Women's Health System Unready For Planned Parenthood Cuts

originally posted by: TonyS

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: introvert

Oh the left and informed independents will see past the charade, but you and I both know that many Republicans and right leaning independents will fall for it hook, line, and sinker. Remember your thread and what we talked about yesterday?

On some issues, I'm as right-wing as you can get and I don't fall for that charade, not for one minute.

Well that's good. I DID say "many" and not all, so I was careful to account for people such as yourself.

originally posted by: ratsinacage
a reply to: Krazysh0t

im surprised that any logical person falls for this one. So PP gets federal money......and that just magically never touches the money that has ANYTHING at all to do with abortions??? Really?? So i guess that means the federal money doesnt pay for any of the staff that perform abortions, pay for any of the equipment thats used, hell....it doesnt even help pay to keep the lights on in the buildings where the abortions are performed or even for the candy machines the abortion docs get their sugar fix from.

Yes really. It's against the law and no investigation into PP has shown otherwise.

Hyde Amendment

In U.S. politics, the Hyde Amendment is a legislative provision barring the use of certain federal funds to pay for abortion unless the pregnancy arises from incest, rape, or to save the life of the mother.[1][2] The Hyde Amendment is not a permanent law, but rather is a "rider" that in various forms has been routinely attached to annual appropriations bills since 1976.[3] Legislation including the Hyde Amendment generally only restricts the use of funds allocated for the Department of Health and Human Services and primarily affects Medicaid.[4][5]

Anyone else see a major logical flaw in asserting no federal money goes towards abortions??? what fantasy land is it where funding somehow magically doesnt touch any of the operations of a business that performs multiple services using many of the same staff, supplies, equipment and buildings in which to do them?

Got any proof of your claims? You know LOGICALLY (and according to Occam's Razor) the solution with the least amount of assumptions is the correct one. So until you can show proof of your allegations, you are working with an assumption. So LOGICALLY (since that is what you are focusing on) you are wrong until you can produce evidence of your claims.

originally posted by: JetBlackStare

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
The reason Planned Parenthood and abortion are interchanged is because CMP used PP as a stepping stone to attack abortion, NOT because the left tied them together. Please get your facts straight.

Because, besides women's health, PP is also in the business of facilitating fetuses. No matter how many posts or threads one might make to deflect it. That IS a fact.

The tissue goes towards research to help save people's lives,that IS fact. Who knows the research may save your life one day. Would you refuse treatment if that life saving treatment came about from research using this tissue, I bet you wouldn't.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

If it's irrelevant to PP then why should they mind discontinuing it if it threatens their very existence? I mean if the rest of women's health issues are so important to them?

Let some private charitable organization that is not tax payer funded take up the "cause" of abortions.

I like the idea of removing abortions from the PP list of services provided. Like the above poster said if it's only 3% of what they do, and they aren't making a profit off of it, then who will notice?

Krazy's OP even said that removing funding from PP would only effect 5-20% of people who would't have the option to go somewhere else.

So here we are paying money to a company to provide a service where up to 95% of what they do could potentially be covered by other businesses/services.

So it's only 3% of PP profits and as little as 5% would be negatively affected by defunding it....I'm sorry but I'm getting a little lost here...Why do we not want to defund? Let the private sector do what it exists to do.

How's about we all just mind our own business and let others make their own decisions?

No evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Planned Parenthood; plenty of evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the fraudsters (I include here the Republicans in the US Congress) out to get them.

What happened to all the wailing and gnashing of teeth concerns about Big Government going after businesses unfairly again? Federal overreach anyone? Anyone?

originally posted by: JetBlackStare
a reply to: Krazysh0t

If it's irrelevant to PP then why should they mind discontinuing it if it threatens their very existence? I mean if the rest of women's health issues are so important to them?

It's irrelevant to the discussion, not to Planned Parenthood.

Let some private charitable organization that is not tax payer funded take up the "cause" of abortions.

That is the POINT of my OP, doing that is going to cause a BUNCH of hardship and make it so many low income women would go without services.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
What happened to all the wailing and gnashing of teeth concerns about Big Government going after businesses unfairly again? Federal overreach anyone? Anyone?

No see this is a "just cause" so federal overreach is perfectly acceptable. /sarc

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Gryphon66
What happened to all the wailing and gnashing of teeth concerns about Big Government going after businesses unfairly again? Federal overreach anyone? Anyone?

No see this is a "just cause" so federal overreach is perfectly acceptable. /sarc

Right, right.

I forgot that fascism is okay when "we" do it.

The argument that PP get Federal funding but they don`t spend any of it on abortions is dishonest in my opinion.
It would be like me not making enough money, so I get food stamps. I buy my food with food stamps and my beer and cigs with cash. I could argue that I didn`t buy my cigs and beer with food stamps. That is dishonest I think, because I chose not buy my food myelf.
It`s hard to sperate the issues honestly.

a reply to: Bennyzilla

Like the above poster said if it's only 3% of what they do, and they aren't making a profit off of it, then who will notice?

The women in need of the service will notice.

So here we are paying money to a company to provide a service where up to 95% of what they do could potentially be covered by other businesses/services.

Many women can't afford those "private" doctors. Planned Parenthood is designed to serve disenfranchised and low income women and families through TITLE X.

The Title X Family Planning program was enacted in 1970 as Title X of the Public Health Service Act (Public Law 91-572 Population Research and Voluntary Family Planning Programs). Title X is the only federal grant program dedicated solely to providing individuals with comprehensive family planning and related preventive health services.

For more than 40 years, Title X family planning centers have provided high quality and cost-effective family planning and related preventive health services for low-income women and men. Family planning centers play a critical role in ensuring access to voluntary family planning information and services for their clients based on their ability to pay.

a reply to: harvestdog

As far as the Hyde Amendment is concerned it is completely honest. It's not PP's fault that a bunch of conservatives passed the Hyde Amendment, but the Amendment exists so PP has to make this distinction. Arguing otherwise requires financial proof, so I hope you are an accountant and have access to PP's financial records to be making claims like yours.

a reply to: Gryphon66

PP recieves Federal funding so it`s all of our business. I don`t think you should throw public money at something without public oversight. That is not governmentt overreaching on a private business.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Women's Health System Unready For Planned Parenthood Cuts

"Eliminating Planned Parenthood from our state's comprehensive network of care would put untenable stress on remaining providers," Martinez Patterson wrote to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) in July.

Whether you believe those videos from Center for Medical Progress are true or not, this is a very BAD idea. Defunding Planned Parenthood is dumb.

This may or may not be true. I don't know. But I'm pretty darn sure that Planned Parenthood does as much harm as it does good. Forget the CMP videos for a minute. What no one wants to talk about is that abortions, many forms of birth control (synthetic female hormones), and mammograms are hazardous to women's health in and of themselves. For whatever amount of good they do -- real or imagined -- they also do much harm.

In that sense, all of these issues -- both the lack of needed healthcare for women if PP is closed, and the women's health issues caused by the services PP provides -- are problems with our entire healthcare system, not just PP. I believe the focus on PP and abortions is simply a means to divert attention to the overall systemic problems with our healthcare system. (Read: "sickcare" system).

originally posted by: JetBlackStare

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
The reason Planned Parenthood and abortion are interchanged is because CMP used PP as a stepping stone to attack abortion, NOT because the left tied them together. Please get your facts straight.

Because, besides women's health, PP is also in the business of facilitating fetuses. No matter how many posts or threads one might make to deflect it. That IS a fact.

So on the flip side because posts or threads say it's so , it must be fact.

a reply to: windword

well surely the number of abortions PP performs must be exceedingly small as to only comprise 3 percent of their total services rendered. I would think in a first world nation such as the USA that it would not be overtly burdensome to go to the closest hospital, which even for small towns is usually not an extreme distance. Aditionally these abortions are not emergency procedures.....and assuming women are not serially aborting i think a once or twice in a lifetime drive a little farther doesnt represent an undue burden even for the poor. As for cost why couldnt the feds simply mandate that any abortikn procedure that meets federal guidelines be given at the same cost as before no matter which facility performs it?


I really think youre straining on this point.

All 5% of them. I think they'll figure something out.

There are plenty of other income assistance places that will help them out. We aren't going to have pregnant women languishing in the streets.

When it comes to women's bodies and issues relating to them "If I have no say, then I no pay"

a reply to: Gryphon66

How's about we all just mind our own business and let others make their own decisions?

That's the most important part in this whole debate. We need to keep our noses out of things that do not concern us and let people be free to choose what they do with their constitutionally protected freedoms.

a reply to: ratsinacage

How about just leaving Planned Parenthood alone so that we don't have to worry about any of that #?

a reply to: introvert

When everybody starts leaving my wallet alone then we won't have any problems