Who Needs Planned Parenthood??

[PaintMyHouse]

PC thinks she's smarter than she is.

Twice I have posted the following in response to your drivel.....

...and all you have done is run off and hidden.

Another chance?

So...you are ignorant of both law and science.

A primer:

There are a number of clear biological facts, and all sorts of legal precedents, that easily refute the claim that the embryo or fetus is simply part of the mother's body.

1. An individual's body parts all share the same genetic code. If the unborn child were actually a part of the mother's body, the unborn's cells would have the same genetic code as the cells of the mother. This is not the case. Every cell of the unborn's body is genetically distinct from every cell in the mother's body.
2. In many cases, the blood type of the unborn child is different than the blood type of the mother. Since one body cannot function with two different blood types, this is clearly not the mother's blood.
3. In half of all pregnancies, the unborn child is a male, meaning that even the sex of the child is different from the mother.
4. As Randy Alcorn states in his book Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments, "A Chinese zygote implanted in a Swedish woman will always be Chinese, not Swedish, because his identity is based on his genetic code, not on that of the body in which he resides."1
5. It is possible for a fetus to die while the mother lives, and it is possible for the mother to die while the fetus lives. This could not be true if the mother and child were simply one person.
6. When the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus, it emits chemical substances which weaken the woman's immune system within the uterus so that this tiny "foreign" body is not rejected by the woman's body. Were this tiny embryo simply "part of the woman's body" there would be no need to locally disable the woman's immunities.
7. It is illegal to execute a pregnant woman on death row because the fetus living inside her is a distinct human being who cannot be executed for the crimes of the mother (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Article 6.5).
8. When Scott Peterson killed his pregnant wife, Laci, he was convicted on two counts of murder.
9. Sir Albert Liley (the "Father of Fetology") made this observation in a 1970 speech entitled, "The Termination of Pregnancy or the Extermination of the Fetus?"

Physiologically, we must accept that the conceptus is, in a very large measure, in charge of the pregnancy.... Biologically, at no stage can we subscribe to the view that the fetus is a mere appendage of the mother.2

1. The late Christopher Hitchens, a prominent public intellectual, atheist, and abortion advocate wrote the following in his book, God is Not Great:

As a materialist, I think it has been demonstrated that an embryo is a separate body and entity, and not merely (as some really did used to argue) a growth on or in the female body. There used to be feminists who would say that it was more like an appendix or even—this was seriously maintained—a tumor. That nonsense seems to have stopped… Embryology confirms morality. The words “unborn child,” even when used in a politicized manner, describe a material reality.3

Hitchens had other reasons for supporting legal abortion, but he recognized the absurdity of claiming that unborn children are simply part of the mother's body.

No matter how you spin it, women don't have four arms and four legs when they're pregnant. Those extra appendages belong to the tiny human being(s) living inside of them. At no point in pregnancy is the developing embryo or fetus simply a part of the mother's body.

Footnotes

1. Randy Alcorn, Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments (Multnomah Publishers, 2000) 57.
2. Sir William Albert Liley,“The Termination of Pregnancy or the Extermination of the Fetus?” cited by Randy Alcorn, Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments, 58.
3. Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything(Hachette Book Group. Kindle Edition, 2009), 378-379.

Part of the Mother’s Body?



So.....if the unborn human is not a part of the mother's body....
...what right does she have to slay same?


Bet you can't answer....

Liberals believe in magic.

A baby is just tissue to be used as they see fit......until the moment the baby leaves the birth canal....then it magically transforms into a living, breathing human-being, ready to be used by the left as fodder in anti-gun legislation.

There is no doubt about it.


They march lock-step with their predecessors:

"We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life."
Leon Trotsky



Such is the legacy of Franklin Roosevelt's presidency.

Since you refuse to treat abortion as murder, you're no different than Trotsky or any other name you drop.

the actual killing is done by the "doctor", not the woman. So if anyone should be charged it should be the doctor.

Murder for hire carries the same charge.

 

[Redfish]

s

Liberals believe in magic.

A baby is just tissue to be used as they see fit......until the moment the baby leaves the birth canal....then it magically transforms into a living, breathing human-being, ready to be used by the left as fodder in anti-gun legislation.

Would you support making abortion the crime of murder and putting women away for life for having abortions?

You 'abortion is murder' people are the phoniest fucks on the planet.

Actually, it is....

But then again....accidents happen.

Explain how it's my responsibility to pay for it?

Then rationally you should support putting women in prison as murderers for having abortions,

but you don't, which means you don't really believe your own propaganda.

If the People decide they want abortions paid for with tax money, then it's your responsibility to pay your taxes while you try to get the laws changed;

since that is currently not the case, what are you complaining about?

the complaint is that tax dollars are funding an abortion mill known as PP. Gowdy took the PP CEO apart on the stand yesterday. She looked like the corrupt lying bitch that she is.

1. planned parenthood is not an "abortion mill".
2. even if it was it would be legal.
3. no federal money is going to abortion.

now run along.

GFY. PP was founded by Margaret Sanger with the sole purpose of reducing the black birth rate because she considered blacks inferior human beings. That was, and is, its primary purpose. PP has killed more minority children than any guns, wars, malnutrition, or slavery, and yet you libs continue to support it because you are too stupid to know how to prevent pregnancy and want to use abortion as a cure for your errors in judgement.

 

[Obiwan]

Liberals believe in magic.

A baby is just tissue to be used as they see fit......until the moment the baby leaves the birth canal....then it magically transforms into a living, breathing human-being, ready to be used by the left as fodder in anti-gun legislation.

Would you support making abortion the crime of murder and putting women away for life for having abortions?

You 'abortion is murder' people are the phoniest fucks on the planet.

Actually, it is....

But then again....accidents happen.

Explain how it's my responsibility to pay for it?

Then rationally you should support putting women in prison as murderers for having abortions,

but you don't, which means you don't really believe your own propaganda.

If the People decide they want abortions paid for with tax money, then it's your responsibility to pay your taxes while you try to get the laws changed;

since that is currently not the case, what are you complaining about?

the complaint is that tax dollars are funding an abortion mill known as PP. Gowdy took the PP CEO apart on the stand yesterday. She looked like the corrupt lying bitch that she is.

1. planned parenthood is not an "abortion mill".
2. even if it was it would be legal.
3. no federal money is going to abortion.

now run along.

Great...

Then since all of those other services are covered by Obozocare, and are readily available from other providers (unless you are ready to admit Obozocare is a failure), the federal government doesn't need to finance PP...

Thanks for playing...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

question for you, NY. If a person kills a pregnant woman he/she is charged with two counts or murder. Why is that?

Sometimes, that's not the law in all states, and there is only and always only one murder in that case.

 

[jillian]

The anti-abortion movement is solely based on irrational emotion. There is no rational argument against providing women a safe, legal window of opportunity to terminate a pregnancy.

Ridiculous arrogance. It is perfectly rational to want to protect unborn babies.

We protect animals from being mistreated. We protect children from being beaten. Why not offer unborn babies the basic right to life?

There is no right to life, period.

Were you an America, you might think differently...

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Thomas Jefferson

pssst... those words aren't law.

 

[mudwhistle]

PC thinks she's smarter than she is.

Twice I have posted the following in response to your drivel.....

...and all you have done is run off and hidden.

Another chance?

So...you are ignorant of both law and science.

A primer:

There are a number of clear biological facts, and all sorts of legal precedents, that easily refute the claim that the embryo or fetus is simply part of the mother's body.

1. An individual's body parts all share the same genetic code. If the unborn child were actually a part of the mother's body, the unborn's cells would have the same genetic code as the cells of the mother. This is not the case. Every cell of the unborn's body is genetically distinct from every cell in the mother's body.
2. In many cases, the blood type of the unborn child is different than the blood type of the mother. Since one body cannot function with two different blood types, this is clearly not the mother's blood.
3. In half of all pregnancies, the unborn child is a male, meaning that even the sex of the child is different from the mother.
4. As Randy Alcorn states in his book Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments, "A Chinese zygote implanted in a Swedish woman will always be Chinese, not Swedish, because his identity is based on his genetic code, not on that of the body in which he resides."1
5. It is possible for a fetus to die while the mother lives, and it is possible for the mother to die while the fetus lives. This could not be true if the mother and child were simply one person.
6. When the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus, it emits chemical substances which weaken the woman's immune system within the uterus so that this tiny "foreign" body is not rejected by the woman's body. Were this tiny embryo simply "part of the woman's body" there would be no need to locally disable the woman's immunities.
7. It is illegal to execute a pregnant woman on death row because the fetus living inside her is a distinct human being who cannot be executed for the crimes of the mother (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Article 6.5).
8. When Scott Peterson killed his pregnant wife, Laci, he was convicted on two counts of murder.
9. Sir Albert Liley (the "Father of Fetology") made this observation in a 1970 speech entitled, "The Termination of Pregnancy or the Extermination of the Fetus?"

Physiologically, we must accept that the conceptus is, in a very large measure, in charge of the pregnancy.... Biologically, at no stage can we subscribe to the view that the fetus is a mere appendage of the mother.2

1. The late Christopher Hitchens, a prominent public intellectual, atheist, and abortion advocate wrote the following in his book, God is Not Great:

As a materialist, I think it has been demonstrated that an embryo is a separate body and entity, and not merely (as some really did used to argue) a growth on or in the female body. There used to be feminists who would say that it was more like an appendix or even—this was seriously maintained—a tumor. That nonsense seems to have stopped… Embryology confirms morality. The words “unborn child,” even when used in a politicized manner, describe a material reality.3

Hitchens had other reasons for supporting legal abortion, but he recognized the absurdity of claiming that unborn children are simply part of the mother's body.

No matter how you spin it, women don't have four arms and four legs when they're pregnant. Those extra appendages belong to the tiny human being(s) living inside of them. At no point in pregnancy is the developing embryo or fetus simply a part of the mother's body.

Footnotes

1. Randy Alcorn, Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments (Multnomah Publishers, 2000) 57.
2. Sir William Albert Liley,“The Termination of Pregnancy or the Extermination of the Fetus?” cited by Randy Alcorn, Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments, 58.
3. Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything(Hachette Book Group. Kindle Edition, 2009), 378-379.

Part of the Mother’s Body?



So.....if the unborn human is not a part of the mother's body....
...what right does she have to slay same?


Bet you can't answer....

Liberals believe in magic.

A baby is just tissue to be used as they see fit......until the moment the baby leaves the birth canal....then it magically transforms into a living, breathing human-being, ready to be used by the left as fodder in anti-gun legislation.

There is no doubt about it.


They march lock-step with their predecessors:

"We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life."
Leon Trotsky



Such is the legacy of Franklin Roosevelt's presidency.

Since you refuse to treat abortion as murder, you're no different than Trotsky or any other name you drop.

the actual killing is done by the "doctor", not the woman. So if anyone should be charged it should be the doctor.

She's an assessory.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

PP was founded by Margaret Sanger with the sole purpose of reducing the black birth rate because she considered blacks inferior human beings.

That is a lie, and she was Pro-Life: The GOP’s Attacks on Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood | Dissent Magazine

 

[Redfish]

Twice I have posted the following in response to your drivel.....

...and all you have done is run off and hidden.

Another chance?

So...you are ignorant of both law and science.

A primer:

There are a number of clear biological facts, and all sorts of legal precedents, that easily refute the claim that the embryo or fetus is simply part of the mother's body.

1. An individual's body parts all share the same genetic code. If the unborn child were actually a part of the mother's body, the unborn's cells would have the same genetic code as the cells of the mother. This is not the case. Every cell of the unborn's body is genetically distinct from every cell in the mother's body.
2. In many cases, the blood type of the unborn child is different than the blood type of the mother. Since one body cannot function with two different blood types, this is clearly not the mother's blood.
3. In half of all pregnancies, the unborn child is a male, meaning that even the sex of the child is different from the mother.
4. As Randy Alcorn states in his book Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments, "A Chinese zygote implanted in a Swedish woman will always be Chinese, not Swedish, because his identity is based on his genetic code, not on that of the body in which he resides."1
5. It is possible for a fetus to die while the mother lives, and it is possible for the mother to die while the fetus lives. This could not be true if the mother and child were simply one person.
6. When the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus, it emits chemical substances which weaken the woman's immune system within the uterus so that this tiny "foreign" body is not rejected by the woman's body. Were this tiny embryo simply "part of the woman's body" there would be no need to locally disable the woman's immunities.
7. It is illegal to execute a pregnant woman on death row because the fetus living inside her is a distinct human being who cannot be executed for the crimes of the mother (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Article 6.5).
8. When Scott Peterson killed his pregnant wife, Laci, he was convicted on two counts of murder.
9. Sir Albert Liley (the "Father of Fetology") made this observation in a 1970 speech entitled, "The Termination of Pregnancy or the Extermination of the Fetus?"

Physiologically, we must accept that the conceptus is, in a very large measure, in charge of the pregnancy.... Biologically, at no stage can we subscribe to the view that the fetus is a mere appendage of the mother.2

1. The late Christopher Hitchens, a prominent public intellectual, atheist, and abortion advocate wrote the following in his book, God is Not Great:

As a materialist, I think it has been demonstrated that an embryo is a separate body and entity, and not merely (as some really did used to argue) a growth on or in the female body. There used to be feminists who would say that it was more like an appendix or even—this was seriously maintained—a tumor. That nonsense seems to have stopped… Embryology confirms morality. The words “unborn child,” even when used in a politicized manner, describe a material reality.3

Hitchens had other reasons for supporting legal abortion, but he recognized the absurdity of claiming that unborn children are simply part of the mother's body.

No matter how you spin it, women don't have four arms and four legs when they're pregnant. Those extra appendages belong to the tiny human being(s) living inside of them. At no point in pregnancy is the developing embryo or fetus simply a part of the mother's body.

Footnotes

1. Randy Alcorn, Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments (Multnomah Publishers, 2000) 57.
2. Sir William Albert Liley,“The Termination of Pregnancy or the Extermination of the Fetus?” cited by Randy Alcorn, Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments, 58.
3. Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything(Hachette Book Group. Kindle Edition, 2009), 378-379.

Part of the Mother’s Body?



So.....if the unborn human is not a part of the mother's body....
...what right does she have to slay same?


Bet you can't answer....

Then why do you refuse to endorse making abortion the crime of murder and prosecuting women accordingly?

question for you, NY. If a person kills a pregnant woman he/she is charged with two counts or murder. Why is that?

I actually never supported that because it was clear it would be used by wingers who don't understand the word "CHOICE"... it has to do with taking away another person's CHOICE... you can't kill another person and you can't interfere with a woman's exercise of her own will over her own body....

same as you can't take away my property without my PERMISSION

a baby in the womb is not part of the woman's body, it is a separate and distinct human being that is temporarliy dependent on the mother for nourishment.

but you dodged the question, if a fetus is not a human being why is the murderer of a pregnant woman charged with two counts of murder?

er... no. it's part of the woman's body. that was one of the issues examined by Roe v Wade. admittedly, it wasn't a perfect decision, but it got the job done.

then why stop at pre birth killing, why not allow the child to be killed up to the age of two if the mother finds it too difficult to deal with or is just tired of being a mother?

Shit, why not allow it up to 16 when kids can really become difficult?

 

[jillian]

Would you support making abortion the crime of murder and putting women away for life for having abortions?

You 'abortion is murder' people are the phoniest fucks on the planet.

Actually, it is....

But then again....accidents happen.

Explain how it's my responsibility to pay for it?

Then rationally you should support putting women in prison as murderers for having abortions,

but you don't, which means you don't really believe your own propaganda.

If the People decide they want abortions paid for with tax money, then it's your responsibility to pay your taxes while you try to get the laws changed;

since that is currently not the case, what are you complaining about?

the complaint is that tax dollars are funding an abortion mill known as PP. Gowdy took the PP CEO apart on the stand yesterday. She looked like the corrupt lying bitch that she is.

1. planned parenthood is not an "abortion mill".
2. even if it was it would be legal.
3. no federal money is going to abortion.

now run along.

Great...

Then since all of those other services are covered by Obozocare, and are readily available from other providers (unless you are ready to admit Obozocare is a failure), the federal government doesn't need to finance PP...

Thanks for playing...

always funny when really, really stupid people who don't even know their own president's name try to play

p.s. there is no insurance plan called "obamacare". there is the Affordable Care Act which allowed millions of people to obtain affordable insurance. there are still many people who aren't insured or who are underinsured.

but it's good to know that you hate women so much that you think that the millions of cancer screenings, etc, that planned parenthood does every year, which forms the vast majority of that planned parenthood does, should be terminated because you "disapprove" of a legal act which isn't funded by your tax dollars.

good thing is no one cares what you approve of.

 

[mudwhistle]

Liberals believe in magic.

A baby is just tissue to be used as they see fit......until the moment the baby leaves the birth canal....then it magically transforms into a living, breathing human-being, ready to be used by the left as fodder in anti-gun legislation.

Would you support making abortion the crime of murder and putting women away for life for having abortions?

You 'abortion is murder' people are the phoniest fucks on the planet.

Actually, it is....

But then again....accidents happen.

Explain how it's my responsibility to pay for it?

Then rationally you should support putting women in prison as murderers for having abortions,

but you don't, which means you don't really believe your own propaganda.

If the People decide they want abortions paid for with tax money, then it's your responsibility to pay your taxes while you try to get the laws changed;

since that is currently not the case, what are you complaining about?

the complaint is that tax dollars are funding an abortion mill known as PP. Gowdy took the PP CEO apart on the stand yesterday. She looked like the corrupt lying bitch that she is.

1. planned parenthood is not an "abortion mill".
2. even if it was it would be legal.
3. no federal money is going to abortion.

now run along.

If they're doing them in federally funded facilities, then it is.

So run along.

Maybe we need an amendment separating abortions and health care facilities. Sortof the way liberals have excluded if not banned religion from any government building or activity.

 

[jillian]

s

Would you support making abortion the crime of murder and putting women away for life for having abortions?

You 'abortion is murder' people are the phoniest fucks on the planet.

Actually, it is....

But then again....accidents happen.

Explain how it's my responsibility to pay for it?

Then rationally you should support putting women in prison as murderers for having abortions,

but you don't, which means you don't really believe your own propaganda.

If the People decide they want abortions paid for with tax money, then it's your responsibility to pay your taxes while you try to get the laws changed;

since that is currently not the case, what are you complaining about?

the complaint is that tax dollars are funding an abortion mill known as PP. Gowdy took the PP CEO apart on the stand yesterday. She looked like the corrupt lying bitch that she is.

1. planned parenthood is not an "abortion mill".
2. even if it was it would be legal.
3. no federal money is going to abortion.

now run along.

GFY. PP was founded by Margaret Sanger with the sole purpose of reducing the black birth rate because she considered blacks inferior human beings. That was, and is, its primary purpose. PP has killed more minority children than any guns, wars, malnutrition, or slavery, and yet you libs continue to support it because you are too stupid to know how to prevent pregnancy and want to use abortion as a cure for your errors in judgement.

aside from the fact that's a lie...

this country was founded by slave owners... ..

your point?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

She's an assessory.

No, that would be the same as hiring a hit-man - murder for hire.

"Legal issues
In the United States, the United Kingdom, and many other countries, a contract to kill a person is void, meaning that it is not legally enforceable. Any contract to commit an indictable offense is not enforceable. Thus, if a hitman takes the money but then fails or refuses to perform, the customer cannot sue for specific performance or for damages for breach of contract. Conversely, if the hitman performs the killing as promised but the customer refuses to pay, the hitman cannot sue the customer for monetary damages.

Furthermore, both the actual killer and the person who paid the killer can be found guilty of murder. Indeed, the acts of merely negotiating and paying for a contract killing (that is never actually carried out) are themselves punishable as attempted murder, as they constitute the "substantial step" towards a crime which are essential for imposing liability for an attempted crime.

In some U.S. jurisdictions with capital punishment, a contract killing may be a special circumstance that allows for the contractor as well as the killer to receive the death penalty."
Contract killing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Obiwan]

Then why do you refuse to endorse making abortion the crime of murder and prosecuting women accordingly?

question for you, NY. If a person kills a pregnant woman he/she is charged with two counts or murder. Why is that?

I actually never supported that because it was clear it would be used by wingers who don't understand the word "CHOICE"... it has to do with taking away another person's CHOICE... you can't kill another person and you can't interfere with a woman's exercise of her own will over her own body....

same as you can't take away my property without my PERMISSION

a baby in the womb is not part of the woman's body, it is a separate and distinct human being that is temporarliy dependent on the mother for nourishment.

but you dodged the question, if a fetus is not a human being why is the murderer of a pregnant woman charged with two counts of murder?

er... no. it's part of the woman's body. that was one of the issues examined by Roe v Wade. admittedly, it wasn't a perfect decision, but it got the job done.

then why stop at pre birth killing, why not allow the child to be killed up to the age of two if the mother finds it too difficult to deal with or is just tired of being a mother?

Shit, why not allow it up to 16 when kids can really become difficult?

Now you're opening up some real interesting issues, considering how retarded and difficult the Libs can be...

 

[jillian]

question for you, NY. If a person kills a pregnant woman he/she is charged with two counts or murder. Why is that?

I actually never supported that because it was clear it would be used by wingers who don't understand the word "CHOICE"... it has to do with taking away another person's CHOICE... you can't kill another person and you can't interfere with a woman's exercise of her own will over her own body....

same as you can't take away my property without my PERMISSION

a baby in the womb is not part of the woman's body, it is a separate and distinct human being that is temporarliy dependent on the mother for nourishment.

but you dodged the question, if a fetus is not a human being why is the murderer of a pregnant woman charged with two counts of murder?

er... no. it's part of the woman's body. that was one of the issues examined by Roe v Wade. admittedly, it wasn't a perfect decision, but it got the job done.

then why stop at pre birth killing, why not allow the child to be killed up to the age of two if the mother finds it too difficult to deal with or is just tired of being a mother?

Shit, why not allow it up to 16 when kids can really become difficult?

Now you're opening up some real interesting issues, considering how retarded and difficult the Libs can be...

again... always funny when the stupidest of posters opine about others.

psssssst... over 60% of the country doesn't agree with you about planned parenthood.

and greater numbers disagree with the rabid right about most other issues.

 

[Obiwan]

Actually, it is....

But then again....accidents happen.

Explain how it's my responsibility to pay for it?

Then rationally you should support putting women in prison as murderers for having abortions,

but you don't, which means you don't really believe your own propaganda.

If the People decide they want abortions paid for with tax money, then it's your responsibility to pay your taxes while you try to get the laws changed;

since that is currently not the case, what are you complaining about?

the complaint is that tax dollars are funding an abortion mill known as PP. Gowdy took the PP CEO apart on the stand yesterday. She looked like the corrupt lying bitch that she is.

1. planned parenthood is not an "abortion mill".
2. even if it was it would be legal.
3. no federal money is going to abortion.

now run along.

Great...

Then since all of those other services are covered by Obozocare, and are readily available from other providers (unless you are ready to admit Obozocare is a failure), the federal government doesn't need to finance PP...

Thanks for playing...

always funny when really, really stupid people who don't even know their own president's name try to play

p.s. there is no insurance plan called "obamacare". there is the Affordable Care Act which allowed millions of people to obtain affordable insurance. there are still many people who aren't insured or who are underinsured.

but it's good to know that you hate women so much that you think that the millions of cancer screenings, etc, that planned parenthood does every year, which forms the vast majority of that planned parenthood does, should be terminated because you "disapprove" of a legal act which isn't funded by your tax dollars.

good thing is no one cares what you approve of.

So you're saying Obozocare isn't working...

Please continue...

 

[Uncensored2008]

Why is her salary in any way relevant?

How do taxpayers "pay for it"?

If taxpayers don't pay for it, then you ghouls should have no objection to ending federal funding.

 

[jillian]

Then rationally you should support putting women in prison as murderers for having abortions,

but you don't, which means you don't really believe your own propaganda.

If the People decide they want abortions paid for with tax money, then it's your responsibility to pay your taxes while you try to get the laws changed;

since that is currently not the case, what are you complaining about?

the complaint is that tax dollars are funding an abortion mill known as PP. Gowdy took the PP CEO apart on the stand yesterday. She looked like the corrupt lying bitch that she is.

1. planned parenthood is not an "abortion mill".
2. even if it was it would be legal.
3. no federal money is going to abortion.

now run along.

Great...

Then since all of those other services are covered by Obozocare, and are readily available from other providers (unless you are ready to admit Obozocare is a failure), the federal government doesn't need to finance PP...

Thanks for playing...

always funny when really, really stupid people who don't even know their own president's name try to play

p.s. there is no insurance plan called "obamacare". there is the Affordable Care Act which allowed millions of people to obtain affordable insurance. there are still many people who aren't insured or who are underinsured.

but it's good to know that you hate women so much that you think that the millions of cancer screenings, etc, that planned parenthood does every year, which forms the vast majority of that planned parenthood does, should be terminated because you "disapprove" of a legal act which isn't funded by your tax dollars.

good thing is no one cares what you approve of.

So you're saying Obozocare isn't working...

Please continue...

no, i'm saying there is no such thing as "obozocare" and that you don't understand the Affordable Care Act.

idiota.

 

[g5000]

She's an assessory.

No, that would be the same as hiring a hit-man - murder for hire.

"Legal issues
In the United States, the United Kingdom, and many other countries, a contract to kill a person is void, meaning that it is not legally enforceable. Any contract to commit an indictable offense is not enforceable. Thus, if a hitman takes the money but then fails or refuses to perform, the customer cannot sue for specific performance or for damages for breach of contract. Conversely, if the hitman performs the killing as promised but the customer refuses to pay, the hitman cannot sue the customer for monetary damages.

Furthermore, both the actual killer and the person who paid the killer can be found guilty of murder. Indeed, the acts of merely negotiating and paying for a contract killing (that is never actually carried out) are themselves punishable as attempted murder, as they constitute the "substantial step" towards a crime which are essential for imposing liability for an attempted crime.

In some U.S. jurisdictions with capital punishment, a contract killing may be a special circumstance that allows for the contractor as well as the killer to receive the death penalty."
Contract killing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whenever and wherever abortion has been illegal in the US, the law did not prosecute the mother for abortion. The law went after the abortionist.

 

[jillian]

Why is her salary in any way relevant?

How do taxpayers "pay for it"?

If taxpayers don't pay for it, then you ghouls should have no objection to ending federal funding.

federal funding pays for other medical services, wacko.

 

[Redfish]

Actually, it is....

But then again....accidents happen.

Explain how it's my responsibility to pay for it?

Then rationally you should support putting women in prison as murderers for having abortions,

but you don't, which means you don't really believe your own propaganda.

If the People decide they want abortions paid for with tax money, then it's your responsibility to pay your taxes while you try to get the laws changed;

since that is currently not the case, what are you complaining about?

the complaint is that tax dollars are funding an abortion mill known as PP. Gowdy took the PP CEO apart on the stand yesterday. She looked like the corrupt lying bitch that she is.

1. planned parenthood is not an "abortion mill".
2. even if it was it would be legal.
3. no federal money is going to abortion.

now run along.

Great...

Then since all of those other services are covered by Obozocare, and are readily available from other providers (unless you are ready to admit Obozocare is a failure), the federal government doesn't need to finance PP...

Thanks for playing...

always funny when really, really stupid people who don't even know their own president's name try to play

p.s. there is no insurance plan called "obamacare". there is the Affordable Care Act which allowed millions of people to obtain affordable insurance. there are still many people who aren't insured or who are underinsured.

but it's good to know that you hate women so much that you think that the millions of cancer screenings, etc, that planned parenthood does every year, which forms the vast majority of that planned parenthood does, should be terminated because you "disapprove" of a legal act which isn't funded by your tax dollars.

good thing is no one cares what you approve of.

you are drowning in the kool aid. ACA is great for those getting it free or heavily subsidized. For those who are paying it sucks. Premiums are up in every state, deductibles are up, coverage is down, and people are forced to buy coverage that they don't want or need. Why should a 60 year old have to buy maternity coverage for example?

it is a terrible piece of legislation, probably the worst in our history. and it was passed in the most corrupt way by the dem party in the dark of night before anyone had a chance to read it.

But you libs and dems own it, and it is destroying your party. Look at who you have running for president, an old corrupt lying bitch who may go to jail, an old tired idiot socialist, and an old pervert with hair plugs. Obozo has destroyed the party of Kennedy and Truman. and you fricken idiots deserve what is happening to you.