Donald Trump: Shut Down Government If Necessary To Defund Planned Parenthood

[g5000]

Nope. You have it exactly backwards. Money is fungible. Funding PP enables them to perform abortions. Take the federal money away, and they would have to decide how to use their remaining money. They would have to choose between performing abortions or providing health services.

Take away the federal money and fund an organization which does not perform abortions. It's win/win for the GOP, and would abort Planned Parenthood.

You're an idiot. If the fungible issue were legitimate then the funding could have been declared illegal long ago.

Wake up.

It's Economics 101. I'm sorry it goes over your head.

I'm sorry it goes in one of your ears and through the empty space in your brain and out the other.

You're making the case that no person on Medicaid, Medicare, or any other government program should not be able to have their healthcare covered in any medical institution that has ever performed an abortion.

Your double negatives are making your straw man fallacy even more unintelligent than it already is.

It is very simple. Planned Parenthood performs abortions. It is able to do so because it receives federal funding.

Take away federal funding from Planned Parenthood and give it to an organization which does not perform abortions.

This is really, really, really simple to understand...you know...if you WANT to understand. No need to toss out red herrings and straw men in your frustration at having federal money taken away which enables abortions.

The argument this would hurt women's health services is a bullshit smoke screen.

lol, get the votes then.

You're full of shit. The government does not fund abortions at PP.

It does fund abortions. The politicians just guessed you would be too stupid to catch on.

They guessed right.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Nope. You have it exactly backwards. Money is fungible. Funding PP enables them to perform abortions. Take the federal money away, and they would have to decide how to use their remaining money. They would have to choose between performing abortions or providing health services.

Take away the federal money and fund an organization which does not perform abortions. It's win/win for the GOP, and would abort Planned Parenthood.

You're an idiot. If the fungible issue were legitimate then the funding could have been declared illegal long ago.

Wake up.

It's Economics 101. I'm sorry it goes over your head.

I'm sorry it goes in one of your ears and through the empty space in your brain and out the other.

You're making the case that no person on Medicaid, Medicare, or any other government program should not be able to have their healthcare covered in any medical institution that has ever performed an abortion.

Your double negatives are making your straw man fallacy even more unintelligent than it already is.

It is very simple. Planned Parenthood performs abortions. It is able to do so because it receives federal funding.

Take away federal funding from Planned Parenthood and give it to an organization which does not perform abortions.

This is really, really, really simple to understand...you know...if you WANT to understand. No need to toss out red herrings and straw men in your frustration at having federal money taken away which enables abortions.

The argument this would hurt women's health services is a bullshit smoke screen.

Well, not if having safe and accessible abortions is a woman's health service.

nobody is taking away the service, only the tax dollars used to perform a service.
how about this, people pay for their own abortions and the tax dollars go back to the taxpayer.

 

[g5000]

It's Economics 101. I'm sorry it goes over your head.

I'm sorry it goes in one of your ears and through the empty space in your brain and out the other.

You're making the case that no person on Medicaid, Medicare, or any other government program should not be able to have their healthcare covered in any medical institution that has ever performed an abortion.

Your double negatives are making your straw man fallacy even more unintelligent than it already is.

It is very simple. Planned Parenthood performs abortions. It is able to do so because it receives federal funding.

Take away federal funding from Planned Parenthood and give it to an organization which does not perform abortions.

This is really, really, really simple to understand...you know...if you WANT to understand. No need to toss out red herrings and straw men in your frustration at having federal money taken away which enables abortions.

The argument this would hurt women's health services is a bullshit smoke screen.

Well, not if having safe and accessible abortions is a woman's health service.

PP frames it as an either/or. Either abortions OR health services.

They are choosing abortions over health services.

What's more, abortion is not a health service to the vast, vast, vast majority of women who get abortions. Less than one percent of abortions are to save the life of the mother.

So that's another bullshit smokescreen.

Family planning is a health issue.

Abortion is not.

Family planning is mostly a financial issue.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You're an idiot. If the fungible issue were legitimate then the funding could have been declared illegal long ago.

Wake up.

It's Economics 101. I'm sorry it goes over your head.

I'm sorry it goes in one of your ears and through the empty space in your brain and out the other.

You're making the case that no person on Medicaid, Medicare, or any other government program should not be able to have their healthcare covered in any medical institution that has ever performed an abortion.

Your double negatives are making your straw man fallacy even more unintelligent than it already is.

It is very simple. Planned Parenthood performs abortions. It is able to do so because it receives federal funding.

Take away federal funding from Planned Parenthood and give it to an organization which does not perform abortions.

This is really, really, really simple to understand...you know...if you WANT to understand. No need to toss out red herrings and straw men in your frustration at having federal money taken away which enables abortions.

The argument this would hurt women's health services is a bullshit smoke screen.

lol, get the votes then.

You're full of shit. The government does not fund abortions at PP.

It does fund abortions. The politicians just guessed you would be too stupid to catch on.

They guessed right.

I repeat the question:

Is it illegal for the US to give aid to Israel given that the Israeli government funds abortions?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'm sorry it goes in one of your ears and through the empty space in your brain and out the other.

You're making the case that no person on Medicaid, Medicare, or any other government program should not be able to have their healthcare covered in any medical institution that has ever performed an abortion.

Your double negatives are making your straw man fallacy even more unintelligent than it already is.

It is very simple. Planned Parenthood performs abortions. It is able to do so because it receives federal funding.

Take away federal funding from Planned Parenthood and give it to an organization which does not perform abortions.

This is really, really, really simple to understand...you know...if you WANT to understand. No need to toss out red herrings and straw men in your frustration at having federal money taken away which enables abortions.

The argument this would hurt women's health services is a bullshit smoke screen.

Well, not if having safe and accessible abortions is a woman's health service.

PP frames it as an either/or. Either abortions OR health services.

They are choosing abortions over health services.

What's more, abortion is not a health service to the vast, vast, vast majority of women who get abortions. Less than one percent of abortions are to save the life of the mother.

So that's another bullshit smokescreen.

Family planning is a health issue.

Yes, but abortion is not.

Family planning is about controlling the size of one's family. It's about when and if you have a child at a certain time.

Of course abortion is a part of that.

 

[g5000]

What your politicians don't want you to know: Fungibility - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[bendog]

You're an idiot. If the fungible issue were legitimate then the funding could have been declared illegal long ago.

Wake up.

It's Economics 101. I'm sorry it goes over your head.

I'm sorry it goes in one of your ears and through the empty space in your brain and out the other.

You're making the case that no person on Medicaid, Medicare, or any other government program should not be able to have their healthcare covered in any medical institution that has ever performed an abortion.

Your double negatives are making your straw man fallacy even more unintelligent than it already is.

It is very simple. Planned Parenthood performs abortions. It is able to do so because it receives federal funding.

Take away federal funding from Planned Parenthood and give it to an organization which does not perform abortions.

This is really, really, really simple to understand...you know...if you WANT to understand. No need to toss out red herrings and straw men in your frustration at having federal money taken away which enables abortions.

The argument this would hurt women's health services is a bullshit smoke screen.

Well, not if having safe and accessible abortions is a woman's health service.

PP frames it as an either/or. Either abortions OR health services.

They are choosing abortions over health services.

What's more, abortion is not a health service to the vast, vast, vast majority of women who get abortions. Less than one percent of abortions are to save the life of the mother.

So that's another bullshit smokescreen.

We simply disagree that elective abortion to end an unwanted pregnancy is, or is not, a health service.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You're an idiot. If the fungible issue were legitimate then the funding could have been declared illegal long ago.

Wake up.

It's Economics 101. I'm sorry it goes over your head.

I'm sorry it goes in one of your ears and through the empty space in your brain and out the other.

You're making the case that no person on Medicaid, Medicare, or any other government program should not be able to have their healthcare covered in any medical institution that has ever performed an abortion.

Your double negatives are making your straw man fallacy even more unintelligent than it already is.

It is very simple. Planned Parenthood performs abortions. It is able to do so because it receives federal funding.

Take away federal funding from Planned Parenthood and give it to an organization which does not perform abortions.

This is really, really, really simple to understand...you know...if you WANT to understand. No need to toss out red herrings and straw men in your frustration at having federal money taken away which enables abortions.

The argument this would hurt women's health services is a bullshit smoke screen.

Well, not if having safe and accessible abortions is a woman's health service.

nobody is taking away the service, only the tax dollars used to perform a service.
how about this, people pay for their own abortions and the tax dollars go back to the taxpayer.

The government does not fund abortions at PP. Stop being stupid.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What your politicians don't want you to know: Fungibility - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Then by your 'logic' it's illegal for the US to give money to any country's government if that country's government funds abortions in any way.

 

[g5000]

Your double negatives are making your straw man fallacy even more unintelligent than it already is.

It is very simple. Planned Parenthood performs abortions. It is able to do so because it receives federal funding.

Take away federal funding from Planned Parenthood and give it to an organization which does not perform abortions.

This is really, really, really simple to understand...you know...if you WANT to understand. No need to toss out red herrings and straw men in your frustration at having federal money taken away which enables abortions.

The argument this would hurt women's health services is a bullshit smoke screen.

Well, not if having safe and accessible abortions is a woman's health service.

PP frames it as an either/or. Either abortions OR health services.

They are choosing abortions over health services.

What's more, abortion is not a health service to the vast, vast, vast majority of women who get abortions. Less than one percent of abortions are to save the life of the mother.

So that's another bullshit smokescreen.

Family planning is a health issue.

Yes, but abortion is not.

Family planning is about controlling the size of one's family. It's about when and if you have a child at a certain time.

Of course abortion is a part of that.

No. Birth control is part of that. Controlling spending is part of that. Education is part of that. Adapting, improvising, and overcoming are part of that.

Abortion is not.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What your politicians don't want you to know: Fungibility - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

If you were right then it would be illegal for any government employee to use money from their paycheck to pay for an abortion.

 

[g5000]

What your politicians don't want you to know: Fungibility - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Then by your 'logic' it's illegal for the US to give money to any country's government if that country's government funds abortions in any way.

You don't need to put logic in quotes. I am entirely correct. Like I said, Economics 101.

Funding bad actors by our politicians is fixed so that it is not illegal when it suits them. But they are certainly enabling. Yep. And they know they are.

When you give cash to any entity (person, corporation, country), you are enabling every heinous thing they do which requires some kind of spending. Conversely, you are enabling every wonderful thing they do which requires some kind of spending.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well, not if having safe and accessible abortions is a woman's health service.

PP frames it as an either/or. Either abortions OR health services.

They are choosing abortions over health services.

What's more, abortion is not a health service to the vast, vast, vast majority of women who get abortions. Less than one percent of abortions are to save the life of the mother.

So that's another bullshit smokescreen.

Family planning is a health issue.

Yes, but abortion is not.

Family planning is about controlling the size of one's family. It's about when and if you have a child at a certain time.

Of course abortion is a part of that.

No. Birth control is part of that. Controlling spending is part of that. Education is part of that. Adapting, improvising, and overcoming are part of that.

Abortion is not.

You're an idiot. Abortion is a legal procedure that allows a woman to choose whether or not she will have a baby. That is family planning.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What your politicians don't want you to know: Fungibility - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Then by your 'logic' it's illegal for the US to give money to any country's government if that country's government funds abortions in any way.

You don't need to put logic in quotes. I am entirely correct. Like I said, Economics 101.

Funding bad actors is not illegal, but certainly enabling. Yep.

When you give cash to any entity (person, corporation, country), you are enabling every heinous thing they do which requires some kind of spending. Conversely, you are enabling every wonderful thing they do which requires some kind of spending.

Why isn't it illegal? Have you abandoned your 'fungible' argument already?

 

[bendog]

Well, not if having safe and accessible abortions is a woman's health service.

PP frames it as an either/or. Either abortions OR health services.

They are choosing abortions over health services.

What's more, abortion is not a health service to the vast, vast, vast majority of women who get abortions. Less than one percent of abortions are to save the life of the mother.

So that's another bullshit smokescreen.

Family planning is a health issue.

Yes, but abortion is not.

Family planning is about controlling the size of one's family. It's about when and if you have a child at a certain time.

Of course abortion is a part of that.

No. Birth control is part of that. Controlling spending is part of that. Education is part of that. Adapting, improvising, and overcoming are part of that.

Abortion is not.

Fine, we disagree. But, we're literally redebating the Hyde Amendment. PP was providing various family planning and women's health services, or subsidizing them with providers. And, as a result of objections to public money going to abortion, PP was required to build funding walls. Now as a result of a sting by some anti-choice activists, who appear to have no other jobs, that show fetal tissue collection that is legal and not done to make money and with the women's consent, you want to return to revisit the Hyde amendment.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What your politicians don't want you to know: Fungibility - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Then by your 'logic' it's illegal for the US to give money to any country's government if that country's government funds abortions in any way.

You don't need to put logic in quotes. I am entirely correct. Like I said, Economics 101.

Funding bad actors by our politicians is fixed so that it is not illegal when it suits them. But they are certainly enabling. Yep. And they know they are.

When you give cash to any entity (person, corporation, country), you are enabling every heinous thing they do which requires some kind of spending. Conversely, you are enabling every wonderful thing they do which requires some kind of spending.

So when Hobby Lobby gives an employee a paycheck, they are enabling that employee to purchase an abortion,

and thus violating Hobby Lobby's 'inviolable' religious beliefs.

 

[rightwinger]

Defunding Planned Parenthood defunds every service Planned Parenthood provides EXCEPT abortion.

Defund birth control and you end up with MORE abortions

 

[koshergrl]

Nope. You have it exactly backwards. Money is fungible. Funding PP enables them to perform abortions. Take the federal money away, and they would have to decide how to use their remaining money. They would have to choose between performing abortions or providing health services.

Take away the federal money and fund an organization which does not perform abortions. It's win/win for the GOP, and would abort Planned Parenthood.

You're an idiot. If the fungible issue were legitimate then the funding could have been declared illegal long ago.

Wake up.

It's Economics 101. I'm sorry it goes over your head.

I'm sorry it goes in one of your ears and through the empty space in your brain and out the other.

You're making the case that no person on Medicaid, Medicare, or any other government program should not be able to have their healthcare covered in any medical institution that has ever performed an abortion.

Your double negatives are making your straw man fallacy even more unintelligent than it already is.

It is very simple. Planned Parenthood performs abortions. It is able to do so because it receives federal funding.

Take away federal funding from Planned Parenthood and give it to an organization which does not perform abortions.

This is really, really, really simple to understand...you know...if you WANT to understand. No need to toss out red herrings and straw men in your frustration at having federal money taken away which enables abortions.

The argument this would hurt women's health services is a bullshit smoke screen.

Well, not if having safe and accessible abortions is a woman's health service.

They don't have them now. They have butcher shops that function under the iron umbrella of the CDC and Planned Parenthood.

 

[g5000]

This is exactly why I was extremely careful when I ran my two non-profits. I never, never, never gave cash to any of the recipients of our assistance. I did due diligence on steroids. I made sure they were absolutely destitute and lived a clean life.

If they needed an electric bill paid, we went to the electric company and paid the bill. If they needed their rent paid, I went to the landlord and paid the rent. And it was always a very short term thing. A bridge through a crisis.

Fungibility can burn your ass. I was always aware of this. If I had given cash to someone, and they went out and used it go get drunk or high, it could have destroyed my organization's reputation and prevented us from continuing our work.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

It's Economics 101. I'm sorry it goes over your head.

I'm sorry it goes in one of your ears and through the empty space in your brain and out the other.

You're making the case that no person on Medicaid, Medicare, or any other government program should not be able to have their healthcare covered in any medical institution that has ever performed an abortion.

Your double negatives are making your straw man fallacy even more unintelligent than it already is.

It is very simple. Planned Parenthood performs abortions. It is able to do so because it receives federal funding.

Take away federal funding from Planned Parenthood and give it to an organization which does not perform abortions.

This is really, really, really simple to understand...you know...if you WANT to understand. No need to toss out red herrings and straw men in your frustration at having federal money taken away which enables abortions.

The argument this would hurt women's health services is a bullshit smoke screen.

Well, not if having safe and accessible abortions is a woman's health service.

nobody is taking away the service, only the tax dollars used to perform a service.
how about this, people pay for their own abortions and the tax dollars go back to the taxpayer.

The government does not fund abortions at PP. Stop being stupid.

yes, the government funding makes it possible for PP to perform abortions. I think others have explained it rather well for you, it is not our fault that you lack the capacity to comprehend what it is you read.
but, if the government does not fund abortions, then stopping funding will not affect abortion rates at all.
and now with the beloved by socialists obamacare, the women wont have to go to PP in order to have the rest of the services provided, they can go to real doctors now. So, cutting funding also does not cut services for women.
Since you agree that abortions are not funded by the tax dollar, and you obviously believe that obamacare is going to cover everything. you can also agree that it wont affect PP at all. You would think that those worried about PP would have been against obamacare.
obamacare is to PP what the automobile was to the buggy builder.