17, and that is with parental consent! It's a scientific fact that children do not fully understand the future consequences of their actions.

Again, a female child knows whether or not she wants to have a baby without pressure from parents she doesn't on her own want to discuss it with. Sure, all parents would like to know if their daughters are having an abortion, but it's not in her best interest to tell them unless she believes it is. When young people join the military or drive a car, they're involving the public, public funds to pay them, public highways to drive on. There is no public role in the abortion process. The public doesn't pay for it, they don't use public facilities, they pay for the service performed at private facilities, and whatever they decide is their choice, and requiring children to notify their parents they're pregnant will work fine for those who would have shared the information to begin with, but it does not work for children who are not comfortable with disclosing that to their parents for any variety of reasons.

Whatever they decide, will be in their best interest. The only consequence of having an abortion is not having a baby which I think we can at least agree is not usually going to be the best route for an unemployed, unmarried 14 year old who doesn't want to have one. For those who want to have a baby, the parents will know soon enough and can give parental consent and pay for a child birth delivery.

Well, actually I'm not left of you. I'm an old fashioned Republican who believes there are proper limited roles for government and improper ones. The income tax is a mandate that puts government in an improper role of not only stealing income and earnings but invading the privacy of a person or business to determine the income, it's also a tool of manipulation, using deductions and tax credits to lure behavior the government wants instead of what the individual feels is best for themselves. Government involvement in medical procedures like abortions or any other for that matter unless the government is paying for it is as equally wrong, because government has no place in the breeding patterns or decisions of the American people with respect to their reproduction. I don't even want the government involved in health care. I oppose using Medicaid funds to pay for funding pregnancies and child birth, because it's an elective procedure.

Medicaid even has a "pregnancy only" coverage with much higher income levels than regular Medicaid. Now explain that. That needs to be repealed and no pregnancy coverage provided by Medicaid unless you were laid off work after you got pregnant and are without an income you were otherwise depending on.

Yes, I support the FairTax to get the government out of as much of our lives and businesses as possible.

Yes, I support the Keystone Pipeline, because it's a business to business transcontinental pipeline that benefits our market and consumers and so far, there's no environmental issue associated with it that sticks.

So, I think I'm actually to the right of you, not to the left, because you prefer more government involvement in our money, business and lives which is a leftist thing than I do, which makes me more right.