Federal funding cut for Planned Parenthood

[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?

[Wyvern]

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.

EoE, you'll be happy to hear that PP does not nor has it ever killed a single baby. I think these centers just like your idea of what is a baby or child are misnamed, by your description they sound more like they called crisis parenthood centers since everything you mentioned is stuff that happens after birth.

[East of Eden]

You are still applying a misnomer when we already have a number of much more accurate terms for a fetus.

Again, not according to Wikipedia.

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.

The 1984 angle comes in when we try to kid ourselves abortion isn't the taking of a child's life. As far back as the Hippocratic Oath this was seen as murder.

Then why did you start this point off by saying abortion has no constitutional basis?

No legitimate constitutional basis, just as the Dred Scott decision did not.

[East of Eden]

EoE, you'll be happy to hear that PP does not nor has it ever killed a single baby.

"How many abortions does Planned Parenthood do?

The number increases each year as it converts more of its clinics to killing centers. In 1985 it had 51 chambers which killed 110,000. By 1994 it had 70 which killed 134,000. Every year, it refers to other facilities almost as many abortions as it does itself."

[Lux]

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.

A weird choice for a statistic. By 2006, over 60% of Americans were opposed to the war in Iraq, and we had to go on supporting it financially for another 4 years. What does it matter if the decision was bipartisan? The fact is the majority of Americans (a clearer majority than that the one against abortion) were against and still had their tax used there. A lot of it. Point: we don't actually get to choose what to support or not based on our morality.

Furthermore, Planned Parenthood states that none of the money they receive from the government goes towards abortions, since that would be illegal. Tax money is not actually funding abortions.

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.

"Kill babies" is your opinion, there is no scientific consensus on when a fetus should actually be considered a baby.

What about the abortions they prevent? 35% of their services are distribution of birth control means and information. That's over 11 times as many abortions as they perform.

[Wyvern]

You are still applying a misnomer when we already have a number of much more accurate terms for a fetus.

Again, not according to Wikipedia.

As has been pointed out to you already more than once in this thread and which you yourself also noted the term child is vernacular and does nothing but muddy the waters.

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.

The 1984 angle comes in when we try to kid ourselves abortion isn't the taking of a child's life. As far back as the Hippocratic Oath this was seen as murder.

Actually the 1984 reference comes from your practice of redefining words in order to fit your needs.

Then why did you start this point off by saying abortion has no constitutional basis?

No legitimate constitutional basis, just as the Dred Scott decision did not.

So because the Constitution doesn't agree with your viewpoint it is no longer legitimate? Sorry but reality will not alter itself just because you refuse to accept it. If the Constitution doesn't agree with you it suddenly becomes illegitimate, if a term doesn't agree with you simply redefine or use an inappropriate word in the proper terms place.

[Wyvern]

EoE, you'll be happy to hear that PP does not nor has it ever killed a single baby.

"How many abortions does Planned Parenthood do?

Plenty I'm sure, but then again only fetuses are aborted not babies, don't blame me that you refuse to use the proper terms for child developement and as a result get caught up in false beliefs.

The number increases each year as it converts more of its clinics to killing centers. In 1985 it had 51 chambers which killed 110,000. By 1994 it had 70 which killed 134,000. Every year, it refers to other facilities almost as many abortions as it does itself."

Care to provide a link for this quote you used but did not provide citation for. What this stat shows is that the procedure is relatively popular, as you like to advocate free market capitalism for most everything why not do the same here. After all if you can convince enough women that it is a bad thing then fewer and fewer clinics will offer it as an option, this seems like a much better option than trying to force everyone to comply with your viewpoint on the subject.