Hey, I understand that Planned Parenthood provides some good services, but I don't think the Federal Government should be in the business of charity, and I know we can't afford it. I also know they kill a lot of innocent babies.
Don't we already have something called Medicaid for low income women? You're confused. Please regroup, reload, and try again. You seem to be saying that Medicaid is a provider. Wikipedia is up today so you'll be able to find out what "provider" means in a healthcare context.
Low-income women who can't afford abortions should be made to bear them. We'll figure out how to pay for THOSE kids later.
Defund it, should be provided locally not federally. The needs of Planned Parenthood are vastly different in the Inner City of Chicago vs. the rural areas of Kansas. It should not be a federal program. If local voters want it, they can institue their own version of it.
We can revisit the need for Planned Parenthood and other such charitable contributions when the debt is paid off and the budget is in a surplus.
Read and learn. "What we clearly know is that making abortion less available does not make it performed less often," said Dr. Lauren Streicher, assistant clinical professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. "It's just more unsafe. Condemning abortion is a cruel and failed strategy." Even in the U.S., where abortion is currently legal, Streicher said access can be limited based on someone's insurance plan and where they live. "Fifty percent of undesired pregnancies are due to failed contraception," said Streicher. "Of those unplanned pregnancies, 50 percent resolve in abortion, so the need for abortion is always going to be there. By criminalizing it, you're just increasing the amount of women who have poor and dangerous outcomes. While some countries have decreased their restrictions on abortion, others have increased barriers to safe abortion through more restrictive laws, unwillingness to train providers, increasing the cost of obtaining safe services and validating abortion stigmatization through perpetuation of cultural and societal norms, said Dr. Eva Lathrop, assistant professor of family planning, obstetrics and gynecology and global health at Emory University Schools of Medicine and Public Health. Researchers said it appears that family planning programs across the globe have not kept pace with the demand, which has continued to increase because of population growth and as more couple want smaller families.
Yes, it would be so much cheaper to pay for the unwanted children's food, clothes, medical care, education, incarceration, criminal activity of all kinds, etc. Brilliant.
So we execute them without a jury trial? Actually without a crime even being committed. Seems pretty un American.
Defunding Planned Parenthood will nto cause it to go away. If PP and the rest of you are so concerned about limiting abortions, then you should hold PP to the same standard that you would hold a hospital - if someone needs the procedure, they perform it and worry about the money later. (I understand that doesn't always happen, but it's the standard we essentially expect health providers to follow.)
I guess we should then just go ahead and start cleaning out the ghettos if they're all going to commit a bunch of crimes as they get older. Are people really defending the practice of executing unborn and innocent children because of the assumption that they'll grow up to be drags on society and commit crimes? Hitler would be proud.
I am mixed about this. I'm tired of us being enablers and wish we would as a nation show some tough love. We have way too many programs that help people that don't want to help themselves. We make it way too easy for people to be dependent on our federal government. At the same time there are some that would have lots of babies if not for abortions. Let's face it, there are some people that have no business having babies because they will live in poverty and just like their parents, will turn to crime to support themselves. There are a million other issues that could be dicussed about this topic . But we really need to get away from being the caregivers for half the country. You can argue were not, but you can't argue we are heading toward that direction.
Do you want fewer abortions? Expand access to contraceptives. (At least that's been the case in western Europe, where the abortion rate is lower than in the U.S.). Making it illegal probably won't stop it. (A case in point would be Brazil, where an estimated 1,000,000 abortions are performed annually.)
Do you want fewer abortions? Expand access to contraceptives. Exactly. You listening, Catholic church?
I'm pro-life and oppose federal funding Planned Parenthood, but the two issues have nothing to do with one another, because Planned Parenthood can't use its federal funds for abortion. Planned Parenthood should lose its federal funding because it's not the federal government's job or its authority to provide contraceptives to anybody. Where does this alleged authority come from? Birth control (and at least legally abortion) are very personal and private matters, and if they are going to remain private, then they can get their hands out of the public money. If you want to hop in the sack, that's fine, but don't take my wallet in there with you.
Planned Parenthood should lose its federal funding because it's not the federal government's job or its authority to provide contraceptives to anybody. And yet the gubmint pays for Viagra....
