1
92

[–] Pwning4Ever [S] 1 points 92 points (+93|-1) ago  (edited ago)

I am pro-choice, but spending out tax dollars on abortions in other countries is fucking retarded.

I chose this article because the tears are very tasty.

Nothing quite says powerlessness like the removal of your right to bodily autonomy

Yeah, your autonomy right to american tax-dollars

1
40

[–] ThatFireFlameNew 1 points 40 points (+41|-1) ago  (edited ago)

They act like we took their rights away to get knocked up instead of just taking their rights away for us to pay for their irresponsibility.

Edit: BTW those tears are very tasty

3
18

[–] ursaggybutt101 3 points 18 points (+21|-3) ago 

Tasty tears they were. But yeah, the niggers should learn to keep their legs closed.

0
20

[–] New_years_day 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago 

Would you happen to have an article that focuses on the policy? I didnt even know that US tax payers paid for this shit :(

0
23

[–] Samsquamch 0 points 23 points (+23|-0) ago 

Most of us didn't. It will be interesting to see what other garbage deals Trump can uncover that Obama has passed with little or no knowledge from the average taxpayer.

0
20

[–] larkan 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helms_Amendment

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/23/trump-abortion-gag-rule-international-ngo-funding

Basically a rule enacted by Congress during the Reagan era that has been enforced then reversed each time there's a party-switch in the presidency. The rule prevents giving taxpayers' money to foreign-aid groups that perform or discuss abortions outside of the US.

Why do they feel entitled to our money in the first place? Are there no homeless people in the US, no one in need of medical care, no one in dire straits?

0
2

[–] anonnynonny 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

He reinstated the Mexico City Policy which bans NGO's from performing abortions in foreign countries using US tax dollars.

It's a political hot-potato.

The policy was enacted by Republican President Ronald Reagan in 1984, rescinded by Democratic President Bill Clinton in January 1993, re-instituted in January 2001 as Republican President George W. Bush took office, rescinded on January 23, 2009 as Democratic President Barack Obama took office and reinstated on January 23, 2017 as Republican President Donald Trump assumed the office.

[–] [deleted] 4 points 12 points (+16|-4) ago 

[Deleted]

0
4

[–] dobokdude 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

0
1

[–] derram 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

We still mutilate the male infants.

They're crying because they can't use the government as a sugar daddy anymore but we still don't let men decide whether they want to be cut or not.

3
3

[–] JohnFrum 3 points 3 points (+6|-3) ago 

We need to spend money here in the states to Make Abortions Great Again.

0
58

[–] go1dfish 0 points 58 points (+58|-0) ago 

Trump has removed US tax payer funding to pay for ...

He has my support.

0
13

[–] Titus-of-Voat 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

You had me at "removed tax payer funding". <3

0
11

[–] HeHeUALame 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

You had me at "Trump" :)

0
33

[–] golgotham 0 points 33 points (+33|-0) ago 

I couldn't possibly hate the MSM any more. How about THIS "After a weekend of inspiring protest, we had to watch the world’s most powerful man sign away the reproductive rights of women in developing countries" as an example of an outright LIE for you? ANY LEFTY CUNTS WANNA DEFEND THIS BULLSHIT? PLEASE?

1
6

[–] bikergang_accountant 1 points 6 points (+7|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Nobody took away their right to have sex or to reproduce, I feel like the left doesn't understand logic. They just jumble buzzwords together into what they think sounds like an argument.

They're like one of those recurrent neural networks that write Wikipedia articles.

0
27

[–] New_years_day 0 points 27 points (+27|-0) ago 

Wait.....we payed for people in other countries to get abortions?

[–] [deleted] 0 points 17 points (+17|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
9

[–] Wahaha 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

I'd be all for financing some late abortions in some countries, if you know what I mean.

0
2

[–] New_years_day 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

For fucking real.

0
6

[–] Alopix 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Nope.

This bans organizations that are even a little bit associated with abortion from receiving US funds; it's not about seeing that our tax dollars aren't used for abortions(which was already banned,) it's about pressuring foreign NGOs to drop abortions and abortion counseling if they want to keep US funding. It's the texas-style interference strategy on abortion. Oh, we won't ban it, just make it more and more scarce, expensive and onerous.

0
1

[–] bikergang_accountant 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

...have the Gates ever spent lobby money? Of course we have. Those malthusians hate humans.

0
0

[–] Koanin 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

No, not since 1973. The title is misleading.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helms_Amendment

[–] [deleted] 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
2

[–] larkan 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

It's a (labeled as such) opinion piece written by a shrill SJW feminist for a far-left newspaper, on par with the New York Times. What can you expect?

0
1

[–] ShinyVoater 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

The piece just screams "it's that time of the month".

3
10

[–] ponchoman275 3 points 10 points (+13|-3) ago 

Ultimately this is a harmful policy. This will lead to increased birth rates in the developing world which will become more and more unstable due to overpopulation. This in turn will fuel more migration to the developed world, including the USA years after Trump is gone and the immigration policy is liberal again. This policy will harm the developing countries and increase the amount of migrants in the west.

0
25

[–] Rummel 0 points 25 points (+25|-0) ago 

You might be right on all of this, but I'll disagree with you that the US stopping free money given out to foreigners for anything, let alone abortions is a bad policy.

It's not our problem, and the developing world can build their own country up and give out free abortion money if they so wish.

[–] [deleted] 5 points 10 points (+15|-5) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
3

[–] Awful-Falafel 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

And if we can secure our borders and get immigration under control, we'll be just fine.

0
5

[–] Shekelstein6M 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Expect the Zika virus to be the next big plague in the coming decade. Zika was until recently a completely harmless virus, but has "magically" evolved to make babies retarded and shrink testicles by 90%, almost like someone engineered it for global population control.

0
6

[–] Awful-Falafel 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

I suspect that the whole Zika thing is just fear mongering.

2
-1

[–] Wahaha 2 points -1 points (+1|-2) ago 

Evolution isn't magic.

0
4

[–] Wahaha 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

You say this as if it were expensive to kill a baby after it was born. If they want to, they can kill their babies just fine.

1
1

[–] obvious_throwaway1 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

Until there are no more unemployed or homeless US citizens, I don't give a shit how "harmful" it will be to stop spending money we don't have on other countries instead of our own population.

I'm sick and tired of my tax dollars being wasted on this bullshit, and so are the many others speaking up with their votes.

[–] [deleted] 1 points 9 points (+10|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

0
5

[–] Pwning4Ever [S] 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Only a matter of time until a new supervirus is formed.

0
3

[–] Shekelstein6M 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Expect the Zika virus to be the next big plague in the coming decade. Zika was until recently a completely harmless virus, but has "magically" evolved to make babies retarded and shrink testicles by 90%, almost like someone engineered it for global population control.

1
1

[–] Rainy-Day-Dream 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

GOOD LUCK EBOLA-CHAN

0
0

[–] Wahaha 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

The easier and less deadly-if-it-goes-wrong approach that is already in full motion is to control the water. Banks are doing this in Africa. They sealed the wells over there, you can only open them if you pay up. They could go to the rivers, but those are poisoned. It's a really effective scheme. Only trouble is that 20 to 40 years from now this won't be only affecting Africa but the whole world. Water will become scarce and really expensive.

0
1

[–] Rainy-Day-Dream 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

no if we cut their funding and the EU and UN fall apart a bit that means more niggers stuck in their own country competing for less food

[–] [deleted] 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
2

[–] ShinyVoater 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

This isn't a straw man: she points out he's cut off funding and then goes ballistic at him with accusations her own evidence doesn't begin to hint at. The correct answer is "PMS".

load more comments ▼ (32 remaining)