Senate GOP Fast-Tracks Bill To Defund Planned Parenthood

Man, people have gone full retard. It's a complete circle-knee-jerk.

Abortions are performed less than all other procedures or services.

They actually provide an important service to the community.

I think we need more STDs and un-cared for babies in the country.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: IanFleming

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Why would you support PP knowing what we know about its origins and behavior?

Besides, why should the taxpayer fund a special interest organization that uses a chunk of it's funds to lobby for more tax dollars?

Are you certain about that? You might want to check the actuality of what organization does what before you make illegitimate claims.

Planned Parenthood Action Fund

Yes, I am quite aware of the different funds and it is a shell game really. "We only use donations over here to get more tax dollars over there," is a bit of a crock. They could simply use all of their funds to provide services and need even less tax dollars, yes?

originally posted by: beezzer
As much as the pro-abortion crowd states that we, the anti-abortion crowd should fund or support all the babies that would be born, why doesn't the pro-abortion crowd simply fund the planned parenthood sites?

If it means that much to you all, pay up!

Problem solved.

Well, take "my tax dollars" that are being used for bombs and drones and use them for women's healthcare.

Oh, wait a minute ... that's not the way government revenue and spending actually WORKS, now is it?

a reply to: IanFleming

What you are describing is a problem that isn't just indicative to PP alone. Pretty much all government funded programs behave like this. The Prison Industrial Complex and MIC are even MORE guilty of this practice, so shine the light on them moreso than an organization that's purpose is to help people.

a reply to: IanFleming

Ah. So, actual facts mean nothing to you, you merely want to state your beliefs.

Got it! Carry on.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: IanFleming

What you are describing is a problem that isn't just indicative to PP alone. Pretty much all government funded programs behave like this. The Prison Industrial Complex and MIC are even MORE guilty of this practice, so shine the light on them moreso than an organization that's purpose is to help people.

Right. Which is why it should be nipped in the bud, even for one's sacred cows. Considering that this thread is about Planned Parenthood, not Lockheed Martin, we'll talk about them and not try to deflect, yes?

originally posted by: Mandroid7
Man, people have gone full retard. It's a complete circle-knee-jerk.

Abortions are performed less than all other procedures or services.

They actually provide an important service to the community.

I think we need more STDs and un-cared for babies in the country.

I'd be tempted to believe that the concerns were actually about Life were I to see these folks working for foster children's programs, or social safety net programs that benefit children, or ... well, anything really aside from trying to impose their own religious beliefs on others.

Some are only about "individual rights" and/or "freedom of choice" when they agree with it ... not you know, for everyone or anything.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: IanFleming

Ah. So, actual facts mean nothing to you, you merely want to state your beliefs.

Got it! Carry on.

Negative. That is the fact.

What you are saying is the same as saying that the Lockheed Martin's lobbyist really isn't part of Lockheed Martin because they call themselves a PAC and have a slightly different funding tree. That's disingenuous.

a reply to: IanFleming

OR you could make a thread about it and talk about the ENTIRE problem as a whole; which sounds like it would be much more productive considering that only talking about one aspect of the problem never addresses the root of it. Though your mileage may vary.

originally posted by: IanFleming

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: IanFleming

Ah. So, actual facts mean nothing to you, you merely want to state your beliefs.

Got it! Carry on.

Negative. That is the fact.

What you are saying is the same as saying that the Lockheed Martin's lobbyist really isn't part of Lockheed Martin because they call themselves a PAC and have a slightly different funding tree. That's disingenuous.

Wait ... didn't you just say that discussing Lockeed-Martin in this context was off-topic?

Physician, heal thyself.

BTW, are you saying that you're against corporations being able to organize as they choose in this country?

So ... you want more government control of business???

*confused*

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: beezzer

I'd go for this if the pro-war solely funds war.

Let's do it.

When a bill comes up in the senate to defunnd war, we can talk about it.

I wonder if this will really make that much of a difference. PP does recieve federal money, but Title X already bans the use of federal money for abortions.

However, not all of that money is from the federal government. Planned Parenthood’s government funding comes from two sources: the Title X Family Planning Program and Medicaid. About $70 million is Title X funding, Planned Parenthood spokesman Tait Sye told us. The rest — about $293 million — is Medicaid funding, which includes both federal and state money.

But Planned Parenthood cannot use the money it receives from the federal government for abortions anyway. According to the Department of Health and Human Service’s website, "by law, Title X funds may not be used in programs where abortion is a method of family planning." Medicaid funding is restricted by the Hyde Amendment to only abortion cases involving rape, incest or endangerment to the life of the mother. Some states use their own funds under Medicaid to go beyond that. Seventeen states and, until recently, the District of Columbia pay for "medically necessary" abortions, according to the Guttmacher Institute. The federal budget deal now bans Washington, D.C., from using its funds to pay for abortions.

Source

I know the numbers in the source are dated, but I believe the laws still apply. If federal money cannot be used for abortions alreaady, what is the point? Are they trying to ensure that no money goes to PP, regardless of how it's used?

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: IanFleming

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: IanFleming

Ah. So, actual facts mean nothing to you, you merely want to state your beliefs.

Got it! Carry on.

Negative. That is the fact.

What you are saying is the same as saying that the Lockheed Martin's lobbyist really isn't part of Lockheed Martin because they call themselves a PAC and have a slightly different funding tree. That's disingenuous.

Wait ... didn't you just say that discussing Lockeed-Martin in this context was off-topic?

Physician, heal thyself.

BTW, are you saying that you're against corporations being able to organize as they choose in this country?

So ... you want more government control of business???

*confused*

Not at all. What I stated was the simple and salient fact that PP is a taxpayer funded organization that lobbies for more taxpayer funding. That, sir, is a fact.

If they object to governmental control and the whims of congress, they could simply take ZERO public funds. However, when you take the public's coin, the public through their elected representatives have every right to say how it is used.

originally posted by: introvert
I know the numbers in the source are dated, but I believe the laws still apply. If federal money cannot be used for abortions alreaady, what is the point? Are they trying to ensure that no money goes to PP, regardless of how it's used?

DING DING! We have a winner. Never mind the fact that 97% of the services that PP provides AREN'T abortions or anything. That nasty A word mean they must go.

I mean are you surprised really? This is coming from the camp willing to let an obviously edited video be "proof" of illegal wrong doing WITHOUT demanding an official investigation be done.

originally posted by: IanFleming

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: IanFleming

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: IanFleming

Ah. So, actual facts mean nothing to you, you merely want to state your beliefs.

Got it! Carry on.

Negative. That is the fact.

What you are saying is the same as saying that the Lockheed Martin's lobbyist really isn't part of Lockheed Martin because they call themselves a PAC and have a slightly different funding tree. That's disingenuous.

Wait ... didn't you just say that discussing Lockeed-Martin in this context was off-topic?

Physician, heal thyself.

BTW, are you saying that you're against corporations being able to organize as they choose in this country?

So ... you want more government control of business???

*confused*

Not at all. What I stated was the simple and salient fact that PP is a taxpayer funded organization that lobbies for more taxpayer funding. That, sir, is a fact.

If they object to governmental control and the whims of congress, they could simply take ZERO public funds. However, when you take the public's coin, the public through their elected representatives have every right to say how it is used.

Right, and your statement is in error as I pointed out.

The "Planned Parenthoods" that receive taxpayer funds, quote/unquote are NOT the Planned Parenthood Action Fund.

That's a simple fact. You can, of course interpret it as you choose and believe what you will.

Facts, however, are facts.

Confederate flag " history of racism and is harmful to people ban it now!"

PP - started by a eugenicist , racist, woman who was hell bent on destroying the black populace by stopping their offspring and has been caught selling baby parts - "oh no pp does great work "

Progressive logic

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: IanFleming

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: IanFleming

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: IanFleming

Ah. So, actual facts mean nothing to you, you merely want to state your beliefs.

Got it! Carry on.

Negative. That is the fact.

What you are saying is the same as saying that the Lockheed Martin's lobbyist really isn't part of Lockheed Martin because they call themselves a PAC and have a slightly different funding tree. That's disingenuous.

Wait ... didn't you just say that discussing Lockeed-Martin in this context was off-topic?

Physician, heal thyself.

BTW, are you saying that you're against corporations being able to organize as they choose in this country?

So ... you want more government control of business???

*confused*

Not at all. What I stated was the simple and salient fact that PP is a taxpayer funded organization that lobbies for more taxpayer funding. That, sir, is a fact.

If they object to governmental control and the whims of congress, they could simply take ZERO public funds. However, when you take the public's coin, the public through their elected representatives have every right to say how it is used.

Right, and your statement is in error as I pointed out.

The "Planned Parenthoods" that receive taxpayer funds, quote/unquote are NOT the Planned Parenthood Action Fund.

That's a simple fact. You can, of course interpret it as you choose and believe what you will.

Facts, however, are facts.

But that is disingenuous. No, Phillip Morris doesn't lobby, they have the Phillip Morris Tobacco Growers lobby PAC. Certainly they have created a separate legal entity to stay in the legal guidelines just like every other special interest group with their hand held out for public funds or political influence, but to say they are not the same or connected is dishonest.

originally posted by: OptimisticCynic
Confederate flag " history of racism and is harmful to people ban it now!"

PP - started by a eugenicist , racist, woman who was hell bent on destroying the black populace by stopping their offspring and has been caught selling baby parts - "oh no pp does great work "

Progressive logic

LOL. Interesting point. Well played sir.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

If you read the actual bill, here, I believe the language leaves open the possibility that federal funds can go to entities other than PP that do offer abortions as well.

This does nothing to stop abortions in any way, it's just shifting money around because PP is now viewed as "evil". That's pretty disingenuous if you ask me.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I am pro life with the exception of rape and medically determined high risk pregnancy.

I personally don't think abortion should be seen as birth control. I think today's young women are making a serious mistake substituting safe sexual practices, with abortion.

It seems to me that PP fetal tissue program is for profit, or at least can be. Therefore, I see no reason why the abortion part of PP even needs to be funded by taxpayers.

If they are running a Capitalist Model, let supply and demand dictate the cost of fetal tissue and there wil be no reason for the public to fund abortions.

There is no reason to stop funding the rest of the highly needed services that PP provides.