Varus wrote:
By giving the irresponsible ones who created a child they can't afford more money? I'd rather the babies are adopted by responsible people who actually give a damn and can afford them.
Glad to see it. You'll be opening a foster home soon then I assume.
Of course you won't; you don't have the slightest ******* inclination to care for children, and your hypocritical pretensions to any sort of compassion are as clear as day to anyone with eyes, or ears, or even just a disembodied brain. It's a bright and shining sight of all kinds of obvious and is evidenced in every word you write about the subject: as long as it doesn't affect
you you couldn't give a ****; as long as they aren't "stealing" from you, who ares; as long as you never have to come to grips with the fact that your vote and your beliefs forces children into a potential hell for over a decade, as a ward of the state or in the cloudy limbo of a foster system or adoption, and as long as the irresponsible mother who just couldn't resist the mighty **** of studliness learns her place, you're happy.
Oh, but none of these things really matter anyway. If you ever had a relationship, or ever fathered a child,
you would do it right as rain I'm sure, but since you haven't and never will because you're a horny, skirt-chasing lecher cruising around colleges in his sweet nisan altima or whatever the hell it was, you're free to pass judgment onto the rest of the
forced child bearing populace with total and hypothetical impunity, because you're the responsible one. If you are so worried about the minuscule threat to your money that endorsing abortion (of any kind) brings it, then why don't
you do something about it instead of passing off the problem to someone else?
Personal responsibility works both ways motherfu
cker.