Isn't it about time to get rid of Planned Parenthood?

[moksha16]

in what way are they fake, if may i ask? of course its biased, its an undercover operation..

First.. most of the 'quotes' are not actual quotes

Second the are edited and commentary from others is added and spliced in when some of those comments are from years ago and on completely different subjects

Third at no point are the PP people trying to sell anything.. they make that clear over and over and they consistently say we are just recovering costs of storage transport.. hence the low amount they are even talking about... meanwhile the 'undercover' people are constantly trying to get them to up the costs and the ones trying to make it seem like they are selling and are suggesting that they take more money haha.. its so transparently bull**** like most of the right wing 'undercover' videos.

and lets be real.. the people hating on PP are anti abortion anyways and the "selling baby parts" bs is just to try to win new anti PP converts and they will lie for Jesus to get them.

[Sick96stang]

Well scientifically the two comparisons are different.

In one situation, you have a human whose body is changing biologically and she wants (for whatever reason) to make it stop.

In the other situation, you have a human whose body is presumably being afflicted with injury against his/her will.

Even if one were to argue that the fetus has rights and therefore it is the same because you're murdering a fetus vs murdering a grown human for instance, one would have to not ignore the fact that there is a woman involved in the case of abortion who has a body, and rights, and an opinion equally as valid as anyone else, if not more so.

If we are viewing the fetus as a human being then it is a murder whether inside or outside of the woman's body. The woman had the choice not to have sex. Once you have made that decision you are now held responsible for the life of another.

[Trev113]

If we are viewing the fetus as a human being then it is a murder whether inside or outside of the woman's body. The woman had the choice not to have sex. Once you have made that decision you are now held responsible for the life of another.

Or you could say that the infant is trying to murder the woman.

Before modern medicine most women died in childbirth.

I don't see why you are favoring the undeveloped child over the woman. You're entirely neglecting the fact that there is a woman there.

Sex is amazing, there is nothing wrong with sex.

[Sick96stang]

Well scientifically the two comparisons are different.

In one situation, you have a human whose body is changing biologically and she wants (for whatever reason) to make it stop.

In the other situation, you have a human whose body is presumably being afflicted with injury against his/her will.

Even if one were to argue that the fetus has rights and therefore it is the same because you're murdering a fetus vs murdering a grown human for instance, one would have to not ignore the fact that there is a woman involved in the case of abortion who has a body, and rights, and an opinion equally as valid as anyone else, if not more so.

Lets not pretend like the woman had no choice in this matter. She could have chosen to not have sex to begin with. Once you have made that decision you are well aware of the possible outcomes that come from it and should plan accordingly. Taking a humans life because the mother made a poor choice shouldn't be taken out on the living human baby.

[Trev113]

Lets not pretend like the woman had no choice in this matter. She could have chosen to not have sex to begin with. Once you have made that decision you are well aware of the possible outcomes that come from it and should plan accordingly. Taking a humans life because the mother made a poor choice shouldn't be taken out on the living human baby.

She does have a choice...

It's called pro-choice for a reason.

It's not a human, it's a could-be-human-if-not-aborted, ie fetus. It's only a problem if it has a soul and **** and you're murdering it and going to hell.

But I don't think that it does, nobody is actually being hurt, in fact lives are being saved.

[Sick96stang]

Or you could say that the infant is trying to murder the woman.

Before modern medicine most women died in childbirth.

I don't see why you are favoring the undeveloped child over the woman. You're entirely neglecting the fact that there is a woman there.

Sex is amazing, there is nothing wrong with sex.

The infant had no say in the matter while the mother did. Your comparison does not work.

Because the undeveloped child is the one who had no choice in this. The woman did have a choice. She chose to have sex thus should be prepared to deal with the after effects of her choice. Killing a baby is not an acceptable after choice.

[BrocepCurls]

The infant had no say in the matter while the mother did. Your comparison does not work.

Because the undeveloped child is the one who had no choice in this. The woman did have a choice. She chose to have sex thus should be prepared to deal with the after effects of her choice. Killing a baby is not an acceptable after choice.

But it's not a child, hence why it's legal /thread

[Trev113]

The infant had no say in the matter while the mother did. Your comparison does not work.

Because the undeveloped child is the one who had no choice in this. The woman did have a choice. She chose to have sex thus should be prepared to deal with the after effects of her choice. Killing a baby is not an acceptable after choice.

But it's not a child, hence why it's legal /thread

"Pro-choicers frequently do not dispute that the prenatal life form is biologically alive. At the same time, as Dalton Conley observes, they view the fetus as "an individual under construction" and thus not yet a person. They do disagree about when in that construction process it becomes a baby. That transition might occur, for example, at certain milestones in brain development; at viability, the earliest age the fetus can survive outside the mother's womb, which is currently around 20 to 24 weeks; or at the moment of birth. Diana Philip from the National Coalition of Abortion Providers comments: "Pro-choice docs would say that it is not their business to determine for a patient when life begins. Ultimately each patient determines the value and definition of life...within her own mind and heart."" - http://www.livestrong.com/article/25...become-a-baby/

Pretty legit article, analyzes both sides.

It's a political debate for a reason, there is no simple solution, especially when human emotion and/or religious fervor are involved.

[HubertL]

First.. most of the 'quotes' are not actual quotes

Second the are edited and commentary from others is added and spliced in when some of those comments are from years ago and on completely different subjects

Third at no point are the PP people trying to sell anything.. they make that clear over and over and they consistently say we are just recovering costs of storage transport.. hence the low amount they are even talking about... meanwhile the 'undercover' people are constantly trying to get them to up the costs and the ones trying to make it seem like they are selling and are suggesting that they take more money haha.. its so transparently bull**** like most of the right wing 'undercover' videos.

and lets be real.. the people hating on PP are anti abortion anyways and the "selling baby parts" bs is just to try to win new anti PP converts and they will lie for Jesus to get them.

gonna need more substantial proof than just hearsay bro. either way you admit they are selling the body parts, despite whether its to cover storage or not

and if the director makes $400,000/yr and contributes to Hillary..you're a buffoon if you can't see that there is massive profits going around

[nutsy54]

If everyone who claimed to support Planned Parenthood actually wrote them a check each year, then Federal/taxpayer funding would be irrelevant...

[Trev113]

If everyone who claimed to support Planned Parenthood actually wrote them a check each year, then Federal/taxpayer funding would be irrelevant...

That's my problem with small government.

Given the choice, who is going to contribute to society?

I'm all for freedom and liberty, I'm a liberal, but I don't mind willingly suspending some of my rights such as paying taxes, if it benefits the greater good.

However, there is a thin line between what actually helps the greater good, and a strong point of contention among varying political parties.

[nutsy54]

That's my problem with small government.

Given the choice, who is going to contribute to society?.

Planned Parenthood isn't "society". It's a private organization which caters to a narrow niche of society.

[BrocepCurls]

Planned Parenthood isn't "society". It's a private organization which caters to a narrow niche of society.

It serves around 5 million people a year, in quite key areas such as contraception and sexual health screening. How many people a year are served by the fire department, which I'm assuming you are OK with being funded by taxpayers?

[TruKnight]

Or you could say that the infant is trying to murder the woman.

well dam we cant have that! stone the child!!

[nutsy54]

It serves around 5 million people a year, in quite key areas such as contraception and sexual health screening. How many people a year are served by the fire department, which I'm assuming you are OK with being funded by taxpayers?

5 out of 320 is a narrow niche.
(Oops, Planned Parenthood says that number is actually 2.7... http://www.plannedparenthood.org/abo...od-at-a-glance )

Why the need to bring up a completely irrelevant and unrelated comparison, especially something which is local and not Federal?


BRB - Local taxes pay for schools, so the Federal government should fund kumquats!

[Trev113]

Planned Parenthood isn't "society". It's a private organization which caters to a narrow niche of society.

Well my point was that I can't see a logical alternative to big government at this point in our civilization.

well dam we cant have that! stone the child!!

Lol

[BrocepCurls]

5 out of 320 is a narrow niche.

Why the need to bring up a completely irrelevant and unrelated topic, especially something which is local and not Federal?

If your criteria for funding something via tax is based on the number of people who use it per year, why oppose PP and not the many other taxpayer funded services which far less people probably use? 5 out of 320 each year means quite a significant number will probably utilise the service at some point in their lives.

[nutsy54]

If your criteria for funding something via tax is based on the number of people who use it per year, why oppose PP and not the many other taxpayer funded services which far less people probably use? 5 out of 320 each year means quite a significant number will probably utilise the service at some point in their lives.

I'm pretty sure I have a solid track record of opposing most of our bloated Federal Government's spending. Meanwhile, your example was of local government on a completely unrelated topic.

Do I actually need to list every single program in existence that I disagree with, before I can comment on the specific topic being discussed in a thread dedicated to that topic?

[Shrugs4Life]

She does have a choice...

It's called pro-choice for a reason.

It's not a human, it's a could-be-human-if-not-aborted, ie fetus. It's only a problem if it has a soul and **** and you're murdering it and going to hell.

But I don't think that it does, nobody is actually being hurt, in fact lives are being saved.

liberals are so morally depraved

[NeoSeminole]

But it's not a child, hence why it's legal /thread

at one point, blacks also didn't have rights b/c they weren't regarded as human beings. You really want to share the same logic?

[NeoSeminole]

"Pro-choicers frequently do not dispute that the prenatal life form is biologically alive. At the same time, as Dalton Conley observes, they view the fetus as "an individual under construction" and thus not yet a person. They do disagree about when in that construction process it becomes a baby. That transition might occur, for example, at certain milestones in brain development; at viability, the earliest age the fetus can survive outside the mother's womb, which is currently around 20 to 24 weeks; or at the moment of birth. Diana Philip from the National Coalition of Abortion Providers comments: "Pro-choice docs would say that it is not their business to determine for a patient when life begins. Ultimately each patient determines the value and definition of life...within her own mind and heart."" - http://www.livestrong.com/article/25...become-a-baby/

Pretty legit article, analyzes both sides.

It's a political debate for a reason, there is no simple solution, especially when human emotion and/or religious fervor are involved.

so why not err on the side of caution and protect life rather than destroy it?

[Trev113]

so why not err on the side of caution and protect life rather than destroy it?

Because I'm not religious and I don't have any ethical problem with it as it stands.

Maybe I'm a terrible person, maybe I'm going to hell. I don't know.

To be honest I just feel like most people who get abortions do it for economic reasons and if we focused more on fixing the economy I would hope to also see a unilateral drop in the rate of abortion. That would make me happy. I don't get happy when abortions happen, I just also am cautious about telling millions of women who want to be allowed to have abortions that they are not legally allowed to... That will probably lead to a lot more problems, as well as an increase in illegal abortions which will inevitably include loss of life and spread of disease etc...

This is why I'm liberal... you can't really force people to live a certain way. They will fight it, as history has shown repeatedly.

And it's unfair for guys like me when condoms don't fit and my sperm are powerful and go through contraceptives and superheros are born who try to wreck the city and chit. Nomsayin.

[NeoSeminole]

Because I'm not religious and I don't have any ethical problem with it as it stands.

Maybe I'm a terrible person, maybe I'm going to hell. I don't know.

my convictions are founded on my Christian beliefs. Even if we remove religion from this discussion, abortion causes death to a human embryo or fetus. What was once alive is now dead. We are not talking about removing cancer or a parasite - we are talking about extinguishing the life of a developing human. How anyone doesn't see a problem with this from an ethical standpoint astounds me.

To be honest I just feel like most people who get abortions do it for economic reasons and if we focused more on fixing the economy I would hope to also see a unilateral drop in the rate of abortion. That would make me happy. I don't get happy when abortions happen, I just also am cautious about telling millions of women who want to be allowed to have abortions that they are not legally allowed to... That will probably lead to a lot more problems, as well as an increase in illegal abortions which will inevitably include loss of life and spread of disease etc...

This is why I'm liberal... you can't really force people to live a certain way. They will fight it, as history has shown repeatedly.

following your logic, people should be able to walk into clinics and get euthanized if they decide one day they don't want to live. After all, telling them no might lead to an increase in illegal suicides

[JimmyWhispers]

People need to stop having children, period. Too many mouths to feed and not enough resources allocated to do so.

[Trev113]

my convictions are founded on my Christian beliefs. Even if we remove religion from this discussion, abortion causes death to a human embryo or fetus. What was once alive is now dead. We are not talking about removing cancer or a parasite - we are talking about extinguishing the life of a developing human. How anyone doesn't see a problem with this from an ethical standpoint astounds me.

following your logic, people should be able to walk into clinics and get euthanized if they decide one day they don't want to live. After all, telling them no might lead to an increase in illegal suicides

A little fetus that would become a human life is there... It's not actually a human life yet according to a lot of people.

http://joeschwartz.net/life.htm

Apparently the Bible says human life starts when the baby takes its first breath?

I am in favor of legalizing euthanasia, but it isn't as simple as just walking in. Just the same as buying a gun shouldn't be as simple as visiting Wal-Mart.

[HubertL]

Because I'm not religious and I don't have any ethical problem with it as it stands.

Maybe I'm a terrible person, maybe I'm going to hell. I don't know.

To be honest I just feel like most people who get abortions do it for economic reasons and if we focused more on fixing the economy I would hope to also see a unilateral drop in the rate of abortion. That would make me happy. I don't get happy when abortions happen, I just also am cautious about telling millions of women who want to be allowed to have abortions that they are not legally allowed to... That will probably lead to a lot more problems, as well as an increase in illegal abortions which will inevitably include loss of life and spread of disease etc...

This is why I'm liberal... you can't really force people to live a certain way. They will fight it, as history has shown repeatedly.

And it's unfair for guys like me when condoms don't fit and my sperm are powerful and go through contraceptives and superheros are born who try to wreck the city and chit. Nomsayin.

no you're liberal cus you're misinformed.

Roe v Wade made abortion legal. There are federal clinics and Obamacare funding that should cover abortions. PP is just a socialist way to force taxpayer money to support abortion and allowing them to profit. For example, the director makes 400k/year.

[NeoSeminole]

A little fetus that would become a human life is there... It's not actually a human life yet according to a lot of people.

http://joeschwartz.net/life.htm

Apparently the Bible says human life starts when the baby takes its first breath?

what? The Bible says life begins when God breaths the breath of life into us. It has nothing to do with being delivered out of the womb

[Trev113]

no you're liberal cus you're misinformed.

Roe v Wade made abortion legal. There are federal clinics and Obamacare funding that should cover abortions. PP is just a socialist way to force taxpayer money to support abortion and allowing them to profit. For example, the director makes 400k/year.

If you like the free market so much, why don't you become a billionaire CEO of an adoption agency?

[Trev113]

what? The Bible says life begins when God breaths the breath of life into us. It has nothing to do with being delivered out of the womb

"In Exodus 21:22 it states that if a man causes a woman to have a miscarriage, he shall be fined; however, if the woman dies then he will be put to death. It should be apparent from this that the aborted fetus is not considered a living human being since the resulting punishment for the abortion is nothing more than a fine; it is not classified by the bible as a capital offense."

Any response to that logic?

[IronRooster2]

Why is Opie pro-abortion and pro-welfare?