I think this is idiotic. I agree with Coburn on both deficit spending and abortion, individually, but his logic is exactly the logic liberals use when defending abortion. That is, they argue why should we allow a child to be born into poverty, a single-mother home, or with disease. Well, because it's a human being that deserves all the rights of...human beings. That includes the right to life. So, sorry, Dr. Coburn, but your point is dumber than hell.
I think Coburn is right, it is a moral issue. Imagine forcing children to be born in this world who wished they weren't born, as their whole life will be a struggle to pay off our debt.
I'm sure Mr. Coburn is going to endorse Ron Paul as Ron Paul promises to fix this.
Coburn can be (and is) correct that this is a moral issue. But I was also born into a world where there was a large deficit and national debt. Saying I or others should have been "protected" from having to pay off that debt by not being born is absurd. Such logic is the worst of what pro-choice people have to offer. Their concern isn't with the child at all. The right to life is a far greater moral issue and imperative than money and paying off debt. Coburn is correct on the individual issues, but his logic on them together is morally idiotic.
Commenting by HaloScan
