Federal funding cut for Planned Parenthood

Two hot topics for the price of one

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Lux
Site Supporter
Posts: 2189
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:27 pm

Federal funding cut for Planned Parenthood

Post #1

Post by Lux »

The House of Representatives has voted to cut all federal funding for Planned Parenthood. The Senate is still to vote on this bill.

Besides abortion, Planned Parenthood provides STD testing and treatment, cancer testing, birth control information and supply, information on safe sex, pregnancy screening, infertility diagnosis and treatment among other services. They report that only 2-3% of the visits they receive result in an abortion.


Is it acceptable to remove all federal funding from this organization?

Is this issue all about abortion, or are there other reasons for the cut?
[center]Image

© Divine Insight (Thanks!)[/center]



"There is more room for a god in science than there is for no god in religious faith." -Phil Plate.

User avatar
East of Eden
Under Suspension
Posts: 7032
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 11:25 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Federal funding cut for Planned Parenthood

Post #31

Post by East of Eden »

McCulloch wrote:
East of Eden wrote: An unborn child is still a child.
An unborn child is like an married bachelor. A human becomes a child at birth and ceases to be a child at puberty (well some of us).
From Wikipedia:

"Some vernacular definitions of a child include the fetus, as being an unborn child."
"We are fooling ourselves if we imagine that we can ever make the authentic Gospel popular......it is too simple in an age of rationalism; too narrow in an age of pluralism; too humiliating in an age of self-confidence; too demanding in an age of permissiveness; and too unpatriotic in an age of blind nationalism." Rev. John R.W. Stott, CBE

User avatar
Wyvern
Under Probation
Posts: 3059
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:50 pm

Re: Federal funding cut for Planned Parenthood

Post #32

Post by Wyvern »

East of Eden wrote:
Wyvern wrote: You're playing fast and loose with language again EoE, a child aint a child until it's born.
That's nothing but your opinion.
Before a child is born it is either a zygote, embryo or fetus depending on its stage of developement. Calling a child a child regardless of the stage of developement is as exact as using the word kind to describe all types of animal instead of the much more exact system in use.
God had no problem with instructing his chosen people forcing abortions on the women of opposing tribes so why should it be such a big deal for you now?
Cite? :confused2: In the OT when a man struck a pregnant women and the child miscarried it was considered manslaughter.
You mean you have no recollection in the bible of one tribe being told by god to slaughter another tribe including cutting the children out of their mothers womb?
As far as constitutional rights go Roe v Wade has been upheld in the highest constitutional court of the land i.e. the supreme court so I'd say it has a pretty good footing as far as constitutionality goes.
So was Dred Scott and Plessy v. Ferguson. There is a difference between legal and moral. Just about all of what Hitler did was legal.
Your point was that abortion has no constitutional basis, all I did was point out that you are incorrect in this point.

User avatar
nygreenguy
Guru
Posts: 2349
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 8:23 am
Location: Syracuse

Re: Federal funding cut for Planned Parenthood

Post #33

Post by nygreenguy »

East of Eden wrote:
McCulloch wrote:
East of Eden wrote: An unborn child is still a child.
An unborn child is like an married bachelor. A human becomes a child at birth and ceases to be a child at puberty (well some of us).
From Wikipedia:

"Some vernacular definitions of a child include the fetus, as being an unborn child."
Thats because its just a made up word with no real scientific meaning.

Anyone can make up a talking point word and get it to be used, but that doesnt mean it has any real actual meaning.

User avatar
McCulloch
Site Supporter
Posts: 24063
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Federal funding cut for Planned Parenthood

Post #34

Post by McCulloch »

East of Eden wrote: From Wikipedia:

"Some vernacular definitions of a child include the fetus, as being an unborn child."
Some vernacular definitions of a child include the fetus, as being an unborn child. The legal definition of "child" generally refers to a minor, otherwise known as a person younger than the age of majority. "Child" may also describe a relationship with a parent or authority figure, or signify group membership in a clan, tribe, or religion; it can also signify being strongly affected by a specific time, place, or circumstance, as in "a child of nature" or "a child of the Sixties."

Let's try to be specific with our language. Let's use the legal or biological definition of the word child. Slang or vernacular definitions only lead to equivocation and muddy the waters.
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John

User avatar
East of Eden
Under Suspension
Posts: 7032
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 11:25 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Federal funding cut for Planned Parenthood

Post #35

Post by East of Eden »

Wyvern wrote: Before a child is born it is either a zygote, embryo or fetus depending on its stage of developement. Calling a child a child regardless of the stage of developement is as exact as using the word kind to describe all types of animal instead of the much more exact system in use.
Not according to Wikipedia. If you don't like that how about 'unborn child'?
You mean you have no recollection in the bible of one tribe being told by god to slaughter another tribe including cutting the children out of their mothers womb?
About the cutting out of children, no. Cite or retract. God was infuriated by the pagan worship practice that included sacrificing children to the god Moloch.
Your point was that abortion has no constitutional basis, all I did was point out that you are incorrect in this point.
My point was that abortion has no moral basis. SCOTUS justices can and do err, as when they ignore the constitutional 'right to life'.
"We are fooling ourselves if we imagine that we can ever make the authentic Gospel popular......it is too simple in an age of rationalism; too narrow in an age of pluralism; too humiliating in an age of self-confidence; too demanding in an age of permissiveness; and too unpatriotic in an age of blind nationalism." Rev. John R.W. Stott, CBE

User avatar
sickles
Sage
Posts: 930
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 8:30 pm

Re: Federal funding cut for Planned Parenthood

Post #36

Post by sickles »

WinePusher wrote:
In a demcratic system, I (a member of the populus) have a say in what my government does and doesn't do. If I want my tax dollars to go to this specific area and to stay away from this area, I vote for the politician who will represent my view and fight for my interests. It's Civics 101 and it (no taxation without representation) was the thing that ignited the inception of America.
This is way of topic, but did you know Hitler was a Catholic?
"Behold! A Man!" ~ Diogenes, my Hero.

User avatar
Lux
Site Supporter
Posts: 2189
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:27 pm

Re: Federal funding cut for Planned Parenthood

Post #37

Post by Lux »

East of Eden wrote:About half, or more, of Americans are pro-life. I'm not aware of a similar majority against blood transfusions.
Yet when the majority of Americans where against the war in Iraq, we still had to support it with our tax money. How does that work?

The fact is that only 2-3% of the women that go to Planned Parenthood end up having an abortion. PP also provides information about a number of other things - including adoption and parenting - some of which don't even relate to unwanted pregnancies. In fact they are a huge provider of safe sex information and contraceptives, thereby preventing abortions and scenarios with parent(s) unable or reluctant to care for their babies.
[center]Image

© Divine Insight (Thanks!)[/center]



"There is more room for a god in science than there is for no god in religious faith." -Phil Plate.

User avatar
Kuan
Site Supporter
Posts: 1806
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 12:21 am
Location: Rexburg, the Frozen Wasteland
Contact:

Re: Federal funding cut for Planned Parenthood

Post #38

Post by Kuan »

sickles wrote:
WinePusher wrote:
In a demcratic system, I (a member of the populus) have a say in what my government does and doesn't do. If I want my tax dollars to go to this specific area and to stay away from this area, I vote for the politician who will represent my view and fight for my interests. It's Civics 101 and it (no taxation without representation) was the thing that ignited the inception of America.
This is way of topic, but did you know Hitler was a Catholic?
Where did this come from? Random?
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
- Voltaire

Kung may ayaw, may dahilan. Kung may gusto, may paraan.

User avatar
East of Eden
Under Suspension
Posts: 7032
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 11:25 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Federal funding cut for Planned Parenthood

Post #39

Post by East of Eden »

Lux wrote: Yet when the majority of Americans where against the war in Iraq, we still had to support it with our tax money. How does that work?
The decision to go into Iraq was bipartisan, and polls also showed that the majority of Americans believed that President Bush had made his case against Iraq. The Gallup poll, for example, found that 67% of those who watched Bush's speech felt that the case had been made.
The fact is that only 2-3% of the women that go to Planned Parenthood end up having an abortion. PP also provides information about a number of other things - including adoption and parenting - some of which don't even relate to unwanted pregnancies. In fact they are a huge provider of safe sex information and contraceptives, thereby preventing abortions and scenarios with parent(s) unable or reluctant to care for their babies.
There are crisis pregnancy centers who do not kill babies, and instead work to place children for adoption and to support the single mothers. That's who we should be supporting financially, if anyone.
"We are fooling ourselves if we imagine that we can ever make the authentic Gospel popular......it is too simple in an age of rationalism; too narrow in an age of pluralism; too humiliating in an age of self-confidence; too demanding in an age of permissiveness; and too unpatriotic in an age of blind nationalism." Rev. John R.W. Stott, CBE

User avatar
Wyvern
Under Probation
Posts: 3059
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:50 pm

Re: Federal funding cut for Planned Parenthood

Post #40

Post by Wyvern »

East of Eden wrote:
Wyvern wrote: Before a child is born it is either a zygote, embryo or fetus depending on its stage of developement. Calling a child a child regardless of the stage of developement is as exact as using the word kind to describe all types of animal instead of the much more exact system in use.
Not according to Wikipedia. If you don't like that how about 'unborn child'?
You are still applying a misnomer when we already have a number of much more accurate terms for a fetus. What you want to do is the equivalent of seeing a lump of coal and instead of calling it coal you instead call it an unconverted diamond and actually have the gaul to think that is an acceptable term. You can't change the language simply because it does not agree with your worldview otherwise you're setting yourself up for a 1984 scenario.
Your point was that abortion has no constitutional basis, all I did was point out that you are incorrect in this point.
My point was that abortion has no moral basis.
Then why did you start this point off by saying abortion has no constitutional basis?

Post Reply