A tax question for pro-life believers

[JustW0nderingWh0Pays]

If there were a vote to allow/not allow abortion, and in order to vote not allowed, you had to commit to paying an extra 5% tax in order to fund free childcare as well as better maternity pay and an increase/restoration of child nenefit, would you still vote Not to allow ???

Obviously the cost /cost of childcare is only one of many reasons not to want to go ahead with an unplanned pregnancy. I do realise this.

Aibu - i hold pro life views and i would not be prepared to pay any more tax

Not being unreasonable - i am pro life but understand that bringing children in to the world is hugely expensive and women shouldn't be left to bear the cost/lose freedom to earn.

Disclaimer, obviously i am pro choice so to me being pro life is unreasonable but hopefully this question makes sense

I think it’s a reasonable question, especially given the huge spike in terminations since the two child limit was introduced for most benefits.
FWIW I don’t really identify as pro life or pro choice, but I am..

• pro education


• pro contraception


• pro consent


• pro healthcare


• pro welfare


• pro programs that support victims of domestic abuse, trafficking, prostitution, and drug addiction


• pro improved maternity (and paternity) leave


• pro a fully funded and functional social work department, including overhauling adoption policy, so that it’s a genuine option, but not a baby mill for rich white women

I do believe in policies (as above) that cut abortions, by preventing unwanted pregnancy, but I also believe it should still be available - a necessary evil if you like - as banning it doesn’t stop abortion happening, it merely blocks access to safe, legal abortion.

Well said!

Nobody should be forced into abortion for financial reasons but at the same time I do agree with the limit on the number of children the state are prepared to support.
So many families who are scraping by but not entitled to benefits end up doing their family planning around finances. It seems unfair that families on benefits can just expect more cash for more children.

Over 210,000 abortions happened in the UK last year, though of course that’s a small percentage of the 40 million that happen each year. Seems a little excessive to me and I would pay more tax to get that down

Contraception is free in the UK (unlike in America). Grown ups should use adequate contraception most of the time. Abortion I would hope would be a last resort because contraception failed, circumstances changed or rape/coercion.
As we used to say...every child a wanted child.

How would this even work when voting is anonymous?

I think a more realistic question would be, if you voted against abortion would you still vote that way if you had to adopt a child or completely sponsor a child to live with its birth mother when otherwise there would have been an abortion, would you also be willing to pay for treatment for any physical and/or psychological issues arising from forcing a woman to have a baby. Would you also be willing to pay additional taxes to cover all the additional services, health, education etc for the rest of that child’s life? Would you be willing to cut your carbon foot print, eg not flying, getting rid of your car to try and slightly compensate for that extra person. And would you be happy for a house to be built in your garden to help house the additional people. You must also cut down on food, clothing etc.

I think there should be reform to childcare provision- eg why in Europe is it so much cheaper? Presumably the government heavily subsidises nurseries? And also child benefit - it's ridiculous a household of 2 jointly bringing in £100k can claim but a single household bringing in £60k cannot. But it shouldn't have anything to do with abortion. I don't really see how the 2 are linked TBH. The cost of raising children doesn't begin and end with nursery fees and a paltry £22 per week CB doesn't make a dent in the cost of raising a child.