Anti-abortion activists indicted for undercover videos smearing Planned Parenthood

Your dementia is noted again.
thumbsup.gif
So you attack a woman by calling her a pig, and now you are disparaging the mentally ill? Just how low will you go, dear?
 
Here's the link to that GAO report...

http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/669140.pdf

... quote where they state federal tax dollars are being used to perform abortions......
Silly Faun....expecting me to point out something from YOUR link when what I posted isn't from YOUR link. Before posting such things, dear, THINK 1st...
Just how fucking demented are you?? That's the GAO report you referenced.

Notice how when pushed to prove your idiocy by pointing to the actual report instead of the translation of it filtered by the right, you run away from your own contention as fast as your walker will allow?

:lmao::lmao::lmao:
 
GAO:
'...though Planned Parenthood—the organization performing 40% of America’s (reported) abortions every year—claims federal funding does not directly fund abortion, it’s not feasible nor believable that a group performing hundreds of thousands of abortions annually could prevent cross contamination.'

If you actually think PP divides their different sources of money into separate accounts and ensures that each abortion paid for is only paid for from the account marked 'NOT Tax Dollars' you're an idiot.
Here's the link to that GAO report...

http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/669140.pdf

... quote where they state federal tax dollars are being used to perform abortions......

Prove you aren't an idiot.
 
Your failed logical fallacy by means of equivocation are noted and laughed at.

Do you believe in personal responsibility?

Do you think someone who gets pregnant after making the choice to have sex without having taken preventative measures before hand should pay for their own abortion if they get pregnant and decide to go that route?

Or do you believe that others should be forced to pay for the consequences of other's choices?

It's really simple, Faun. You, Jill, and others want to try to make the issue / question much more complicated than it is or has to be. These 3 questions are simple....just give me a straight-up answer on them.
Personal responsibility. That means you're pro-choice. Thank you. I am too. The decision rests with the pregnant woman, her family and her doctor alone.

Dhara then why this business of relying on federal mandates to force regulations on both employers and citizens.
Wouldn't free market choices allow people maximum freedom to set up programs without worrying about
having to go through govt that is Constitutionally required to respect prolife beliefs equally for other such citizens the govt also represents.

Why are we forgetting or ignoring that public laws should respect prolife equally as prochoice?
As well as respecting beliefs in both right to health care and free market health care?
Do you think we ought to help our poorer citizens with healthcare or not?
 
Well at least you recognize you're mentally ill. I suppose that's a good start for ya.
No, I acknowledged that there isn't anyone you won't degrade, disparage, or insult in order to try to push your own opinions and narratives. Poor wittle, Faun.

So far you have advocated for a complete lack of personal accountability, for forcing others to pay for the consequences of irresponsible people's actions, have furthered the liberal 'War on Women' by calling a woman a pig, and disparaged the mentally ill....

Keep on ranting, Faun. You're the perfect poster child for the Progressive Liberal Party!
 
The point is not whether women will seek abortions legal or not. The point is will we allow women to get safe procedures or not?

Worldwide, there are 19 million unsafe abortions a year, and they kill 70,000 women (accounting for 13 percent of maternal deaths), mostly in poor countries like Tanzania where abortion is illegal, according to the World Health Organization. More than two million women a year suffer serious complications. According to Unicef, unsafe abortions cause 4 percent of deaths among pregnant women in Africa, 6 percent in Asia and 12 percent in Latin America and the Caribbean.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/02/health/02abort.html?_r=0

Dhara this can be set up without forcing prolife people to fund it.
Look at how much money the Democratic party candidates can raise to lobby for prochoice support.
Just put that money directly into building more medical programs and facilities to provide care directly,
such as through medical schools and internships, and then you can have all the health care you want to provide to the people you want to serve.

Look at the billions lost on a failed prison and mental health system.
So people who believe in funding medical treatment for mentally ill
instead of executions can invest funding in converting prisons into medical treatment centers.

By separating by political beliefs, you can control where your money goes.
There's plenty already being paid in if we didn't waste it on programs that don't work.

Why not give taxpayers a break for investing directly in the programs of their choice:
A. prochoice and right to health care in place of funding the death penalty by converting prisons into medical programs
B. prolife and free market health care such as by organizing resources around banks or VA reform etc.

If people's beliefs clash, then let's just acknowledge that instead of trying to impose one on the other.
Let both sides get their way and fund the programs of their choice that match their beliefs, just like choices of which religious schools or charities to support
Federal money is not being used to pay for abortions.

Dhara the point is Planned Parenthood is not a govt institution but one that prolife do not believe in funding.
That's like asking gun control activists to pay taxes to the NRA which they oppose by their beliefs.
It's a private non-profit.
 
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter. Isaiah 5:20
Ask me if I care what the Bible says. It's not my tradition.
 
The Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution guarantees individuals the right to personal autonomy, which means that a person's decisions regarding his or her personal life are none of the government's business. That right, which is part of the right to privacy, encompasses decisions about parenthood, including a woman's right to decide for herself whether to complete or terminate a pregnancy, as well as the right to use contraception, freedom from forced sterilization and freedom from employment discrimination based on childbearing capacity.

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude ... shall exist within the United States." -- The Thirteenth Amendment

Forced motherhood is unconstitutional

Reproductive Freedom - The Right to Choose: A Fundamental Liberty

Who is talking about forcing any woman to be a mother?
You are. You want to outlaw abortions.
 
Do you think we ought to help our poorer citizens with healthcare or not?

'Providing our citizens with health care' is not the same thing as using tax dollars to pay for abortions for irresponsible people who seek to avoid the consequences of their own decisions / actions.

A better question might be do you believe in making providing actual health care to OUR citizens (to include vets) before we neglect them and instead make Illegals, terrorists, and 'refugees' a higher priority? But that is another issue altogether.....
 
If a woman has un-protected sex and get's pregnant, according to Faun and Jill, I should have to pay for her abortion.

In the same way, Welfare REWARDS women for every child they choose to have out of wedlock by forcing other Americans to pay for the care of those children. This is the insane Liberal mindset that is devoid of the concept of 'personal accountability'.

If a girl has a child out of wedlock...
- where is her family for support?
- Where is the father, and why aren't we forcing him to help support HIS child? (It was his decision to have sex, too)
- where is the church and local charities?
- Why are we paying for more than 1 child born out of wedlock?

I can see one, possibly 2, but no more. If a 3rd child or more is born it should be on the mother to care for the child. If they can't then the children should be taken away. in such a case if the mother continues the irresponsible behavior of having children she can't afford to take care of I would be all in favor of sterilizing the mother FOR THE SAKE OF THE CHILDREN / FUTURE children.

Bash ME if you want, but it is women who engage in such activity, having children repeatedly they can't or don't want to take care of, especially those who do so just to get a check, who are the 'bad guys'.

Liberals, however, do not believe in Personal Accountability.
- Obama and Hillary blame others.

- Liberals are still reaching back almost a decade to call upon the name 'Bush' to make excuses for or to justify the actions of a President who has been in office over 7 freakin' years!

Again, pro-abortionists can have all the abortions their little heart desire, but for God's sakes and those of us who are tired of paying for your shite, GROW UP, ACCEPT SOME PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY / RESPONSIBILITY, AND PAY FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF YOUR OWN ACTIONS!

Dear easyt65 the nonprofit groups and social services that do help families out of poverty and to stabilize financially
require longterm mentoring usually one-on-one individualized support. Govt is not designed to do this level of personalized social and family counseling which is private. If social programs are already set up that do work efficiently, the people can either agree which ones to fund with govt grants or which to fund privately if groups don't agree. Because of prochoice/prolife beliefs I find people on both sides not wanting to pay for other people's abortion, birth control, execution, life imprisonment etc. etc. etc.
 
That's the GAO report you referenced.
Dear Faun, the link you provided is not the source nor the report from which I speak. I quoted the aclj.org who write an article on the matter. Again, you continue to make accusations without supporting evidence, proving your ignorance and affinity for making false accusations.
 
When did women get the right to force me to pay for their abortions?

Federal funds cannot be used to pay for abortion.

Money is fungible. We all know that money given to PP is used to pay for abortions. Only morons like you are fooled.
Just think ... all you have to do is prove that and you can accomplish what the center for medical progress failed to do -- bring down Planned Parenthood. :thup:

I don't need to prove what is patently obvious to anyone with two brain cells to rub together.

You seem to have a lot of friends whose intellect consists of 2 brain cells.
Yes, all my friends have at least two brain cells, which is two more than you have.
 
Insults are not a substitute for facts and logic.

You obviously can't answer the question.
What other answer is there to such a moronic question given your question is built on the ignorance that you're paying for abortions? :dunno:

Facts are "ignorance" only to liberals. If the government is giving money to PP, which performs abortions, then I'm paying for abortions. There's no two ways about it.
Imbecile.... it's not a "fact" until you prove it.

Until you do, it's a delusion, not a fact.

That's indisputable proof of your idiocy. Facts are facts, regardless of whether someone proves them or not.

And avoiding proving it under the pathetic guise that you don't have to because it's so obvious to you only further demonstrates your dementia.

So either prove your claims or you prove you're just another crazy conservative......

Total horseshit. I don't have to prove the sun comes up in the East. Everyone knows that already. Likewise I don't have to prove that PP uses government money to pay for abortions.
Your failed logical fallacy by means of equivocation are noted and laughed at.

:lol:

You prove you're just a delusional crazy conservative.
thumbsup.gif


Not that more proof was necessary, mind you.

"Equivocation" isn't a logical fallacy, numskull, and furthermore that's not what I did.

You bring a special meaning to the word "stupid."
 
The point is not whether women will seek abortions legal or not. The point is will we allow women to get safe procedures or not?

Worldwide, there are 19 million unsafe abortions a year, and they kill 70,000 women (accounting for 13 percent of maternal deaths), mostly in poor countries like Tanzania where abortion is illegal, according to the World Health Organization. More than two million women a year suffer serious complications. According to Unicef, unsafe abortions cause 4 percent of deaths among pregnant women in Africa, 6 percent in Asia and 12 percent in Latin America and the Caribbean.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/02/health/02abort.html?_r=0

This discussion isn't about whether abortions should be legal. It's about whether the taxpayers should foot the bill for it. I have yet to see anyone even attempt to explain why they should.
 
. In Romania, where abortion was available upon request until 1966, the abortion mortality ratio was 20 per 100,000 live births in 1960. New legal restrictions were imposed in 1966, and by 1989 the ratio reached 148 deaths per 100,000 live births. The restrictions were reversed in 1989, and within a year the ratio dropped to 68 of 100,000 live births; by 2002 it was as low as 9 deaths per 100,000 births (Figure 3). Similarly, in South Africa, after abortion became legal and available on request in 1997, abortion-related infection decreased by 52%, and the abortion mortality ratio from 1998 to 2001 dropped by 91% from its 1994 level..6

Evidence demonstrates that liberalizing abortion laws to allow services to be provided openly by skilled practitioners can reduce the rate of abortion-related morbidity and mortality.
Main Points

The World Health Organization deems unsafe abortion one of the easiest preventable causes of maternal mortality.
Data suggest that even as the overall abortion rate has declined, the proportion of unsafe abortion is on the rise.
Methods of unsafe abortion include drinking toxic fluids; inflicting direct injury to the vagina, cervix, or rectum; or inflicting external injury to the abdomen. Complications also arise from unskilled providers causing uterine perforation and infections.
Worldwide, 5 million women are hospitalized each year for treatment of abortion-related complications, and abortion-related deaths leave 220,000 children motherless.
Data indicate an association between unsafe abortion and restrictive abortion laws.
Preventing unintended pregnancy, providing better access to health care, and liberalizing abortion laws to allow services to be openly provided can reduce the rate of abortion-related morbidity and mortality.
Unsafe Abortion: Unnecessary Maternal Mortality

No one is even talking about making abortion illegal, you fucking moron.
 
The Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution guarantees individuals the right to personal autonomy, which means that a person's decisions regarding his or her personal life are none of the government's business. That right, which is part of the right to privacy, encompasses decisions about parenthood, including a woman's right to decide for herself whether to complete or terminate a pregnancy, as well as the right to use contraception, freedom from forced sterilization and freedom from employment discrimination based on childbearing capacity.

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude ... shall exist within the United States." -- The Thirteenth Amendment

Forced motherhood is unconstitutional

Reproductive Freedom - The Right to Choose: A Fundamental Liberty

Who is talking about forcing any woman to be a mother?
You are. You want to outlaw abortions.

How is that enforceable without punishing women more than men?
To be fair both partners responsible for the pregnancy should be considered:
what if the man raped the woman? Are we going to criminalize the woman while the man goes free?
Try writing laws that hold men equally responsible as women for sex that leads to unwanted pregnancy in the first place.
Otherwise, arguing after the fact, is going to affect women more than men and the laws are going to be biased.
 
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter. Isaiah 5:20
Ask me if I care what the Bible says. It's not my tradition.
Sure it is. Everything you disagree with conservatives is anti God. So yes, your tradition is take demonic positions on issues.
 
The Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution guarantees individuals the right to personal autonomy, which means that a person's decisions regarding his or her personal life are none of the government's business. That right, which is part of the right to privacy, encompasses decisions about parenthood, including a woman's right to decide for herself whether to complete or terminate a pregnancy, as well as the right to use contraception, freedom from forced sterilization and freedom from employment discrimination based on childbearing capacity.

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude ... shall exist within the United States." -- The Thirteenth Amendment

Forced motherhood is unconstitutional

Reproductive Freedom - The Right to Choose: A Fundamental Liberty

Who is talking about forcing any woman to be a mother?
Rightards who want to make abortion illegal.

Name one person posting in this thread who said they want to make it illegal.
 

Forum List

Back
Top