like I said, I don't think abortion should be outlawed.  My point is that there is already a system in place that handles unwanted pregnancies which includes paying for healthcare and such for the pregnant mother without government funding.  If you actually read my post, I was actually just commenting on how ridiculous your exageration of mothers ditching babies in dumpsters and arresting rape victims was.  

Dude. That's like arguing that democrats aren't "pro choice" because they don't believe that taxes should be voluntary.

Nevermind the fact, I imagine republicans think that people who would go through the trouble of aborting their children would instead put them up for adoption.

Probably not that much.

The children who aren't adopted are children taken away from their parents at an older age.  There is a huge shortage of newborns.

Brian H. Bix, Perfectionist Policies in Family Law, 2007 U. ILL. L. REV. 1055, 1061 (2007)

("[G]iven the current supply and demand for children for adoption, there is
every reason to believe that a baby given up immediately after birth would have no trouble
finding a loving home.").

The only issue really would be that a number of minority advocacy groups tend to fight adoptions of non-white children to white parents, even if that means they will be stuck in foster care.  )Of course said groups also tend to see abortion as a "stealth genocide of minorities.")

In general, most perspective adopted parents don't care about race but they DO care about age.  Wanting the "Full childraising expierence" and not wanting a child who doesn't see them as their "first" parents.

And this runs into the problem that is at the crux of the matter.  On the one side is stated taxation is theft, and you have Grover Norquist getting politicians to say no more tax increases.   There is repeated talks of cuts.  What happens is that problems build up, because societies fail to do anything, and the government is left with it.  Policies have unintend consequences, just as would competely outlawing abortion.  Lip service is paid but nothing is really done to help.  People try, but the trying is focused on the giver and how much better they are than Liberals.  It is not on the poor.

As much as there may be a desire for it, show me there is an interest anywhere to make sure there is sufficient money to cover it.   I do not see it.

I find stuff like this though:

How medieval an ideology that a woman should be forced to carry to term - and give birth to - a child she conceived through rape.

Force being the operative word here. After being forced into sexual intercourse, she's then forced into motherhood. If she can't prevent the first scenario, she should at least have some say in the second one.

I personally wouldn't want an eternal reminder of such a horrible event, and doubt I could ever look at my child and NOT see their origin story.

because if that baby ever commits a crime they'll cheer and applaud as they take it's life.

There is one bit of being offended by this you didn't mention.  How about forcing all that, AND DOING NOTHING to help out either.  In short, the woman gets less humane treatment than someone in prison.  At least people who got drafted, and heck slaves, got food and shelter and basic medical coverage.  The GOP doesn't believe in any of that apparently.  They just want to make it illegal and have the chips fall where they may.  In short, as I said, a back-alley birthing.

I guess I didn't comment on that because in my country we have the NHS. And care "from the cradle to the grave". So even if abortion was illegal, the woman and her child would be cared for. I find it difficult to imagine a life so hopeless. Like I said though, a very medieval ideology. Who owns an individual's body and the rights to it - according to this politician, in cases of rape the rights belong to the state. Sickening.

In America, you have the GOP side (this is what I am talking about) that both wants to outlaw abortion for every single context and NOT have any form of government assistance for people in need, unless they are elderly, because it would be political suicide to do so.  In fact, I have with me a card by one pro-GOP super-PAC that talks about how Democrats want to cut funds for Medicare.

You can see thinking on this subject here:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110323205706AAtoJIE

One quote:

pro life protects defenseless babies that are going to be killed by their mothers 

welfare rewards laziness and keeps people from trying to improve their lives 

being pro life doesnt mean i want to pay some lazy bums way forever

Again, with that mentality, it is as I said, it is pro-birth, not pro-life.

I did point this at the GOP, because the pro-life movement itself apparently has a range of opinions on government welfare:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/189172/welfare-and-pro-life-movement/michael-j-new