BRILLIANT: Why you should continue FUNDING Planned Parenthood you ANTI-FEMINIST WOMAN HATER!

[Stephanie]

SNIP:


ALL of it from the site:
BRILLIANT Why you should continue FUNDING Planned Parenthood you ANTI-FEMINIST WOMAN HATER The Right Scoop -

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Those not willing to fund it hate women, and a lot of them are, very stupid women.

 

[JFish123]

Don't believe the Pro Abortionist hype everyone


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[emilynghiem]

Those not willing to fund it hate women, and a lot of them are, very stupid women.

Reminds me of when the opposite happens.
When it comes to Christian references in public schools,
the secular left doesn't want that publicly funded.

Does that make them all God haters and against the charity
and public good done by Christian groups?

No, it is argued it's because of separation of church and state,
and there is nothing wrong with funding beliefs in private, just not public.

Well, the same with people who don't believe in funding Planned Parenthood. Why not keep that funded privately if people disagree on beliefs about abortion and birth control?

The left can finally have what they want, if all their funding can go into these clinics for health care, deduct 100% from taxes as a business investment, create an entire Singlepayer health care umbrella that will cover all the needs of the poor, and give others the same freedom to fund their own charity programs as well.

How can you mandate which charities the public must pay for?
If the Catholic charities mandated funds, wouldn't the secularists yell?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Those not willing to fund it hate women, and a lot of them are, very stupid women.

Reminds me of when the opposite happens.
When it comes to Christian references in public schools,
the secular left doesn't want that publicly funded.

Does that make them all God haters and against the charity
and public good done by Christian groups?

No, it is argued it's because of separation of church and state,
and there is nothing wrong with funding beliefs in private, just not public.

Well, the same with people who don't believe in funding Planned Parenthood. Why not keep that funded privately if people disagree on beliefs about abortion and birth control?

The left can finally have what they want, if all their funding can go into these clinics for health care, deduct 100% from taxes as a business investment, create an entire Singlepayer health care umbrella that will cover all the needs of the poor, and give others the same freedom to fund their own charity programs as well.

How can you mandate which charities the public must pay for?
If the Catholic charities mandated funds, wouldn't the secularists yell?

PP isn't a charity, and you don't get to direct your tax dollars.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

PP isn't a charity, and you don't get to direct your tax dollars.

Planned Parenthood is most definitely a charity that claims they need your tax dollars to survive. And we direct where our tax money goes all the time.

Now that Obama Care is here why do we need PP at all? It's a redundant service that, if not for abortion, would be absolutely unnecessary.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

PP isn't a charity, and you don't get to direct your tax dollars.

Planned Parenthood is most definitely a charity that claims they need your tax dollars to survive. And we direct where our tax money goes all the time.

Now that Obama Care is here why do we need PP at all?

Learn what a charity is. And Obamacare isn't Universal Single-Payer.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

PP isn't a charity, and you don't get to direct your tax dollars.

Planned Parenthood is most definitely a charity that claims they need your tax dollars to survive. And we direct where our tax money goes all the time.

Now that Obama Care is here why do we need PP at all?

Learn what a charity is. And Obamacare isn't Universal Single-Payer.

A charity: "an organization set up to provide help and raise money for those in need."
An organization (like Planned Parenthood, I guess) set up to provide help (that would be providing women's health services).
I know what a charity is. Apparently you do not. And that Obama isn't universal single payer is absolutely irrelevant. Between Obama Care and public health clinics there should be no woman in America without the services PP claims to provide. You lose.

 

[emilynghiem]

Those not willing to fund it hate women, and a lot of them are, very stupid women.

Reminds me of when the opposite happens.
When it comes to Christian references in public schools,
the secular left doesn't want that publicly funded.

Does that make them all God haters and against the charity
and public good done by Christian groups?

No, it is argued it's because of separation of church and state,
and there is nothing wrong with funding beliefs in private, just not public.

Well, the same with people who don't believe in funding Planned Parenthood. Why not keep that funded privately if people disagree on beliefs about abortion and birth control?

The left can finally have what they want, if all their funding can go into these clinics for health care, deduct 100% from taxes as a business investment, create an entire Singlepayer health care umbrella that will cover all the needs of the poor, and give others the same freedom to fund their own charity programs as well.

How can you mandate which charities the public must pay for?
If the Catholic charities mandated funds, wouldn't the secularists yell?

PP isn't a charity, and you don't get to direct your tax dollars.

Where religious beliefs are concerned,
why shouldn't citizens have the right NOT to be forced to fund institutions against their beliefs.

What happened to no taxation without representation?
What happened to govt not respecting an establishment of religion?

Sorry but my Constitutional standards on respecting beliefs and free exercise of religion are higher than what is practiced.

If MY beliefs about what constitutes religious bias
also constitutes a political religion, then I have the right to that also!

Maybe the Constitutionalists need to formally declare these separate denominations to be political religions, and agree to separate them and keep them out of govt mandates.

I have suggested this for conferences in preparation for Constitutional amendments, but given the state of political division and unrest, we can't even have a convention yet without the process getting thrown off. We need to have an agreement what is a political belief and how to manage these. If we don't even agree on that, we REALLY need to separate. Very sad if we can't even agree what constitutes bias based on political beliefs and creeds. Can't we even see we all have biases?

 

[emilynghiem]

PP isn't a charity, and you don't get to direct your tax dollars.

Planned Parenthood is most definitely a charity that claims they need your tax dollars to survive. And we direct where our tax money goes all the time.

Now that Obama Care is here why do we need PP at all?

Learn what a charity is. And Obamacare isn't Universal Single-Payer.

A charity: "an organization set up to provide help and raise money for those in need."
An organization (like Planned Parenthood, I guess) set up to provide help (that would be providing women's health services).
I know what a charity is. Apparently you do not. And that Obama isn't universal single payer is absolutely irrelevant. Between Obama Care and public health clinics there should be no woman in America without the services PP claims to provide. You lose.

Dear Eric Arthur Blair
I would say you are right about PP that they operate as a charity seeking donations, even though they are political and cross the line with business, politics, etc.

For ObamaCare my Singlepayer/Universal care friends will tell you that is corporate hijacking and not what they wanted either.

They don't believe in the money going to corporate insurance.
This is a hybrid nightmare designed to hold health care and taxpayers
hostage to force a replacement, where the left won't agree to things that don't match their agenda, so we are stuck with something neither side wants.

Unfortunately, since the Congress members in charge of changing ACA aren't affected by it directly, they all have benefits through their own system and are using certain clauses to exempt themselves,
there is no motivation to change it. The taxpayers affected don't have direct say, and the ones with jurisdiction aren't under pressure since they are exempted. So nothing is changing, everyone waits on someone else to change it. Nobody agrees, but the same people affected are not the ones with any say in the bill, and vice versa.

The people who passed it, and Justice Roberts who rewrote or reinterpreted as a tax to endorse it as Constitutional, should be sued to either pay the difference in cost and losses to taxpayers who didn't agree to this and weren't represented, or to change it to OPTIONAL to make it Constitutional.

Otherwise I would sue both parties for the 24 billion cost to taxpayers over the federal shutdown because of the contested ACA that should not have passed without consensus, since it established political beliefs that were cleared contested by half the nation and their representatives. If you override the consent of the taxpayers, then there is that bill to pay that should not be charged to the dissenters who protested the whole time but were not represented. Period.

Pelosi and Obama as representatives of the Democrats who passed and keep endorsing this ACA bill and mandates should be held to pay back the costs to taxpayers of the mandate we didn't agree to be under, and that money can be invested in setting up the REAL singlepayer system as an OPTIONhtrough the Democrats. Likewise the GOPcan set up free market options through that party, and give taxpayers a choice. Since health care involves spiritual beliefs, religious and political belief and cannot be mandated or regulated by govt without consent of the people whose beliefs and creeds are affected.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

PP isn't a charity, and you don't get to direct your tax dollars.

Planned Parenthood is most definitely a charity that claims they need your tax dollars to survive. And we direct where our tax money goes all the time.

Now that Obama Care is here why do we need PP at all?

Learn what a charity is. And Obamacare isn't Universal Single-Payer.

A charity: "an organization set up to provide help and raise money for those in need."
An organization (like Planned Parenthood, I guess) set up to provide help (that would be providing women's health services).
I know what a charity is. Apparently you do not. And that Obama isn't universal single payer is absolutely irrelevant. Between Obama Care and public health clinics there should be no woman in America without the services PP claims to provide. You lose.

It is a non-profit health care provided, not a charity.

 

[emilynghiem]

PP isn't a charity, and you don't get to direct your tax dollars.

Planned Parenthood is most definitely a charity that claims they need your tax dollars to survive. And we direct where our tax money goes all the time.

Now that Obama Care is here why do we need PP at all?

Learn what a charity is. And Obamacare isn't Universal Single-Payer.

A charity: "an organization set up to provide help and raise money for those in need."
An organization (like Planned Parenthood, I guess) set up to provide help (that would be providing women's health services).
I know what a charity is. Apparently you do not. And that Obama isn't universal single payer is absolutely irrelevant. Between Obama Care and public health clinics there should be no woman in America without the services PP claims to provide. You lose.

It is a non-profit health care provided, not a charity.

OK PaintMyHouse so let's not haggle over terms.
what do we mean by nonprofit or charity.

1. do we agree that people have a CHOICE whether to fund
this type of "nonprofit/charity" or whatever you call this TYPE
of institution. is it by VOLUNTARY donation?

2. if it is something taxpayers are REQUIRED to fund,
like public school, public housing, etc. even though public housing
operates as a pseudo-nonprofit that also blurs lines between
public govt agency and a third party independent institution.

3. is it BOTH, is it an independent private institution that "happens to receive federal/public grants"

Certain private schools, if they receive federal grants, have to abide by federal laws such as barring discrimination by creed.

So even if this is a private institution (whether you CALL it a nonprofit or a charity, do we agree funding is voluntary and it is NOT govt),
do you agree that it should not discriminate by creed.

So for taxpayers who don't believe in abortion, or funding prochoice politics the same way others don't fund Christian or prolife beliefs,
don't those taxpayers have a right NOT to fund this and to insist
on private funding only by people who believe in that, similar to
the FREE CHOICE to fund prolife or Christian "nonprofits/charities"

Shouldn't that be voluntary?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

PP isn't a charity, and you don't get to direct your tax dollars.

Planned Parenthood is most definitely a charity that claims they need your tax dollars to survive. And we direct where our tax money goes all the time.

Now that Obama Care is here why do we need PP at all?

Learn what a charity is. And Obamacare isn't Universal Single-Payer.

A charity: "an organization set up to provide help and raise money for those in need."
An organization (like Planned Parenthood, I guess) set up to provide help (that would be providing women's health services).
I know what a charity is. Apparently you do not. And that Obama isn't universal single payer is absolutely irrelevant. Between Obama Care and public health clinics there should be no woman in America without the services PP claims to provide. You lose.

It is a non-profit health care provided, not a charity.

OK PaintMyHouse so let's not haggle over terms.
what do we mean by nonprofit or charity.

1. do we agree that people have a CHOICE whether to fund
this type of "nonprofit/charity" or whatever you call this TYPE
of institution. is it by VOLUNTARY donation?

2. if it is something taxpayers are REQUIRED to fund,
like public school, public housing, etc. even though public housing
operates as a pseudo-nonprofit that also blurs lines between
public govt agency and a third party independent institution.

3. is it BOTH, is it an independent private institution that "happens to receive federal/public grants"

Certain private schools, if they receive federal grants, have to abide by federal laws such as barring discrimination by creed.

So even if this is a private institution (whether you CALL it a nonprofit or a charity, do we agree funding is voluntary and it is NOT govt),
do you agree that it should not discriminate by creed.

So for taxpayers who don't believe in abortion, or funding prochoice politics the same way others don't fund Christian or prolife beliefs,
don't those taxpayers have a right NOT to fund this and to insist
on private funding only by people who believe in that, similar to
the FREE CHOICE to fund prolife or Christian "nonprofits/charities"

Shouldn't that be voluntary?

No...

 

[emilynghiem]

Planned Parenthood is most definitely a charity that claims they need your tax dollars to survive. And we direct where our tax money goes all the time.

Now that Obama Care is here why do we need PP at all?

Learn what a charity is. And Obamacare isn't Universal Single-Payer.

A charity: "an organization set up to provide help and raise money for those in need."
An organization (like Planned Parenthood, I guess) set up to provide help (that would be providing women's health services).
I know what a charity is. Apparently you do not. And that Obama isn't universal single payer is absolutely irrelevant. Between Obama Care and public health clinics there should be no woman in America without the services PP claims to provide. You lose.

It is a non-profit health care provided, not a charity.

OK PaintMyHouse so let's not haggle over terms.
what do we mean by nonprofit or charity.

1. do we agree that people have a CHOICE whether to fund
this type of "nonprofit/charity" or whatever you call this TYPE
of institution. is it by VOLUNTARY donation?

2. if it is something taxpayers are REQUIRED to fund,
like public school, public housing, etc. even though public housing
operates as a pseudo-nonprofit that also blurs lines between
public govt agency and a third party independent institution.

3. is it BOTH, is it an independent private institution that "happens to receive federal/public grants"

Certain private schools, if they receive federal grants, have to abide by federal laws such as barring discrimination by creed.

So even if this is a private institution (whether you CALL it a nonprofit or a charity, do we agree funding is voluntary and it is NOT govt),
do you agree that it should not discriminate by creed.

So for taxpayers who don't believe in abortion, or funding prochoice politics the same way others don't fund Christian or prolife beliefs,
don't those taxpayers have a right NOT to fund this and to insist
on private funding only by people who believe in that, similar to
the FREE CHOICE to fund prolife or Christian "nonprofits/charities"

Shouldn't that be voluntary?

No...

Ok then you are opening the door for all prolife groups to claim their institutions should be automatically funded to defend the lives of the unborn if you are going to compel taxpayers to pay for health care under the beliefs and creeds of PP and their supporters.

If you believe in mandating funding, well so do the Christians
and Muslims believe their requirements are mandatory for them.

Why can't all people get taxbreaks for investing in the health care mandates of their choice?

Where does federal govt have authority to regulate on the basis of religion and creed, and decide who gets mandatory public funding, who gets tax breaks, etc.

PaintMyHouse I agree we need means to cover public health on a universal level of equal protections and access.

So by that very standard, shouldn't all groups have equal access to fund the programs of their free choice, beliefs and creed.

We can require that all people provide for health care, where they don't dump the burden on other taxpayers.

But how can federal govt dictate how this is done? With creeds at stake? Since when it is the place of federal govt to regulate by religion?

When people CLEARLY have different beliefs of prochoice and prolife.
why not have separate tracks, as we already do for political parties
to fund their own candidates and platforms! Why not take that
a step further and fund/manage their own health care and benefits!

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

PP isn't a charity, and you don't get to direct your tax dollars.

Planned Parenthood is most definitely a charity that claims they need your tax dollars to survive. And we direct where our tax money goes all the time.

Now that Obama Care is here why do we need PP at all?

Learn what a charity is. And Obamacare isn't Universal Single-Payer.

A charity: "an organization set up to provide help and raise money for those in need."
An organization (like Planned Parenthood, I guess) set up to provide help (that would be providing women's health services).
I know what a charity is. Apparently you do not. And that Obama isn't universal single payer is absolutely irrelevant. Between Obama Care and public health clinics there should be no woman in America without the services PP claims to provide. You lose.

It is a non-profit health care provided, not a charity.

It's exactly the same as Salvation Army or any other organization that receives federal funding (excepting the Salvation Army's main reason for being isn't to
kill babies).

 

[emilynghiem]

PP isn't a charity, and you don't get to direct your tax dollars.

Planned Parenthood is most definitely a charity that claims they need your tax dollars to survive. And we direct where our tax money goes all the time.

Now that Obama Care is here why do we need PP at all?

Learn what a charity is. And Obamacare isn't Universal Single-Payer.

A charity: "an organization set up to provide help and raise money for those in need."
An organization (like Planned Parenthood, I guess) set up to provide help (that would be providing women's health services).
I know what a charity is. Apparently you do not. And that Obama isn't universal single payer is absolutely irrelevant. Between Obama Care and public health clinics there should be no woman in America without the services PP claims to provide. You lose.

It is a non-profit health care provided, not a charity.

It's exactly the same as Salvation Army or any other organization that receives federal funding (excepting the Salvation Army's main reason for being isn't to
kill babies).

I've been arguing that peopleagainst the death penalty due to their beliefs in restorative justice should haveequaloption to pay for life in prison working to pay restitution

and people against war can pay for health care and schools instead, since there is a part of the military budget that is supposed to pay civilians for collateral damage to restore and pay those costs.

 

[bodecea]

PP isn't a charity, and you don't get to direct your tax dollars.

Planned Parenthood is most definitely a charity that claims they need your tax dollars to survive. And we direct where our tax money goes all the time.

Now that Obama Care is here why do we need PP at all?

Learn what a charity is. And Obamacare isn't Universal Single-Payer.

A charity: "an organization set up to provide help and raise money for those in need."
An organization (like Planned Parenthood, I guess) set up to provide help (that would be providing women's health services).
I know what a charity is. Apparently you do not. And that Obama isn't universal single payer is absolutely irrelevant. Between Obama Care and public health clinics there should be no woman in America without the services PP claims to provide. You lose.

It is a non-profit health care provided, not a charity.

It's exactly the same as Salvation Army or any other organization that receives federal funding (excepting the Salvation Army's main reason for being isn't to
kill babies).

Neither is Planned Parenthood's main reason for being.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Planned Parenthood is most definitely a charity that claims they need your tax dollars to survive. And we direct where our tax money goes all the time.

Now that Obama Care is here why do we need PP at all?

Learn what a charity is. And Obamacare isn't Universal Single-Payer.

A charity: "an organization set up to provide help and raise money for those in need."
An organization (like Planned Parenthood, I guess) set up to provide help (that would be providing women's health services).
I know what a charity is. Apparently you do not. And that Obama isn't universal single payer is absolutely irrelevant. Between Obama Care and public health clinics there should be no woman in America without the services PP claims to provide. You lose.

It is a non-profit health care provided, not a charity.

It's exactly the same as Salvation Army or any other organization that receives federal funding (excepting the Salvation Army's main reason for being isn't to
kill babies).

Neither is Planned Parenthood's main reason for being.

Right (wink). Whatever it's PR wing and leftist politicians claim Planned Parenthood doesn't do a thing that local free clinics, social services offices or
Obama Care providers don't already do themselves.....except aborting babies.

 

[emilynghiem]

Planned Parenthood is most definitely a charity that claims they need your tax dollars to survive. And we direct where our tax money goes all the time.

Now that Obama Care is here why do we need PP at all?

Learn what a charity is. And Obamacare isn't Universal Single-Payer.

A charity: "an organization set up to provide help and raise money for those in need."
An organization (like Planned Parenthood, I guess) set up to provide help (that would be providing women's health services).
I know what a charity is. Apparently you do not. And that Obama isn't universal single payer is absolutely irrelevant. Between Obama Care and public health clinics there should be no woman in America without the services PP claims to provide. You lose.

It is a non-profit health care provided, not a charity.

It's exactly the same as Salvation Army or any other organization that receives federal funding (excepting the Salvation Army's main reason for being isn't to
kill babies).

Neither is Planned Parenthood's main reason for being.

Regardless what its original purpose is,
if people don't believe in funding a private institution
they don't believe in and can't check, with no representation,
why would you make someone fund that?

I wouldn't want to be forced to fund corporations I had no
say in or check on either, and that's what's wrong with this country.
We've lost direct accountability and visibility.

If you are going to have govt mandates, especially forced funding,
that is the whole Point of Representation and Constitutional
checks on govt.

No taxation without Representation.
Equal protection of the laws
Consent of the governed and no discrimination by creed
Due process before depriving citizens of liberties

What happened to the Golden Rule common sense and decency.
if we don't want other people pushing agenda through govt
and making us pay for their things we don't believe in,
why can't we respect the same rights and equal protections of others?

Are we really reduced to just forcing our way through govt
and expecting the other side to fight back if they want their interests
represented. And whoever wins gets their way?

How is that equal protection of the laws?
Sounds like equal opportunity to VIOLATE the beliefs of others
by bullying and bulldozing each other over!

I believe in mediation, conflict resolution, consensus
NOT civil wars, fought with bigger dollars to lobby through
parties and media. What the H

I guess this is why Occupy started yelling.
And why the Tea Party can't get more things through
because of all this infighting trying to play the bullying games.

Gee FU whiz...

 

[emilynghiem]

Learn what a charity is. And Obamacare isn't Universal Single-Payer.

A charity: "an organization set up to provide help and raise money for those in need."
An organization (like Planned Parenthood, I guess) set up to provide help (that would be providing women's health services).
I know what a charity is. Apparently you do not. And that Obama isn't universal single payer is absolutely irrelevant. Between Obama Care and public health clinics there should be no woman in America without the services PP claims to provide. You lose.

It is a non-profit health care provided, not a charity.

It's exactly the same as Salvation Army or any other organization that receives federal funding (excepting the Salvation Army's main reason for being isn't to
kill babies).

Neither is Planned Parenthood's main reason for being.

Right (wink). Whatever it's PR wing and leftist politicians claim Planned Parenthood doesn't do a thing that local free clinics, social services offices or
Obama Care providers don't already do themselves.....except aborting babies.

Dear Eric Arthur Blair
I was just talking with a prolife friend of mine about how to organize
a taxpayers group, like a class action, and sue both parties to separate fundign for health care by prochoice and prolife beliefs, so we can all get what we want and NOT be forced by law to fund the practices of teh other group(s).

Instead of just complaining to each other,
can you help me and Juda find a lawyer or legal team?
She has tried to contact some, and I also get no response
since we are just individuals. We need to organize a mass number,
and it would help if we are evenly prochoice wanting singlepayer set up throught he Democrats who promised this and ran campaigns on this premise and owe it to constituents, and prolife whose candidates keep promising them they won't have to fund abortions.

How can we sue the parties themselves to set up these tracks,
fund them directly and quit fighting through govt which gets nowhere???

Don't the party leaders OWE these programs to the constituents they promised them too. so why not hold them to their own statements or else argue they are committing fraud and need to refund the campaign dollars or else invest that money directly into setting up separate health care programs for the members who AGREE to be under that and fund it as mandatory to participate in them.

How do we organize a class action suit or petition demanding this be set up by party or else NOT run for office NOT fund any more campaigns until the resources are invested directly into what both parties promised.

P..S. for funding sources I propose to hold the Republicans and leaders responsible for paying back illicit war contracts that weren't authorized constitutionally and pay that back into setting up health care in both Iraq and in the US especialy for Vets deprived of health life and access to services due to govt incompetence.

And for Democrats the ACA mandates that are unconstitutional need to be changed to optional,
and demand that the monies paid to candidates promising either universal health care or abolishing the death penalty need to be paid back and invested in reforming prisons to save resources that can be used to expand health services for the greater population, not just paying for convicts in prison.

Personally I'd like to petition/sue Pelosi Obama and Justice Roberts
to pay the 300 more a month added to my costs to comply with ACA
once my day job ends and my insurance (that I was promised I could keep
and am required to cover by law) goes up from 30 a month to 300 which I cannot afford.
Nor can I afford the 1-3% fine off my salary since I am using both jobs to
pay for costs of nonprofits in communities suffering damages and abuses by govt corruption.

I am already paying thousands to help volunteers in community recovery from govt abuses.
So if these Officials in govt pass laws requiring me to pay 300 a more per month,
where is that going to come from?

I am paying 300 a month for the vehicle for the nonprofit group in my neighborhood,
or else our own elected Precinct Chair for our Democratic precinct will lose his transportation.

So I want to ask Obama which I should pay for
300 a month to be compliant with this health insurance mandate I had no say in
or 300 a month to keep the van I am paying for so our Democratic Precinct Chair
can continue to volunteer in the National Historic Black Church District
destroyed by four Democratic Mayors who gave all the money to developers
and none to the nonprofit groups trying to save national history by building a campus here.

Which one do I fund, because I cannot pay for both.