It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
i already posted their annual report in the OP...try reading it
originally posted by: ~Lucidity
originally posted by: kellyjay
originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Yes, many people, men and women, need Planned Parenthood. The number of people who use their services prove that in and of itself.
Defund them? How about you break down what the funding is and put some more perspective on it.
The better question is does the world really need pro-lifers when the choice to be made here is a personal one?
if its a personal choice, then they should pay for it...personally
In response to your addressing of only the commentary at the end of my post, for the most part they do. Now address that funding bomb.
originally posted by: kellyjay
i already posted their annual report in the OP...try reading it
originally posted by: ~Lucidity
originally posted by: kellyjay
originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Yes, many people, men and women, need Planned Parenthood. The number of people who use their services prove that in and of itself.
Defund them? How about you break down what the funding is and put some more perspective on it.
The better question is does the world really need pro-lifers when the choice to be made here is a personal one?
if its a personal choice, then they should pay for it...personally
In response to your addressing of only the commentary at the end of my post, for the most part they do. Now address that funding bomb.
originally posted by: ~Lucidity
originally posted by: kellyjay
i already posted their annual report in the OP...try reading it
originally posted by: ~Lucidity
originally posted by: kellyjay
originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Yes, many people, men and women, need Planned Parenthood. The number of people who use their services prove that in and of itself.
Defund them? How about you break down what the funding is and put some more perspective on it.
The better question is does the world really need pro-lifers when the choice to be made here is a personal one?
if its a personal choice, then they should pay for it...personally
In response to your addressing of only the commentary at the end of my post, for the most part they do. Now address that funding bomb.
Oh I have. I want to know from you the path that the government money travels. Did you read it? Research it?
the question i posed was, if an investigation shows that they have been acting outwith the boundarys of the law, should they be defunded?
originally posted by: kellyjay
originally posted by: ~Lucidity
originally posted by: kellyjay
i already posted their annual report in the OP...try reading it
originally posted by: ~Lucidity
originally posted by: kellyjay
originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Yes, many people, men and women, need Planned Parenthood. The number of people who use their services prove that in and of itself.
Defund them? How about you break down what the funding is and put some more perspective on it.
The better question is does the world really need pro-lifers when the choice to be made here is a personal one?
if its a personal choice, then they should pay for it...personally
In response to your addressing of only the commentary at the end of my post, for the most part they do. Now address that funding bomb.
Oh I have. I want to know from you the path that the government money travels. Did you read it? Research it?
can you google? ....if so go do that , that way you save us both time by cutting out the middle man
originally posted by: kellyjay
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: kellyjay
So you'd argue to shut down Wal-mart because you can buy anything there at a multitude of other places?
is walmart breaking the law with regards to thier services?
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: kellyjay
You know that in the past when states have defunded Planned Parenthood, they end up with explosions in STD rates? Don't believe me? It happened earlier this year in Indiana.
The NPR story did not provide any documentation linking an increase in HIV cases in Indiana to the closure of a Planned Parenthood clinic in that state.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: kellyjay
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: kellyjay
So you'd argue to shut down Wal-mart because you can buy anything there at a multitude of other places?
is walmart breaking the law with regards to thier services?
They have in the past. Off the top of my head, they've been accused of locking their overnight staff inside the building overnight. I mean we are talking about Wal-mart here. They aren't exactly known for their ethics.
originally posted by: kellyjay
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: kellyjay
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: kellyjay
So you'd argue to shut down Wal-mart because you can buy anything there at a multitude of other places?
is walmart breaking the law with regards to thier services?
They have in the past. Off the top of my head, they've been accused of locking their overnight staff inside the building overnight. I mean we are talking about Wal-mart here. They aren't exactly known for their ethics.
well actually we are talking about PP so if we could stay on topic that'd be grat instead of throwing out strawmen
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: kellyjay
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: kellyjay
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: kellyjay
So you'd argue to shut down Wal-mart because you can buy anything there at a multitude of other places?
is walmart breaking the law with regards to thier services?
They have in the past. Off the top of my head, they've been accused of locking their overnight staff inside the building overnight. I mean we are talking about Wal-mart here. They aren't exactly known for their ethics.
well actually we are talking about PP so if we could stay on topic that'd be grat instead of throwing out strawmen
That's wasn't a strawman. Its a tactic in logical arguments were you substitute the premise of an argument with entirely different premises while keeping the flow of the argument consistent to show that the argument itself is invalid.
A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: kellyjay
Because PP was doing it! It's called market saturation. Why should a local clinic that probably operates on a shoestring budget dedicate valuable resources to testing for something that was ALREADY adequately covered by an organization that has a FAR larger budget?