Do we continue paying for abortions when a woman has already had 2 or more abortions?

[BDBoop]

Unless you can prove that Planned Parenthood used government money to pay for abortions,

which necessitates proving that Planned Parenthood had no access to non-governmental funds for those same abortions, so the money HAD to come from the government,

then you have no case.

What is it with you dick heads always demanding 'proof'?

Honest to God, my 5 year-old grand daughter is more mature than that.

You sound like Pee Wee Herman.... "Prove it..!!"

immature dillweeds

The above is when you know you've won the argument.

Exactly.

 

[JoeB131]

As these statistics (reality..) show.. 44% of abortions were performed on women that are not responsible or why else would they all have had a previous abortion.

• 36.6% were performed on women with one or two prior abortions, and
• 8.1% were performed on women with three or more prior abortions (CDC).
• 44.7% or nearly half by women are either stupid, definitely don't use birth control

Facts About Abortion: U.S. Abortion Statistics

Now where is the funding from tax payers that pay for these abortions going???

Planned Parenthood Total Revenue
$1,049,600,000 ...
$538,500,000 Government health services,grants,etc... 45% comes from OUR TAX dollars.
ISSUU - 2010-2011 Annual Financial Report by Planned Parenthood Action Fund

According to analysis by the Susan B. Anthony List, Planned Parenthood has performed almost 1 million abortions in the past three years alone.

One more time,

The government is paying PP for health services and education.

The abortions are fully paid for by the women who have them. Abortion is a profit center for PP.

 

[hazlnut]

As these statistics (reality..) show.. 44% of abortions were performed on women that are not responsible or why else would they all have had a previous abortion.

• 36.6% were performed on women with one or two prior abortions, and
• 8.1% were performed on women with three or more prior abortions (CDC).
• 44.7% or nearly half by women are either stupid, definitely don't use birth control

Facts About Abortion: U.S. Abortion Statistics

Now where is the funding from tax payers that pay for these abortions going???

Planned Parenthood Total Revenue
$1,049,600,000 ...
$538,500,000 Government health services,grants,etc... 45% comes from OUR TAX dollars.
ISSUU - 2010-2011 Annual Financial Report by Planned Parenthood Action Fund

According to analysis by the Susan B. Anthony List, Planned Parenthood has performed almost 1 million abortions in the past three years alone.

Yes!


YES!!



YES!!!



And pay her to get her tubes tied.

 

[hazlnut]

The real problem is the fact that Tax Dollars don't go to abortions.

Poor women who can not afford to feed kids, should NOT be having kids.

People have sex.

Women get pregnant.


We have no jobs.


Why do we not pass out Plan B like candy to anyone who wants it??

 

[ShawnChris13]

People are killing children and claiming its a woman's right to choose. The father has no day in whether or not they have an abortion. Yet if he wants one and she keeps it he has to pay support. If he doesn't and she does he never gets to have his child. Yes, women's rights indeed.

 

[AceRothstein]

The op seems counter-intuitve. Frankly I have no interest in whether a woman chooses, or doesn't choose, an abortion, and would prefer to not be informed in either case, but SERIOUSY, if a woman has already chosen three or so abortions, is it really in socity's interest to force her to become a mother at that point?

You win the thread.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Didn't you mean "Not to gullible people"?

Unless you can prove that Planned Parenthood used government money to pay for abortions,

which necessitates proving that Planned Parenthood had no access to non-governmental funds for those same abortions, so the money HAD to come from the government,

then you have no case.

Not everybody can trace the funds that go into abortions, but we have an idea.

Take Minnesota:

What you should know about Planned Parenthood, health care reform

By Bill Poehler​

May 9, 2010 — Last week's announcement that Planned Parenthood will build a large new abortion center in St. Paul's Midway neighborhood brings to light the contentious issue of government funding of elective abortions. While it is true that Planned Parenthood will use private donations of approximately $18 million to construct its new complex, its day- to-day operations will continue to rely heavily on taxpayer funds.​

Many Minnesotans still do not realize that they fund abortions every day simply by paying state taxes -- sales tax, income tax and other taxes. This is the result of the Minnesota Supreme Court's 1995 Doe vs. Gomez decision, in which the court "found" a right to taxpayer-funded abortion in the state Constitution. Since the ruling, abortion centers have been reimbursed with $15.6 million for 50,000 abortions, according to the Minnesota Department of Human Services. In 2008, the most recent figures available, taxpayers paid $1.5 million for 3,754 abortions. Roughly 99 percent of these abortions are elective, meaning they are performed for reasons other than to save the mother's life, or in cases of reported rape or incest.​

In addition to direct abortion funding, Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), the nation's largest abortion business, received a staggering $349 million in taxpayer dollars in the form of federal and state government grants and contracts in 2007 (latest figures). Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota received $5.26 million from federal, state and local governments in 2008.​

Abortion providers are poised to receive even more federal funds under President Obama's new health care overhaul, which PPFA hailed as "a huge victory." Not only does the law subsidize health plans that cover abortion, it also opens the door to direct federal funding of abortions at community health centers, or CHCs. The law appropriates $11 billion over five years to approximately 1,250 different CHCs.​

There are no restrictions to prevent that money from paying for abortions, according to legal experts including Columbus School of Law Prof. Robert A. Destro, who is an authority on abortion funding, who helped to write the amicus brief filed by 218 members of the U.S. House of Representatives in Harris vs. McRae (1980), and who has written: "The history of abortion funding litigation since Roe v. Wade in 1973 demonstrates conclusively that the Secretary [of Health and Human Services] will be forced by the courts to pay for abortions with the CHC money appropriated by the Senate health care bill."​

This is true primarily because the CHC funds are a direct appropriation in the health care bill itself and will not flow through the annual appropriations bill for the Department of Health and Human Services. These funds would not be covered by the Hyde Amendment, which only prohibits use of annual HHS appropriations to fund abortions.​

Indeed, the Reproductive Health Access Project and the Abortion Access Project have produced an "administrative billing guide" to help CHCs integrate abortion into their practices within the confines of federal and state restrictions.​

The sad truth is that this will lead to more abortions performed on vulnerable, low-income women. Statistics show that when public funding of abortion is instituted or expanded, the numbers of abortions increase very significantly. A study by the Guttmacher Institute, a pro-choice research organization, found that the abortion rate among Medicaid recipients was more than twice as high in those states that publicly funded abortion through Medicaid.​

The bottom line is that abortion is about money. Abortion, which ends the life of a developing human being, is now the most common surgical procedure in the United States. It has become an enormously profitable enterprise, marketed to ethnic and immigrant populations in their native-language newspapers; to students and young people as the solution to the "problem" of pregnancy, and to women everywhere as their absolute "right" without regard for the life that is destroyed.​

This Op Ed piece appeared in the 5/9/2010 Minneapolis Star Tribune​

​

​

That isn't even the tip of the iceberg Obama has for the unborn by tapping the taxpayer's wallet.​

That's an OpEd that includes a lie that abortion is the most common surgical procedure in the US.

Therefore we can safely ignore every other claim in it that isn't backed up by objective irrefutable evidence.

 

[candycorn]

The real problem is the fact that Tax Dollars don't go to abortions.

Poor women who can not afford to feed kids, should NOT be having kids.
People have sex.
Women get pregnant.
We have no jobs.
Why do we not pass out Plan B like candy to anyone who wants it??

It's not the Christian thing to do; I suppose.

 

[healthmyths]

There is no spin....it's the law.

Anyone making a claim that taxpayer money is used for abortions is simply lying.

fun·gi·ble
ˈfənjəbəl/Submit
adjectiveLAW
1.
(of goods contracted for without an individual specimen being specified) able to replace or be replaced by another identical item; mutually interchangeable.
"money is fungible—money that is raised for one purpose can easily be used for another"

Your free lesson for today. Read it, learn it, don't make me do this again.

And BTW..... I think ALL libturds should be given free abortions and $5 from Crime Stop.

And another $10 from the Darwin Society.

And $20 from the "Keep America Beautiful Foundation"

Not sure what any of that means but PP doesn't use tax money for abortions.

Justine Sessions, a spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood acknowledged that, but said some abortion clinics and health centers are housed within the same buildings. She suggested that if it were too expensive to upgrade the abortion clinics, then it could also force a shut-down of the health care clinics in the same building.

That right there is an admission that Planned Parenthood mixes its funds and uses some taxpayer money — the corporate welfare it gets year after year from the government — to fund abortions.

Despite all its protestations, the abortion business must be pretty good. Planned Parenthood opened a gigantic facility that it calls “Prevention Park” in Houston’s black and Hispanic neighborhoods a couple of years ago. That facility is 78,000 square feet, making it the largest abortion center in the nation. A Planned Parenthood official called that abortion factory “sacred and holy ground.”
The PJ Tatler » Planned Parenthood Admits that It Uses Taxpayer Money to Fund Abortions

So an official spokeswoman admits that it is difficult to segregate expenses between abortion clinics and health centers. Health centers that received federal tax money.
Common sense says the operating costs are co-mingled.. i.e. is the toilet paper in EVERY abortion clinic paid with NON-Tax payer money? Are all expenditures segregated to meet the
strict compliance that states no tax payer money will be used to fund abortions?
In reality.. no. It is not feasible.

Planned Parenthood Total Revenue
$1,049,600,000 ...of which $538,500,000 Government health services,grants,etc... 45% comes from OUR TAX dollars.
ISSUU - 2010-2011 Annual Financial Report by Planned Parenthood Action Fund

There is NO way a half billion dollars was NOT in some sloppy fashion at the minimum used to pay for abortions.

 

[healthmyths]

My question was should we pay for women who have had more then say 3 abortions?
As I pointed out 36.6% were performed on women with one or two prior abortions, and
8.1% were performed on women with three or more prior abortions (CDC).
44.7% or nearly half by women are either stupid, definitely don't use birth control

Why not advise these women that seemingly can't use birth control the next abortion they have will include sterilization or at least tubal ligation?

This tubal ligation would simplify these womens' lives ... lower the costs of abortions for those that really need them i.e. rape,incest, health of mother.
But to continue to provide free of charge abortions makes no sense.
These 45% of abortions would NOT be necessary if the women who had already 3 or more abortions who I'm sure would be VERY happy to have a tubal ligation.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Do we continue paying for abortions when a woman has already had 2 or more abortions?

If you and others on the right had your way they’d be subject to forced sterilization.

 

[candycorn]

Your free lesson for today. Read it, learn it, don't make me do this again.

And BTW..... I think ALL libturds should be given free abortions and $5 from Crime Stop.

And another $10 from the Darwin Society.

And $20 from the "Keep America Beautiful Foundation"

Not sure what any of that means but PP doesn't use tax money for abortions.

Justine Sessions, a spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood acknowledged that, but said some abortion clinics and health centers are housed within the same buildings. She suggested that if it were too expensive to upgrade the abortion clinics, then it could also force a shut-down of the health care clinics in the same building.

That right there is an admission that Planned Parenthood mixes its funds and uses some taxpayer money — the corporate welfare it gets year after year from the government — to fund abortions.

Despite all its protestations, the abortion business must be pretty good. Planned Parenthood opened a gigantic facility that it calls “Prevention Park” in Houston’s black and Hispanic neighborhoods a couple of years ago. That facility is 78,000 square feet, making it the largest abortion center in the nation. A Planned Parenthood official called that abortion factory “sacred and holy ground.”
The PJ Tatler » Planned Parenthood Admits that It Uses Taxpayer Money to Fund Abortions

So an official spokeswoman admits that it is difficult to segregate expenses between abortion clinics and health centers. Health centers that received federal tax money.
Common sense says the operating costs are co-mingled.. i.e. is the toilet paper in EVERY abortion clinic paid with NON-Tax payer money? Are all expenditures segregated to meet the
strict compliance that states no tax payer money will be used to fund abortions?
In reality.. no. It is not feasible.

Planned Parenthood Total Revenue
$1,049,600,000 ...of which $538,500,000 Government health services,grants,etc... 45% comes from OUR TAX dollars.
ISSUU - 2010-2011 Annual Financial Report by Planned Parenthood Action Fund

There is NO way a half billion dollars was NOT in some sloppy fashion at the minimum used to pay for abortions.

In no way was it an admission despite what is in Pajamas Media says. That it was named "pajamas media" probably should have been your first clue.

No taxpayer money is used to fund abortions. If you have proof, contract the local FBI office.

 

[candycorn]

My question was should we pay for women who have had more then say 3 abortions?
As I pointed out 36.6% were performed on women with one or two prior abortions, and
8.1% were performed on women with three or more prior abortions (CDC).
44.7% or nearly half by women are either stupid, definitely don't use birth control

Why not advise these women that seemingly can't use birth control the next abortion they have will include sterilization or at least tubal ligation?

This tubal ligation would simplify these womens' lives ... lower the costs of abortions for those that really need them i.e. rape,incest, health of mother.
But to continue to provide free of charge abortions makes no sense.
These 45% of abortions would NOT be necessary if the women who had already 3 or more abortions who I'm sure would be VERY happy to have a tubal ligation.

"We" didn't pay for the first or the second.

 

[JoeB131]

My question was should we pay for women who have had more then say 3 abortions?
As I pointed out 36.6% were performed on women with one or two prior abortions, and
8.1% were performed on women with three or more prior abortions (CDC).
44.7% or nearly half by women are either stupid, definitely don't use birth control

Why not advise these women that seemingly can't use birth control the next abortion they have will include sterilization or at least tubal ligation?

This tubal ligation would simplify these womens' lives ... lower the costs of abortions for those that really need them i.e. rape,incest, health of mother.
But to continue to provide free of charge abortions makes no sense.
These 45% of abortions would NOT be necessary if the women who had already 3 or more abortions who I'm sure would be VERY happy to have a tubal ligation.

My question is, why do you have so much hostility towards women?

Why do you care how many abortions they've had in the past?

A tubal ligation is a lot more expensive than four abortions.

 

[healthmyths]

My question was should we pay for women who have had more then say 3 abortions?
As I pointed out 36.6% were performed on women with one or two prior abortions, and
8.1% were performed on women with three or more prior abortions (CDC).
44.7% or nearly half by women are either stupid, definitely don't use birth control

Why not advise these women that seemingly can't use birth control the next abortion they have will include sterilization or at least tubal ligation?

This tubal ligation would simplify these womens' lives ... lower the costs of abortions for those that really need them i.e. rape,incest, health of mother.
But to continue to provide free of charge abortions makes no sense.
These 45% of abortions would NOT be necessary if the women who had already 3 or more abortions who I'm sure would be VERY happy to have a tubal ligation.

My question is, why do you have so much hostility towards women?

Why do you care how many abortions they've had in the past?

A tubal ligation is a lot more expensive than four abortions.

If you see someone hitting their head against the wall would you intervene to stop it?
So you stopped that someone hitting their head.
Then they continue.
What do you do then? Let the head-bashing continue?
Is it a hostile action in trying to help?

A woman who has had 2 previous abortions comes in again, she has to give consent to the abortion.
She has been bashing her head and now you give her an option. Bash her head one more time but with a tubal ligation she won't be bashing her head anymore.
That is a hostile act?

And yes you are right about the costs.
But you are evidently hostile against women because abortions ARE an operation.

Continual assault on a women i.e. future abortions are like bashing head against the wall harmful.
Are you not hostile in wanting to let the women continue her assault ..i.e. abortions... on her body?


Despite the use of local anesthesia, a full 97% of women having abortions reported experiencing pain during the procedure, which more than a third described as "intense,""severe" or "very severe."
Compared to other pains, researchers have rated the pain from abortion as more painful than a bone fracture, about the same as cancer pain, though not as painful as an amputation.
Complications such as these are common, as are bleeding, hemorrhage,[88] laceration of the cervix, [89] menstrual disturbance, [90] inflammation of the reproductive organs, [91] bladder or bowel perforation, [92] and serious infection. [93]

Even more harmful long term physical complications from abortion may surface later. For example, overzealous currettage can damage the lining of the uterus and lead to permanent infertility. [94] Overall, women who have abortions face an increased risk of ectopic (tubal) pregnancy [95] and a more than doubled risk of future sterility. [96] Perhaps most important of all, the risk of these sorts of complications, along with risks of future miscarriage, increase with each subsequent abortion. [97]

Abortion: Some Medical Facts

 

[Bumberclyde]

Should we pay to repair if someone breaks their leg for the 3rd time? Or tell them to bugger off?

 

[JoeB131]

[

If you see someone hitting their head against the wall would you intervene to stop it?
So you stopped that someone hitting their head.
Then they continue.
What do you do then? Let the head-bashing continue?
Is it a hostile action in trying to help?

A woman who has had 2 previous abortions comes in again, she has to give consent to the abortion.
She has been bashing her head and now you give her an option. Bash her head one more time but with a tubal ligation she won't be bashing her head anymore.
That is a hostile act?

And yes you are right about the costs.
But you are evidently hostile against women because abortions ARE an operation.

Continual assault on a women i.e. future abortions are like bashing head against the wall harmful.
Are you not hostile in wanting to let the women continue her assault ..i.e. abortions... on her body?


Abortion: Some Medical Facts

Guy, when you cite a group like National Right To Life about medical effects of abortion, you really don't have credibility at that point.

Do you guys really think masking your misogyny in fake concern is going to fool anyone?

Really? Really?

 

[JoeB131]

Should we pay to repair if someone breaks their leg for the 3rd time? Or tell them to bugger off?

Now, Bumber, don't you know that the purpose of medical science is to pass judgement on people's lives!

In fact, Doctors should be required to take a full year of "shaming".

 

[healthmyths]

Should we pay to repair if someone breaks their leg for the 3rd time? Or tell them to bugger off?

Well the smart person would ask what KIND Of hostile person is it that continually breaks their leg for the third time?
Are they involved in a profession i.e. ski jumper and if so who cares ...he has insurance...not tax money!
Or if it is a non-athletic person then maybe something else is occurring but just to repair after 3 times... and not
figure out the cause..that's barbaric ... that's uncivilized.

 

[healthmyths]

[

If you see someone hitting their head against the wall would you intervene to stop it?
So you stopped that someone hitting their head.
Then they continue.
What do you do then? Let the head-bashing continue?
Is it a hostile action in trying to help?

A woman who has had 2 previous abortions comes in again, she has to give consent to the abortion.
She has been bashing her head and now you give her an option. Bash her head one more time but with a tubal ligation she won't be bashing her head anymore.
That is a hostile act?

And yes you are right about the costs.
But you are evidently hostile against women because abortions ARE an operation.

Continual assault on a women i.e. future abortions are like bashing head against the wall harmful.
Are you not hostile in wanting to let the women continue her assault ..i.e. abortions... on her body?


Abortion: Some Medical Facts

Guy, when you cite a group like National Right To Life about medical effects of abortion, you really don't have credibility at that point.

Do you guys really think masking your misogyny in fake concern is going to fool anyone?

Really? Really?

Yea.. we are such mean evil people.
We want to have educated people..not breeding people.
We want informed people that don't devolve to simple animals screwing indiscriminately!
The point is civilized people are concerned about women who seemingly think abortions have no consequences.
Only uncaring, uncompassionate people would watch a woman bashing her head i.e. having another abortion without offering a solution.
I really feel sorry for people that don't care about a woman's health by providing abortions on demand.
I am sure you are the type of person that would like to see a drive-through abortion system .. ordering abortion on demand... yea really civilized!