War On Women Big Fail

A radio host here had a program where he offered 200 to drug addicts if they got tubal ligations or vesctomies and it was hugely successful. Aren't these the people liberals don't want reproducing.

Anything for money drug money. It was voluntary. And a bunch of crack heads are now not giving birth to crack addicted babies. Crack heads don't tend to have abortions because they are too fucked up.

Reality is a bitch but voluntary sterilization worked.

Maybe the war isn't on women maybe the war is on unborn babies.

nytimes.com/2014/09/16/us/arizona-republican-official-resigns-after-remarks-about-medicaid-recipients.html?_r=0

But, but, but, there is no Republican war on women. It's all a delusion. Forcing them to have life changing surgery to remove their reproductive organs isn't part of the war on women.
Do you not know the difference between voluntary and mandatory? The link for the article I posted is about the top ranking Republican in Arizona proposing mandatory sterilization?
 
Men’s Sexual Health Services at Planned Parenthood
Services offered at Planned Parenthood health centers vary by location. Some of the services include

Men s Sexual Health

When are they going to start demanding that men don't totally lose their reproductive freedom the moment a woman gets pregnant?
Say again. In English, please.

When a woman is pregnant, the man who got her pregnant totally loses his reproductive freedom. Is that not clear?
 
The women actually have to get the abortion and what you don't seem to know is that many are too addicted to drugs to go get an abortion or too lazy or wasted. The baby is born all messed up.

Will liberals go into the homes if these drug addicts and drive them to the PP and help them get their abortion while they are wasted on drugs? Is that what you want?

I'm aware of the crackheads having babies.And the meth heads. And the heroin addicts. In fact, I encounter these individuals on a regular basis.

What you don't seem to grasp is this is not throw spaghetti at the wall to see if it sticks. So, lets get to your point.
 
Men’s Sexual Health Services at Planned Parenthood
Services offered at Planned Parenthood health centers vary by location. Some of the services include

Men s Sexual Health

When are they going to start demanding that men don't totally lose their reproductive freedom the moment a woman gets pregnant?
Say again. In English, please.

When a woman is pregnant, the man who got her pregnant totally loses his reproductive freedom. Is that not clear?

And? He doesn't. But, and?
 
Men’s Sexual Health Services at Planned Parenthood
Services offered at Planned Parenthood health centers vary by location. Some of the services include

Men s Sexual Health

When are they going to start demanding that men don't totally lose their reproductive freedom the moment a woman gets pregnant?
Say again. In English, please.

When a woman is pregnant, the man who got her pregnant totally loses his reproductive freedom. Is that not clear?

And? He doesn't. But, and?

Oh, he absolutely does. At that point, the woman can either deny him fatherhood or force him into servitude for the next 18 years, and there is nothing he can do about it.
 
"(CNSNews.com) – Planned Parenthood’s net revenue increased 5% to total of $1.21 billion in its organizational fiscal year ending on June 30, 2013, according to its new Annual Report 2012-2013, and about 45% of that revenue--$540.6 million--was provided by taxpayer-funded government health services grants.

In the same report, Planned Parenthood said that in the year that ended on Sept. 30, 2012 it did 327,166 abortions."

"CNSNews.com contacted Planned Parenthood by phone and e-mail to ask how much of the $540.6 million in government money was received from federal sources, and how much from money came from state sources. Planned Parenthood did not respond."

Planned Parenthood Got 540.6 Million in Government Grants in FY 2013 CNS News



What I don't understand is people who believe we subsidize WalMart's payroll because some WalMart employees receive government assistance while WalMart gets tax breaks, but we don't subsidize abortions by PP, just their other procedures. The WM argument is the "one big pot" theory. Why is "one big pot" not applicable to PP.

This is only referencing those who believe we subsidize WalMart so they don't have to pay a fair wage but don't believe we subsidize PP so they can perform free or reduced cost abortions.

The employees have to apply for aid for specific purposes. Food stamps pay for food.
PP applies for grants (aid) for specific purposes. Grants for patient education go for patient education.

You're simply wrong.
What I don't understand is people who believe we subsidize WalMart's payroll because some WalMart employees receive government assistance while WalMart gets tax breaks, but we don't subsidize abortions by PP, just their other procedures. The WM argument is the "one big pot" theory. Why is "one big pot" not applicable to PP.

This is only referencing those who believe we subsidize WalMart so they don't have to pay a fair wage but don't believe we subsidize PP so they can perform free or reduced cost abortions.

The employees have to apply for aid for specific purposes. Food stamps pay for food.
PP applies for grants (aid) for specific purposes. Grants for patient education go for patient education.

You're simply wrong.
 
Men’s Sexual Health Services at Planned Parenthood
Services offered at Planned Parenthood health centers vary by location. Some of the services include

Men s Sexual Health

When are they going to start demanding that men don't totally lose their reproductive freedom the moment a woman gets pregnant?
Say again. In English, please.

When a woman is pregnant, the man who got her pregnant totally loses his reproductive freedom. Is that not clear?

And? He doesn't. But, and?

Oh, he absolutely does. At that point, the woman can either deny him fatherhood or force him into servitude for the next 18 years, and there is nothing he can do about it.

How unfortunate. Last time I checked, men don't have a uterus.
 
When are they going to start demanding that men don't totally lose their reproductive freedom the moment a woman gets pregnant?
Say again. In English, please.

When a woman is pregnant, the man who got her pregnant totally loses his reproductive freedom. Is that not clear?

And? He doesn't. But, and?

Oh, he absolutely does. At that point, the woman can either deny him fatherhood or force him into servitude for the next 18 years, and there is nothing he can do about it.

How unfortunate. Last time I checked, men don't have a uterus.

Irrelevant. They lose their reproductive freedom.
 
"(CNSNews.com) – Planned Parenthood’s net revenue increased 5% to total of $1.21 billion in its organizational fiscal year ending on June 30, 2013, according to its new Annual Report 2012-2013, and about 45% of that revenue--$540.6 million--was provided by taxpayer-funded government health services grants.

In the same report, Planned Parenthood said that in the year that ended on Sept. 30, 2012 it did 327,166 abortions."

"CNSNews.com contacted Planned Parenthood by phone and e-mail to ask how much of the $540.6 million in government money was received from federal sources, and how much from money came from state sources. Planned Parenthood did not respond."

Planned Parenthood Got 540.6 Million in Government Grants in FY 2013 CNS News



What I don't understand is people who believe we subsidize WalMart's payroll because some WalMart employees receive government assistance while WalMart gets tax breaks, but we don't subsidize abortions by PP, just their other procedures. The WM argument is the "one big pot" theory. Why is "one big pot" not applicable to PP.

This is only referencing those who believe we subsidize WalMart so they don't have to pay a fair wage but don't believe we subsidize PP so they can perform free or reduced cost abortions.

The employees have to apply for aid for specific purposes. Food stamps pay for food.
PP applies for grants (aid) for specific purposes. Grants for patient education go for patient education.

You're simply wrong.
What I don't understand is people who believe we subsidize WalMart's payroll because some WalMart employees receive government assistance while WalMart gets tax breaks, but we don't subsidize abortions by PP, just their other procedures. The WM argument is the "one big pot" theory. Why is "one big pot" not applicable to PP.

This is only referencing those who believe we subsidize WalMart so they don't have to pay a fair wage but don't believe we subsidize PP so they can perform free or reduced cost abortions.

The employees have to apply for aid for specific purposes. Food stamps pay for food.
PP applies for grants (aid) for specific purposes. Grants for patient education go for patient education.

You're simply wrong.

You can get that from their website.
Annual Report Planned Parenthood
 
"Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains (PPRM), which currently faces a lawsuit in Colorado for malpractice and health standard violations, is not licensed or regulated as a health clinic under Colorado state policy. A Media Trackers investigation has revealed and PPRM has confirmed that while individual PPRM doctors and nurses are certified at the state level, the clinics themselves only meet federal level standards and regulation dating back to the 1980s.

The malpractice suit was filed against PPRM by Colorado Springs resident Ayanna Byer last month. Byer, whose complaint included a total of six charges, alleged that she was forced to undergo an abortion at a local clinic without proper anesthetic after asking doctors not to go through with the procedure. Byer’s specific reports of battery and negligence are listed in her Complaint and Jury Demand against a PPRM physician identified in the complaint as “Dr. John Doe”.

Colorado Planned Parenthood Clinics Not Regulated By Standard State Health and Medical Guidelines RedState
 
"(CNSNews.com) – Planned Parenthood’s net revenue increased 5% to total of $1.21 billion in its organizational fiscal year ending on June 30, 2013, according to its new Annual Report 2012-2013, and about 45% of that revenue--$540.6 million--was provided by taxpayer-funded government health services grants.

In the same report, Planned Parenthood said that in the year that ended on Sept. 30, 2012 it did 327,166 abortions."

"CNSNews.com contacted Planned Parenthood by phone and e-mail to ask how much of the $540.6 million in government money was received from federal sources, and how much from money came from state sources. Planned Parenthood did not respond."

Planned Parenthood Got 540.6 Million in Government Grants in FY 2013 CNS News


And, of course, money is fungible. Like the complaint about Wal-Mart, when PP gets millions from the government, it can spend more millions on abortions.
 
Say again. In English, please.

When a woman is pregnant, the man who got her pregnant totally loses his reproductive freedom. Is that not clear?

And? He doesn't. But, and?

Oh, he absolutely does. At that point, the woman can either deny him fatherhood or force him into servitude for the next 18 years, and there is nothing he can do about it.

How unfortunate. Last time I checked, men don't have a uterus.

Irrelevant. They lose their reproductive freedom.

It's absolutely relevant.
 
Men’s Sexual Health Services at Planned Parenthood
Services offered at Planned Parenthood health centers vary by location. Some of the services include

Men s Sexual Health

When are they going to start demanding that men don't totally lose their reproductive freedom the moment a woman gets pregnant?
Say again. In English, please.

When a woman is pregnant, the man who got her pregnant totally loses his reproductive freedom. Is that not clear?

And? He doesn't. But, and?

Oh, he absolutely does. At that point, the woman can either deny him fatherhood or force him into servitude for the next 18 years, and there is nothing he can do about it.

That is because he defaulted on his rights when he made the decision to impregnate the female, or risk impregnating the female without making a formal agreement as to the options the female could or would take if pregnancy occurred. It is the males decision at the time of impregnating the female to enter such agreement or accept the consequences of the already established laws and customs of society. You are responsible for your offspring and the woman has a constitutional right to control her own body and choose between having a child or not.
 
But you said government doesn't fund abortions when clearly it does.

"(CNSNews.com) – Planned Parenthood’s net revenue increased 5% to total of $1.21 billion in its organizational fiscal year ending on June 30, 2013, according to its new Annual Report 2012-2013, and about 45% of that revenue--$540.6 million--was provided by taxpayer-funded government health services grants.

In the same report, Planned Parenthood said that in the year that ended on Sept. 30, 2012 it did 327,166 abortions."

"CNSNews.com contacted Planned Parenthood by phone and e-mail to ask how much of the $540.6 million in government money was received from federal sources, and how much from money came from state sources. Planned Parenthood did not respond."

Planned Parenthood Got 540.6 Million in Government Grants in FY 2013 CNS News



What I don't understand is people who believe we subsidize WalMart's payroll because some WalMart employees receive government assistance while WalMart gets tax breaks, but we don't subsidize abortions by PP, just their other procedures. The WM argument is the "one big pot" theory. Why is "one big pot" not applicable to PP.

This is only referencing those who believe we subsidize WalMart so they don't have to pay a fair wage but don't believe we subsidize PP so they can perform free or reduced cost abortions.

The employees have to apply for aid for specific purposes. Food stamps pay for food.
PP applies for grants (aid) for specific purposes. Grants for patient education go for patient education.

You're simply wrong.
What I don't understand is people who believe we subsidize WalMart's payroll because some WalMart employees receive government assistance while WalMart gets tax breaks, but we don't subsidize abortions by PP, just their other procedures. The WM argument is the "one big pot" theory. Why is "one big pot" not applicable to PP.

This is only referencing those who believe we subsidize WalMart so they don't have to pay a fair wage but don't believe we subsidize PP so they can perform free or reduced cost abortions.

The employees have to apply for aid for specific purposes. Food stamps pay for food.
PP applies for grants (aid) for specific purposes. Grants for patient education go for patient education.

You're simply wrong.

You can get that from their website.
Annual Report Planned Parenthood
 
When a woman is pregnant, the man who got her pregnant totally loses his reproductive freedom. Is that not clear?

And? He doesn't. But, and?

Oh, he absolutely does. At that point, the woman can either deny him fatherhood or force him into servitude for the next 18 years, and there is nothing he can do about it.

How unfortunate. Last time I checked, men don't have a uterus.

Irrelevant. They lose their reproductive freedom.

It's absolutely relevant.

Fundamental fairness (another thing sacred to liberals) demands that he not be discriminated against just because he doesn't have a uterus. So why should a woman not lose her freedom when she has a new human growing inside of her?
 
When are they going to start demanding that men don't totally lose their reproductive freedom the moment a woman gets pregnant?
Say again. In English, please.

When a woman is pregnant, the man who got her pregnant totally loses his reproductive freedom. Is that not clear?

And? He doesn't. But, and?

Oh, he absolutely does. At that point, the woman can either deny him fatherhood or force him into servitude for the next 18 years, and there is nothing he can do about it.

That is because he defaulted on his rights when he made the decision to impregnate the female, or risk impregnating the female without making a formal agreement as to the options the female could or would take if pregnancy occurred. It is the males decision at the time of impregnating the female to enter such agreement or accept the consequences of the already established laws and customs of society.

Oh, so HE is expected to be responsible for himself and the results of his sexual actions, but she is not?
 
It was a smart ass remark note the wink.

I don't think women, in general, are stupid but women are emotional, I know, I am one, and sometimes take propaganda as a reason to get all worked up.

"Today, his approval rating among women is 41 percent, with 51 percent disapproving."

YOUNG Obama s teetering presidency - Washington Times

I have to say this surprises me. Women are smarter than I thought. ;)

It could be that they are now already stumping for Hillary who is desperately trying to distance herself from Obama.

What say you....

So how stupid did you think they were?
 
But you said government doesn't fund abortions when clearly it does.

"(CNSNews.com) – Planned Parenthood’s net revenue increased 5% to total of $1.21 billion in its organizational fiscal year ending on June 30, 2013, according to its new Annual Report 2012-2013, and about 45% of that revenue--$540.6 million--was provided by taxpayer-funded government health services grants.

In the same report, Planned Parenthood said that in the year that ended on Sept. 30, 2012 it did 327,166 abortions."

"CNSNews.com contacted Planned Parenthood by phone and e-mail to ask how much of the $540.6 million in government money was received from federal sources, and how much from money came from state sources. Planned Parenthood did not respond."

Planned Parenthood Got 540.6 Million in Government Grants in FY 2013 CNS News



What I don't understand is people who believe we subsidize WalMart's payroll because some WalMart employees receive government assistance while WalMart gets tax breaks, but we don't subsidize abortions by PP, just their other procedures. The WM argument is the "one big pot" theory. Why is "one big pot" not applicable to PP.

This is only referencing those who believe we subsidize WalMart so they don't have to pay a fair wage but don't believe we subsidize PP so they can perform free or reduced cost abortions.

The employees have to apply for aid for specific purposes. Food stamps pay for food.
PP applies for grants (aid) for specific purposes. Grants for patient education go for patient education.

You're simply wrong.
What I don't understand is people who believe we subsidize WalMart's payroll because some WalMart employees receive government assistance while WalMart gets tax breaks, but we don't subsidize abortions by PP, just their other procedures. The WM argument is the "one big pot" theory. Why is "one big pot" not applicable to PP.

This is only referencing those who believe we subsidize WalMart so they don't have to pay a fair wage but don't believe we subsidize PP so they can perform free or reduced cost abortions.

The employees have to apply for aid for specific purposes. Food stamps pay for food.
PP applies for grants (aid) for specific purposes. Grants for patient education go for patient education.

You're simply wrong.

You can get that from their website.
Annual Report Planned Parenthood


I told you, very clearly, several pages ago that federal money is prohibited. I also explained, twice, that medicaid that is used comes via the state.
 
Say again. In English, please.

When a woman is pregnant, the man who got her pregnant totally loses his reproductive freedom. Is that not clear?

And? He doesn't. But, and?

Oh, he absolutely does. At that point, the woman can either deny him fatherhood or force him into servitude for the next 18 years, and there is nothing he can do about it.

That is because he defaulted on his rights when he made the decision to impregnate the female, or risk impregnating the female without making a formal agreement as to the options the female could or would take if pregnancy occurred. It is the males decision at the time of impregnating the female to enter such agreement or accept the consequences of the already established laws and customs of society.

Oh, so HE is expected to be responsible for himself and the results of his sexual actions, but she is not?

Isn't she?
 

Forum List

Back
Top