MacGirl334
Junior Member
I just want to know if a person can sue on the grounds of the free exercise of religion, to stop the gov from using my taxes to pay for abortions?
-
FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.
Taxpayer Funded Abortion
- Thread starter MacGirl334
- Start date
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
Zigner
Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Abortion is legal. You are free to exercise your religion so long as it doesn't interfere with the rights of others.
tranquility
Senior Member
But, (federal) taxpayer funded abortions are not. While one has the right to bear arms, they don't have a right to have government buy them one.
The problem is, money is fungible. There have been many lawsuits on this issue. Part of the requirements of Obamacare also reflect on religious freedom in the next round of cases at the appellate level. Unless you have a specific example of a small operation getting federal funds using them solely for abortion, don't waste your time. Others having similar views would prefer you make a donation to their larger organizations where it could make a difference.
See also:
Hyde amendment
Last edited:
Just Blue
Senior Member
People can spend 100K+_to sue for this. Likely won't win...But have at it Brother/Sister.
Wonder how much $$ the above tax payer is willing to put out in the care of children in foster care??
tranquility
Senior Member
People can spend 100K+_to sue for this. Likely won't win...But have at it Brother/Sister.
Wonder how much $$ the above tax payer is willing to put out in the care of children in foster care??
Children are a resource. While they can cost, if we don't get more, we are in real trouble demographically.
I don't think we have a shortage of children in this country. Unfortunately we have a shortage of capable parents. And there's nothing to be done about the fact that (statistically) better educated, smarter people tend to have fewer children, except to provide better education about contraceptives to people of all income brackets.
tranquility
Senior Member
Sigh. Why do you think government spending is unsustainable? (In part, but especially in regards to social security and medicare.) Because of the baby boomers. They have been a huge cohort paying into the system for social security and medicare for decades to support a much smaller portion of the population's benefits. Sure, the amount above that required for current benefits was "invested" in Treasury bonds--with interest! One problem is that, rather than actually saving the money, the government spent it on other things. I believe Social Security drew down on those "investments" last year to the tune of 40 to 50 billion dollars. That money is part of the entitlement portion of our federal budget, but is not included in the deficit because it is "off the books". (Which was a clever dodge to allow the politicians to spend rather than save the funds put into medicare and social security.)
This cash flow issue, demographically, is only going to get worse as more of the baby boomers retire and stop paying money into the trust fund(s). (Living longer screws up the plan as well. The calculations were made with a much shorter life span than we have today.) But, just because taxes have to be raised to pay for this increased cash flow need (Or, other spending reduced. Remember there is no money in any lock box.), does not mean Social Security is bankrupt. NO! It has a BUNCH of assets! Um...all those treasury bonds. Interesting conundrum, no?
In 1945, there were about 40 workers for each retiree. In 1965, about 5 workers for each retiree. Today, there is less than 2 workers for each retiree. As the baby boomers retire, the ratio gets worse.
We need more kids.
Actually, Em there are. There are jobs that Americans don't want and there are jobs available in which Americans don't have the necessary skills.
tranquility
Senior Member
That just makes the problem worse. The bottom line is, because math, government spending is unsustainable without a substantive increase in population. (We didn't even get to Medicare/Obamacare that even huge increases in workers cannot solve.) If that population does not have work, government spending is, again, unsustainable. But, we don't have to worry about the work issue if we don't deal with the demographic (math) issue.
Antigon* may or may not be right. At some point someone has to make something. It may not have to be a tangible thing, it could be an invention of a better or more efficient way to do something people need or want. Many of the people we are preparing for life are finding they should have studied manufacturing or...pipes, than some of the humanities. STEM is great, but is not the answer. We need farmers, plumbers, electricians, robot repair people too. My only saving grace for my lack of useful function is that there will always be taxes.
Last edited:
tranquility
Senior Member
That's why health care will be rationed and some fear the much ridiculed "death panels".
justalayman
Senior Member
there are no jobs that Americans don't want. There are jobs they are not willing to accept at the wages the employer wants to pay. Many, if not most, blue collar jobs have had a decrease in effective, if not actual, pay over the last couple of decades.
if there is a lack of skills, it is because people cannot afford to pay for education to learn some skill set for a particular trade or job and earn enough to repay those education costs. While CEO incomes skyrocketed, effective pay for many many blue collar jobs has actually gone down over the last several decades.
what we do have is an abundance of unemployed people. Many are of great enough intelligence to be trained to do any job out there but they cannot afford the training. A person has to earn enough to be able to survive and pay back their education costs. Blue collar level work of today isn't offering a lot of those jobs.
How many of each do you want? I can give you a list of 1000 electricians who are skilled (within 100 miles of me). Probably a similar number of plumbers. Not quite as many robot techs but they are not scarce. You find me jobs that pay a decent wage and benefit package and I'll find you the tradesmen.
and we don't need more farmers. Farms have become big business. Super farms where some conglomerate owns hundreds of thousands of acres are the farmers of today. They want farm hands, not farmers, and they aren't paying much at all. As far as farmers go; a person cannot afford to become a farmer. They will not earn enough from the crops to pay for the land. The huge corporations can do it because they can work on a much smaller profit margin per acre than an individual farmer can. The huge corporations can also afford to weather out a bad year or two that a private farmer cannot.