Jump to content

Planned Parenthood

NorthoftheBorder

By NorthoftheBorder
in Political Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

bullets13

bullets13

Posted
Posted
That could be completely fabricated. maybe it's just the fact that it's poorly written and on a fake news site, but it sure reads like a piece of fiction. I'm just saying. It is all based on an interview posted by a church on their website. a church that is obviously against abortion. it wouldn't much serve their purpose if she said "it was very humane and by the book".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted

That could be completely fabricated. maybe it's just the fact that it's poorly written and on a fake news site, but it sure reads like a piece of fiction. I'm just saying. It is all based on an interview posted by a church on their website. a church that is obviously against abortion. it wouldn't much serve their purpose if she said "it was very humane and by the book".

My comment has nothing to do with the article, only planned parenthood's (what a joke of a name) activities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullets13

bullets13

Posted
Posted
just FYI, about 3% of PP's health services involve abortion. Their main focus is on prevention of unintended pregnancies, rather than termination of those already conceived. Whether or not you agree with abortion, that is a miniscule part of what they do, and they provide a TON of other valuable services.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted

just FYI, about 3% of PP's health services involve abortion. Their main focus is on prevention of unintended pregnancies, rather than termination of those already conceived. Whether or not you agree with abortion, that is a miniscule part of what they do, and they provide a TON of other valuable services.

Just FYI:

 

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/04/planned-parenthood/

 

From the article:

 

Planned Parenthood’s chart shows that abortions made up 3 percent of its total services. Another way to measure the group’s abortion services, however, is to divide the total number of abortions by the number of clients. For example, Planned Parenthood said that it “provided nearly 11.4 million medical services for 3 million people” in 2009. Its 2011 fact sheet says it performed 332,278 abortion procedures in 2009. That would mean that roughly one out of every 10 clients received an abortion.

 

 

They killed 332,278 babies in 2009...good thing they are only spending 3% of their budget on it.

 

Wonder how much money they made off of 332,278 abortions?

 

Make no mistake...planned parenthood is in the abortion business to make money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NorthoftheBorder

NorthoftheBorder

Posted
  • Author
Posted

That could be completely fabricated. maybe it's just the fact that it's poorly written and on a fake news site, but it sure reads like a piece of fiction. I'm just saying. It is all based on an interview posted by a church on their website. a church that is obviously against abortion. it wouldn't much serve their purpose if she said "it was very humane and by the book".

I know nothing about this site.  What do you base your assertion that it is a "fake" news site.  I assume that it is because it is not NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC etal....  Planned Parenthood has been exposed multiple times for indescretions, but the legitimate news sources never cover them.  Occassionaly Fox does but they do not stay with it very long.  It is a real piece of work when the "legitimate" news sources do not cover the indescretions of those organizations they support, but then when the internet based groups do cover it, we all scream that they are fake and can't be trusted and "it must not be true" since the "legitimate" news didn't cover it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullets13

bullets13

Posted
Posted
 

I know nothing about this site.  What do you base your assertion that it is a "fake" news site.  I assume that it is because it is not NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC etal....  Planned Parenthood has been exposed multiple times for indescretions, but the legitimate news sources never cover them.  Occassionaly Fox does but they do not stay with it very long.  It is a real piece of work when the "legitimate" news sources do not cover the indescretions of those organizations they support, but then when the internet based groups do cover it, we all scream that they are fake and can't be trusted and "it must not be true" since the "legitimate" news didn't cover it.

 I based on their "news topics": Abortion, Bioethics, Contraception, Culture of Life, Editorial, Euthanasia, Faith, Family, Freedom, Homosexuality, Newsbytes, Politics, Population Control, Stem Cell.

This is clearly a far-right propoganda site. It would be like me posting an article from a far-left one. I don't know of any, but i'm sure there are just as many as on the left as on the right.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullets13

bullets13

Posted
Posted
 

Just FYI:
 
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/04/planned-parenthood/
 
From the article:
 
Planned Parenthood’s chart shows that abortions made up 3 percent of its total services. Another way to measure the group’s abortion services, however, is to divide the total number of abortions by the number of clients. For example, Planned Parenthood said that it “provided nearly 11.4 million medical services for 3 million people” in 2009. Its 2011 fact sheet says it performed 332,278 abortion procedures in 2009. That would mean that roughly one out of every 10 clients received an abortion.
 
 
They killed 332,278 babies in 2009...good thing they are only spending 3% of their budget on it.
 
Wonder how much money they made off of 332,278 abortions?
 
Make no mistake...planned parenthood is in the abortion business to make money.

 
I suppose it's in how you want to divide the numbers, but i'd agree that 10% is a valid number. that being said, 90% of their clients do not get abortions. So i get it, you hate abortions, and many people do. I respect that. but this does not take away from the fact that 90% of their clients, AND 97% of the services they provide have nothing to do with abortions, and are very valuable to the poor of our country.

I'd also challenge anybody to say that any entity providing free birth control to the poor in order to prevent unwanted pregnancies that you and i will pay for (both during pregnancy and as long as the child receives welfare, medicaid, chips, WIC, etc.) or that might end up as an abortion is not doing a great service for our country by doing so.

So while you and i may disagree about abortion, i can respect your view on it. But PP is not strictly an abortion clinic, or even mostly an abortion clinic, or even a good bit a an abortion clinic. it's a free women's health clinic that also happens to provide abortions. And no matter how much you may dislike the abortion aspect of it, there are many aspects of PP that are extremely valuable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted

 
 
I suppose it's in how you want to divide the numbers, but i'd agree that 10% is a valid number. that being said, 90% of their clients do not get abortions. So i get it, you hate abortions, and many people do. I respect that. but this does not take away from the fact that 90% of their clients, AND 97% of the services they provide have nothing to do with abortions, and are very valuable to the poor of our country.

I'd also challenge anybody to say that any entity providing free birth control to the poor in order to prevent unwanted pregnancies that you and i will pay for (both during pregnancy and as long as the child receives welfare, medicaid, chips, WIC, etc.) or that might end up as an abortion is not doing a great service for our country by doing so.

So while you and i may disagree about abortion, i can respect your view on it. But PP is not strictly an abortion clinic, or even mostly an abortion clinic, or even a good bit a an abortion clinic. it's a free women's health clinic that also happens to provide abortions. And no matter how much you may dislike the abortion aspect of it, there are many aspects of PP that are extremely valuable.

 

Ehhh...they do some good work...so don't worry about all the children they murder.

 

It amazes me how people can be so dismissive of this.

 

There are plenty of Crisis Pregnancy centers (most Church centered) that provide these services WITHOUT trying to push abortions (which pp does)

 

If pp could not provide abortions, they would close the doors.

 

What makes me even sicker is that my tax dollars go to this abortion mill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullets13

bullets13

Posted
Posted
 

Ehhh...they do some good work...so don't worry about all the children they murder.
 
It amazes me how people can be so dismissive of this.
 
There are plenty of Crisis Pregnancy centers (most Church centered) that provide these services WITHOUT trying to push abortions (which pp does)
 
If pp could not provide abortions, they would close the doors.
 
What makes me even sicker is that my tax dollars go to this abortion mill.

 
Well, a lot of the population is pro-choice, including myself. that being said, the LAW is also pro-choice. so if what they're doing is legal, you might as well look at the work that they do that benefits you as well. i personally would rather my tax dollars go to abortion and birth control than to unwanted children that i'll have to support for 18-years with my tax dollars (at least).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted

Well, a lot of the population is pro-choice, including myself. that being said, the LAW is also pro-choice. so if what they're doing is legal, you might as well look at the work that they do that benefits you as well. i personally would rather my tax dollars go to abortion and birth control than to unwanted children that i'll have to support for 18-years with my tax dollars (at least).


So lots of folks are OK with it and it's legal...good thing that weak-minded view didn't prevail when slavery was legal.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tvc184

tvc184

Posted
Posted

You are pushing that weak-minded view now.   "Let's let the states decide, even if it might violate somebody's consitutional rights."   That is your view, right?

 

To my knowledge the federal government has not defined when life begins. The state of Texas has and it is at conception, even to the point of filing murder charges for intentionally killing a fetus. That appears to be under the Tenth Amendment under states' rights and I have not seen any constitutional challenge to that TX law of establishing life. So with the feds not defining life and TX has, it seems that the TX law is constitutional (and in fact is unless overturned) and as I have said, there has been no challenge or overturning of the TX law.

 

If life is in the womb, why is allowing the killing of the child allowed under the US Constitution? What part of the Constitution allows the killing of a person not convicted of any crime short of life saving? Remembering that a state could ban abortion before Roe v. Wade when the SCOTUS ruled that a state had to allow it to some extent but left most of those rules to the states. If a state rules that life begins as conception, what constitutional authority does any other person have to murder that child? 

 

Obviously TX has law that says it is not murder IF it is by the mother's choice AND by a medical professional licensed to perform that procedure (due to Roe) but for anyone else, it is. By the SCOTUS overriding a state's right to make laws on when life begins, it is murder for a man to hit a woman in the stomach and kill the fetus even it if with the consent of the mother but if she hits herself in the stomach and causes the same abortion, it is legal.

 

Maybe I need to go back and read the Constitution again and find out where the killing of a person that is not convicted of a crime or to save a life is constitutional. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NorthoftheBorder

NorthoftheBorder

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hahaha!  This is a typical liberal article about a typical liberal candidate.  She tells us who she really is and what she really believes in her famous fillibuster.  Decides to run for governeress as the champion liberal, only to realize that in conservative Texas she doesn't have much chance unless she LIES in her campaign and says she is willing to modify her position. But she knows, and you know, that the liberal education system that you champion and that the citizens have been reared up in the last 40 years has "castrated" their brains such that they will "believe what she says" instead of "what she does".  That is why she has a chance to be elected.  The stupidity of the electorate!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Member Statistics

    45,967
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    yielder
    Newest Member
    yielder
    Joined


×
×
  • Create New...