My Visit to Planned Parenthood Today

originally posted by: MisterSpock
a reply to: reldra

If it's the brits you like, I'd avoid anything that's too hard or sweet for their teeth.

You could always try to lure them in with some biscuits, a fresh pack of jammie dodgers may do the trick.

I had to look up jammie dodgers. LOL. I have seen similar here, just not named that. I sure do like Brits.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
a reply to: reldra

To be fair, it sounds like a well run, efficient service, why wouldn't you want to use them?

I do. As I said, I think I got sidetracked due to a gynecologist across the hall from my GP and my insurance manual not being real obvious I could go there.

But I am now.

Lol, yes, I read your thread, I know you used them. It was more of a question to those that are of a more conservative persuasion.

But, I can appreciate why they wouldn't, as it goes against their beliefs on the abortion question.

Do most hospitals in the U.S provide an abortion service, or is it confined to specialised clinics?

There are hospitals that do. Mainly ones that have a specialized Gynecology department. Ones that aren't attached to a religious organization. Catholic Health Systems locally only will to save the mother's life and don't do elective sterilization. In cases where a mother has just given birth and wants elective sterilization, Catholic Health Systems will transport her to another hospital.


My hospital of choice is actually a Catholic health System hospital. I was born in it. They have a world class orthopedic department. A world class Sleep Study facility. But, when I delivered my daughter, I chose another place as the Catholic hospital had not undergone a full rehab or remodel since before I was born, especially in the Obstrectics department.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
What was in your "Goodie Bag"?
Skittles?---I love those things.

Baby parts? I here they're worth a fortune!

a reply to: reldra

Planned Parenthood is a textbook example of how to lie with statistics....

data show that Planned Parenthood Federation of America is the country’s largest abortion provider with affiliates performing more than 300,000 abortions per year, which amounts to approximately one out of every three in the country.[3]

How Does Planned Parenthood Calculate Its Claims About Its Abortion Services?

Although Planned Parenthood Federation of America reportedly requires all affiliates to have at least one clinic that performs abortions,[4] Planned Parenthood’s annual report does not identify the number of affiliated clinics that provide abortion services or how much of Planned Parenthood’s total revenue results from abortions. Instead, the report claims that abortions account for only 3 percent of the medical services Planned Parenthood affiliates provide.[5]

How does the Planned Parenthood annual report arrive at the 3 percent figure? The calculation counts each “discrete clinical interaction” as a separate “medical service,” meaning simple tests or routine provision of birth control are given the same weight as surgical or chemical abortions.[6] For example, if a woman in the course of a year receives a free condom, a pregnancy test, a sexually transmitted infection (STI) test, and an abortion, Planned Parenthood would say abortion was only 25 percent of the services provided.

www.heritage.org...
Now the 300, 000 figure is widely accepted. An abortion can cost anywhere from $350 to $1500. Let's go with a low estimate of an average cost of $500 per abortion...then do the math. PP is not required to divulge how much they spend on abortion each year. If the general public was aware of the amount they would back eliminating taxpayer money to PP. Just another example of a dishonest media.

a reply to: Arizonaguy


Heritage.org is not a source I trust. They are really good at right wing propaganda.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
In other words.

The exact same service provided by normal clinics that don't murder babies and expect taxpayers to pay for it.

No, it's not the same. You need to scroll back. Also, PP doesn't use taxpayer money for abortions.

That's a bit of a grey area isn't it, if we're being honest? I mean, if we are, that's more than anyone could say for them. Per testimony, their revenue from abortions is anywhere from 25-50%. There's no way of knowing for sure, since they're not exactly forthcoming for some reason. So, up to half of their revenue. That makes them in the business of providing abortions. It doesn't matter if they hand out a million goodie bags a day. Baseball teams sell more hotdogs than they have baseball games. McDonalds isn't in the free napkin business. PP is simply in the abortion business. They just offer the other services to justify it, because most people are too dim witted to even comprehend the idea that the two can provided separately or that PP is anything less than completely infallible.
The question isn't if they take federal dollars to perform abortions. Abortions generate revenue for them, not the other way around. The question is whether tax dollars are being used to fund an organization that is actually in the business of providing abortions, which they undeniably are. I say take the funding away. The beautiful thing about capitalism is that anyone can take their place. There's obviously a demand for the other services as well, and PP can either stop performing abortions and collect the tax money or stick to their money maker. Also, anecdotes aren't evidence of anything. Glad they didn't try to harvest you for parts though!

originally posted by: ketsuko
Well, there is a simple solution to this PP flap. They should separate their busines. Remove the abortion side of it from the rest. The other services can then receive tax payer monies.

Umm. That's exactly how it already works.....

a reply to: bender151

It's NOT a gray area. Never has been. The law is they do not use taxpayer funds for abortions and they do not.

It is very clear.

This is a little more than an anecdote. An anecdote would be "my cousin said.." Or 15 years ago I...."

This was a real life, timely and detailed report.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Arizonaguy


Heritage.org is not a source I trust. They are really good at right wing propaganda.

In other words, you can't refute the facts presented, so you attack the source.

I think we had this discussion before in a previous thread that PP was lying about their services by counting each interaction as a service, so if they gave out 4 condoms they'd say they had four services performed and then only did 1 abortion, they'd claim the abortion was just 20% of their services provided. Most logical people would say the only real service provided was the abortion and that handing out free condoms isn't really on the same level in regards to medical procedures.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Arizonaguy


Heritage.org is not a source I trust. They are really good at right wing propaganda.

In other words, you can't refute the facts presented, so you attack the source.

I think we had this discussion before in a previous thread that PP was lying about their services by counting each interaction as a service, so if they gave out 4 condoms they'd say they had four services performed and then only did 1 abortion, they'd claim the abortion was just 20% of their services provided. Most logical people would say the only real service provided was the abortion and that handing out free condoms isn't really on the same level in regards to medical procedures.

The source is crappy. No, I don't remember any such thread and I do not believe that to be true.

Fact Check.org

Congressional Republicans seeking to eliminate federal funding for Planned Parenthood have made versions of the claim that abortions make up 94 percent of the organization’s “pregnancy services.” One House member went even further, saying “94 percent of their business is abortion services.”

The figure comes from adding together the numbers Planned Parenthood did provide for its abortion procedures (327,653), prenatal services (18,684) and adoption referrals (1,880), and then dividing the number of abortions by that cumulative figure (348,217). The 94 percent figure is also used by groups that oppose abortion, such as Americans United for Life, which said in January: “According to its most recent annual report, abortions were 94% of its pregnancy-related services (abortion, adoption referral, and prenatal services).But that overall figure leaves out other services provided to pregnant women.For example, the annual report says that 65,464 additional “family practice services” were provided to men and women, some of whom may have been expecting. Nearly 1.2 million pregnancy tests were given to women, some of whom may have been pregnant at the time. And 17,817 men and women received “other procedures,” including services for low-income pregnant women through the Women, Infants, and Children federal program.”

4.5 million tests and treatment for sexually transmitted infections. 3.6 million contraception related services. 935,573 cancer screenings including breast exams and Pap tests.1.1 million pregnancy tests and prenatal services

That is a lot of stuff. Too many nutty Republicans have claimed 94% of what PP does is abortions. That is simply a made up number. If people who don't like PP want to have a normal debate, their government reps should stop saying crazy things.

a reply to: reldra

If you went to the source you would see that they back everything up with sources, some from PP themself

a reply to: reldra

Tax payers don't pay for the MD's and RN's?

A living testimonial is worth 1000 videos.

originally posted by: Arizonaguy
a reply to: reldra

If you went to the source you would see that they back everything up with sources, some from PP themself

The Heritage math is all wrong.

originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: reldra

Tax payers don't pay for the MD's and RN's?

I imagine you are saying taxpayers pay for abortions via the MDs and RNs that perform them. Nope. Only certain services can be paid for by taxpayer dollars.

a reply to: neo96

PP is NOT necessary.

PP offers people NOTHING they can't get elsewhere.

Well they can't 'just do abortions' , that wouldn't look good.

a reply to: reldra

Enlighten us then, oh mathematical one

Sure reldra. We don't fund abortion with our tax dollars ...

It works like this:

The drunk has $50. He can either buy food or alcohol with that money but not afford to do both. Along comes SNAP. It provides about $100 in food assistance. Sure, sure, he can't buy alcohol with it, so he buys food and we fed him, but he didn't have to spend that $50 on food, so now he has that $50 to spend on alcohol.

Technically, the SNAP was spent on food and the taxpayers didn't fund his drinking habit.

a reply to: bender151

the same argument you seem to want to make could also be applied to all those child care centers that are run by churches. if one qualifies, one can receive assistance to help pay the cost of the child care, even at those centers that are run by churches.. and yet, the churches' main business isn't in the child care industry is it? no, it's in promoting a religion which the gov't is really barred from funding. to be honest, I think we can be less sure that the funds that they get for proving childcare for the poor from the gov't aren't being spent on spreading religious beliefs than we can be about planned parenthood. since planned parenthood is put through a heck of a lot more scrutiny. and, child care isn't the only thing that the religious groups are getting federal funding for.
if an argument is acceptable for one non-profit, then it should be accepted for all, including all those receiving funds from those faith based initiatives grants!

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: reldra

Ladies: #grabyourwallet.

#thingsatsmembersdontcaretoknowaboutyou.

Ain't that the damn truth... I read the first line and last line. I said "blah blah blah" to myself while I skipped from top to bottom.