Planned Parenthood reports

[Recliner Pilot 61]

You can't have it both ways. If they're all sluts for having an unwanted pregnancy meaning it's entirely their responsibility then only they get to say what happens next. Sorry nonecksi.

If it's "entirely their responsibility" why do they ask for taxpayer money to pay for their abortions?

[Franknbeans 46]

If it's "entirely their responsibility" why do they ask for taxpayer money to pay for their abortions?

link?

[ens189 1]

Says the guy who can't spell moron.

Says the guy who can identify a blatant homage to the picture of a guy holding a sign that says "Get a brain morans" which we've all seen before.

[ens189 1]

Frank didn't get crushed. He just disagrees with you. And guess what, he's on the right side of the law. Abortions are legal. As they should be. So preach all you want about your desire to have 50 million unwanted kids running around, further burdening our welfare and legal systems. It doesn't make you right. In fact, you're wrong.

 

Gotcha. So because its a law that I don't agree with I'm wrong. That daughter of yours ought to be the right age to start hitting up PP for her abortions right?

 

This society has gotten to the point where we use a legions as birth control and its disgusting.

[DankNuggs 305]

If it's "entirely their responsibility" why do they ask for taxpayer money to pay for their abortions?

liberals truly believe the notion that responsibility means 'everyone but themselves' which is the exact opposite of what responsibility is... Kinda funny.

[NewbieJr 540]

Gotcha. So because its a law that I don't agree with I'm wrong. That daughter of yours ought to be the right age to start hitting up PP for her abortions right?

 

This society has gotten to the point where we use a legions as birth control and its disgusting.

Being pro-choice isn't the same as being pro-abortion. I feel the same way about people who use abortions as birth control. It makes me sick.

[Frank M 181]

Says the guy who can identify a blatant homage to the picture of a guy holding a sign that says "Get a brain morans" which we've all seen before.

 

I'm sure that's what it was.

 

[drobeski 3,061]

link?

See the the first post in the thread nit wit

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

Paying for an abortion is cheaper than a life time of food stamps and welfare monies.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Paying for an abortion is cheaper than a life time of food stamps and welfare monies.

Paying for none of that would be even cheaper.

[BudBro 117]

Paying for an abortion is cheaper than a life time of food stamps and welfare monies.

though i agree with this statement, there is a serious disconnect here. there is a need for some sort of penalty to dissuade women from having an abortion. most of the moral or ethical feelings have been removed when the public discourse convinces people they are pregnant with a muskrat, or something other than human. they all know it's a baby. though there may be shame, and certainly there are mental consequences down the road, the ease of killing the baby outweighs any ramifications of pulling the trigger, so to speak.

 

i blame men. there are no consequences for the men involved in the insemination process. a woman can say pull it out, but that doesn't control the man. and then the damage is done. sandra fluke gets free birth control, but apparently 335,000 other women don't. it has to be bigger than paying for birth control and paying for abortions, or having to pay for a bunch of unwanted welfare kids. so, what can we do to reduce the need for abortions? how do we shame the practice or how do we help women shame men into pulling out?

 

what if we kept it legal, but made it public information in a daily publication, like when people purchase a home. list the doctor, the facility, the date and time, the last name and first initial of woman and the "father" person, along with the cost to taxpayers. i don't know, something needs to change the tide here.

[naomi 343]

i blame men. there are no consequences for the men involved in the insemination process. a woman can say pull it out, but that doesn't control the man. and then the damage is done. sandra fluke gets free birth control, but apparently 335,000 other women don't. it has to be bigger than paying for birth control and paying for abortions, or having to pay for a bunch of unwanted welfare kids. so, what can we do to reduce the need for abortions? how do we shame the practice or how do we help women shame men into pulling out?

 

what if we kept it legal, but made it public information in a daily publication, like when people purchase a home. list the doctor, the facility, the date and time, the last name and first initial of woman and the "father" person, along with the cost to taxpayers. i don't know, something needs to change the tide here.

 

There's way too many possible complicating factors for why publishing that info would be potentially shitty. That's not the way to go. I can articulate a better argument that that, but will just leave it there. It's a dishonorable (not dishonest) way to go. If you sanction it through law, principle obligates you to give it the same treatment you would other legal procedures recognized under healthcare.

 

But it definitely comes across doubleminded to me to see guys that sound lascivious go on about 'sluts who can't keep their legs closed.' If you truly lament that society is rife with that element, and you get off on the resulting fodder, welcome consuming it, promote it, etc., you have to realize you actually come off as part of the problem.

[rholio 339]

One problem I see with this issue, namely the taxpayer money for abortions, is it's the same crowd complaining at every step of the process.

 

Why pay for birth control? It's cheaper than abortions.

 

Why pay for abortions? It's cheaper than welfare.

 

Why pay for welfare? Starving people hurt property values? Dunno.

 

The people that cry about paying for birth control, seem to also cry about paying for abortions, and paying to keep a child from starving. At some point, someone has to pay, even if it's paying the street cleaner to scrape up the dead kids.

 

So, where's the best place to pay? Someone is going to, and if the parent(s) aren't able to, then it's hitting the taxpayers... welcome to civilization.

[rholio 339]

both sides are hypocrites. and the discourse is getting more strained and cold as each day passes. what's happened that babies aren't wanted? and what's happened that nobody wants to take care of anyone? we'd rather send billions out of the country and fight wars elsewhere than spend money on our own to make opportunity for us. we build programs that encourage sloth and laziness in once-proud cities where our ingenuity and hard work ruled the world. have you ever seen a 1957 cadillac or 63 lincoln continental? everyone wanted to be like us. now, we aspire to be europe, or worse. if it weren't for us, france would be speaking german. and now, we aspire to be france. where did these leaders come from that would choose to take us down a path to nowhere, and waste all of our commodities and our cash in the process? who are these people? and worse yet, who elected them? where has the self-esteem of america gone when we end up with leadership that doesn't have the will to win...at anything? why would a media buy into an agenda that will end their very existence? our team sucks now. everybody can beat us.

 

Those leaders, for the most part, come from never knowing what it's like to suffer. Their parents may have, may not have, but never passed on the lesson of what it's like. Ask a WWI (doubtful) or WWII (getting scarce as well) veteran what it's like to suffer... most of them know. I'm not sure I do... my kids don't. Each generation gets a bit more spoiled, a bit more self-centered, a bit less appreciative of what they have. So now, we have people stupid enough to give up freedoms for security, stupid enough to trust the government to protect them, stupid enough to elect a village idiot in Obama, to follow a retarded offspring of an intelligent man in Bush, and stupid enough to go for even worse in the next election... you can practically guarantee at least one of the candidates will make us miss the last two idiots.

 

The problem is this country... we've been 'Number One!' for so long we've forgotten what got us there.

[Frank M 181]

though i agree with this statement, there is a serious disconnect here. there is a need for some sort of penalty to dissuade women from having an abortion. most of the moral or ethical feelings have been removed when the public discourse convinces people they are pregnant with a muskrat, or something other than human. they all know it's a baby. though there may be shame, and certainly there are mental consequences down the road, the ease of killing the baby outweighs any ramifications of pulling the trigger, so to speak.

 

i blame men. there are no consequences for the men involved in the insemination process. a woman can say pull it out, but that doesn't control the man. and then the damage is done. sandra fluke gets free birth control, but apparently 335,000 other women don't. it has to be bigger than paying for birth control and paying for abortions, or having to pay for a bunch of unwanted welfare kids. so, what can we do to reduce the need for abortions? how do we shame the practice or how do we help women shame men into pulling out?

 

what if we kept it legal, but made it public information in a daily publication, like when people purchase a home. list the doctor, the facility, the date and time, the last name and first initial of woman and the "father" person, along with the cost to taxpayers. i don't know, something needs to change the tide here.

 

For someone who claims to be a Libertarian, you sure are interested in finding ways to control people's morality.

[Frank M 181]

One problem I see with this issue, namely the taxpayer money for abortions, is it's the same crowd complaining at every step of the process.

 

Why pay for birth control? It's cheaper than abortions.

 

Why pay for abortions? It's cheaper than welfare.

 

Why pay for welfare? Starving people hurt property values? Dunno.

 

The people that cry about paying for birth control, seem to also cry about paying for abortions, and paying to keep a child from starving. At some point, someone has to pay, even if it's paying the street cleaner to scrape up the dead kids.

 

So, where's the best place to pay? Someone is going to, and if the parent(s) aren't able to, then it's hitting the taxpayers... welcome to civilization.

 

They want it tied up in a nice neat package called Don't Fock Unless You Can Pay For A Baby AN If You Do, Don't Come Running To Me For Help.

 

While the sentiment is nice, the reality is a lot messier.

[rholio 339]

They want it tied up in a nice neat package called Don't Fock Unless You Can Pay For A Baby AN If You Do, Don't Come Running To Me For Help.

 

While the sentiment is nice, the reality is a lot messier.

 

See, that's the problem... we're past the point of scaring kids away from sex, and past the point of setting the unwanted babies out for the coyotes to take away. Most cities don't have enough coyotes.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

Paying for none of that would be even cheaper.

Sure it is, but i dont see the welfare train ending any time soon. What if we abort everyone who has been on welfare for more than 2 years?

[Phurfur 70]

See, that's the problem... we're past the point of scaring kids away from sex, and past the point of setting the unwanted babies out for the coyotes to take away. Most cities don't have enough coyotes.

 

The Great Society pays children to have children.

 

Cloward-Piven.

[rholio 339]

The Great Society pays children to have children.

 

You're old enough to remember some of the tactics... you're ###### with fall off if you have sex before marriage, etc.

 

Kids today can hop on the internet and prove otherwise.

[BudBro 117]

For someone who claims to be a Libertarian, you sure are interested in finding ways to control people's morality.

no, i would like to see less babies killed by abortion and i would like to see less unwanted babies that need support from public assistance. what would suggest helps reduce those numbers?

 

edit: i don't think i ever professed to be libertarian, but when i look up what it is, i may be.

[BudBro 117]

But it definitely comes across doubleminded to me to see guys that sound lascivious go on about 'sluts who can't keep their legs closed.' If you truly lament that society is rife with that element, and you get off on the resulting fodder, welcome consuming it, promote it, etc., you have to realize you actually come off as part of the problem.

if you're suggesting i'm implying anything of the sort, your reading comprehension skills need serious work. i offered a suggestion as to how to slow down the rate of abortions. if you don't have a better one to offer, then i suggest we take mine and run with it. that's the problem here at the fort. we get a lot of arguers of semantics, yet no creative solutions. from a woman's perspective, how would you suggest we slow the rate of abortions?

[Phurfur 70]

You're old enough to remember some of the tactics... you're ###### with fall off if you have sex before marriage, etc.

 

Kids today can hop on the internet and prove otherwise.

 

Nope, that never happened to me and it never happened to anyone I know. We were smarter and a lot more careful because we knew if our GF was PG we would be quitting school and getting a job. It was about responsibility then, something very few people have today but then the Great Society does not require responsibility.

 

For the Great Society this is entertainment.

 

A new reality-TV special being developed for the Oxygen Network tells the story of Atlanta rapper Shawty Lo and his 11 children with 10 different women. But "All My Babies' Mamas" is creating more anger than excitement, and protest groups have called for the show to be cancelled.

 

Pre-production clips leaked to YouTube show Shawty Lo, 36, most famous for the song "Laffy Taffy," referring to his children's mothers with nicknames like Jealous Baby Mama, Baby Mama from Hell, and Shady Baby Mama. The show also introduces viewers to Lo's 19-year-old girlfriend

[naomi 343]

if you're suggesting i'm implying anything of the sort, your reading comprehension skills need serious work. i offered a suggestion as to how to slow down the rate of abortions. if you don't have a better one to offer, then i suggest we take mine and run with it. that's the problem here at the fort. we get a lot of arguers of semantics, yet no creative solutions. from a woman's perspective, how would you suggest we slow the rate of abortions?

Didn't have you in mind with that.

 

I think fewer women would go ahead with one if they felt that a person was developing inside of them- if it wasn't characterized as a lesser or unrealized form of life because it needs your body to sustain its body at the start. If that's what you believe in your heart though, knowing other people don't in theirs isn't a convincing factor. You go by what's right, or at least, isn't wrong, to you. My guess is that there are women who become comfortable with that regard (its lesser or unrealized life) because there is top-down recognition of it like that. Native instinct/connection errs the other way. There's also a righteousness forwarded with women's rights rhetoric. It's a choice that should be honored because opposition is actually fueled foremost out of men working to keep your sex down. Fight back, embrace the choice.

 

What would clearly reduce the number of abortions would be if people having sex could just flip off a switch that allows fertilization to take place. A fail-safe switch. Either you want it on or off.

 

If that's true, it means that the situation of seeking an abortion is overwhelmingly preceded by two people wanting to have sex but not the product of it (I know it's obvious).

 

So the more sober people are with honoring that possible outcome, the less demand there would wind up being for abortion. In a culture that just isn't going to roll with sobriety there, seeking to inject it at one particular point (what to do with the outcome) isn't going to be successful.

[Phurfur 70]

Didn't have you in mind with that.

 

I think fewer women would go ahead with one if they felt that a person was developing inside of them- if it wasn't characterized as a lesser or unrealized form of life because it needs your body to sustain its body at the start. If that's what you believe in your heart though, knowing other people don't in theirs isn't a convincing factor. You go by what's right, or at least, isn't wrong, to you. My guess is that there are women who become comfortable with that regard (its lesser or unrealized life) because there is top-down recognition of it like that. Native instinct/connection errs the other way. There's also a righteousness forwarded with women's rights rhetoric. It's a choice that should be honored because opposition is actually fueled foremost out of men working to keep your sex down. Fight back, embrace the choice.

 

What would clearly reduce the number of abortions would be if people having sex could just flip off a switch that allows fertilization to take place. A fail-safe switch. Either you want it on or off.

 

If that's true, it means that the situation of seeking an abortion is overwhelmingly preceded by two people wanting to have sex but not the product of it (I know it's obvious).

 

So the more sober people are with honoring that possible outcome, the less demand there would wind up being for abortion. In a culture that just isn't going to roll with sobriety there, seeking to inject it at one particular point (what to do with the outcome) isn't going to be successful.

The word on the street is that once you have your first abortion the rest are easy.

 

About half of all U.S. women having abortions had already had a prior abortion.

[BudBro 117]

Didn't have you in mind with that.

 

I think fewer women would go ahead with one if they felt that a person was developing inside of them- if it wasn't characterized as a lesser or unrealized form of life because it needs your body to sustain its body at the start. If that's what you believe in your heart though, knowing other people don't in theirs isn't a convincing factor. You go by what's right, or at least, isn't wrong, to you. My guess is that there are women who become comfortable with that regard (its lesser or unrealized life) because there is top-down recognition of it like that. Native instinct/connection errs the other way. There's also a righteousness forwarded with women's rights rhetoric. It's a choice that should be honored because opposition is actually fueled foremost out of men working to keep your sex down. Fight back, embrace the choice.

 

What would clearly reduce the number of abortions would be if people having sex could just flip off a switch that allows fertilization to take place. A fail-safe switch. Either you want it on or off.

 

If that's true, it means that the situation of seeking an abortion is overwhelmingly preceded by two people wanting to have sex but not the product of it (I know it's obvious).

 

So the more sober people are with honoring that possible outcome, the less demand there would wind up being for abortion. In a culture that just isn't going to roll with sobriety there, seeking to inject it at one particular point (what to do with the outcome) isn't going to be successful.

not to argue semantics, but righteousness, even in the 70s hippie context instead of the religious, has lost all value. sex for all the righteous reasons always leads to the end, where there is either righteous control or there isn't...and in our jersey shore world, righteousness and respect is dead and buried. i want more. go farther. in all human-beingness, and especially in the times in which we live, which are far different than they were even in the mid-1980s, the only way to change behavior is through character assassination, for lack of a better phrase. there has never been a more prominent example of a master manipulator than what we are seeing now. it's on full display and in grand color. the tone has been set and the rules have been read. yours are romantic in their notion, but are only that, romantic. let's change it around. how would broncobama stop abortion if he were on the other side of the argument. you can see how he's doing it with guns. nothing's changed in the world of guns in the last 40 years, but you wouldn't know it if you just woke up from a long nap. from a womanly standpoint, i want to know what it would take in the public scenery for you as a woman to avoid an abortion at all costs.

[naomi 343]

not to argue semantics, but righteousness, even in the 70s hippie context instead of the religious, has lost all value. sex for all the righteous reasons always leads to the end, where there is either righteous control or there isn't...and in our jersey shore world, righteousness and respect is dead and buried. i want more. go farther. in all human-beingness, and especially in the times in which we live, which are far different than they were even in the mid-1980s, the only way to change behavior is through character assassination, for lack of a better phrase. there has never been a more prominent example of a master manipulator than what we are seeing now. it's on full display and in grand color. the tone has been set and the rules have been read. yours are romantic in their notion, but are only that, romantic. let's change it around. how would broncobama stop abortion if he were on the other side of the argument. you can see how he's doing it with guns. nothing's changed in the world of guns in the last 40 years, but you wouldn't know it if you just woke up from a long nap. from a womanly standpoint, i want to know what it would take in the public scenery for you as a woman to avoid an abortion at all costs.

 

Are you asking what brand(s) of public repercussion would it take for women to be too scared of getting an abortion, despite personally wanting one?

[TheBlade 3]

Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

Not really sure why this is an argument. Don't most people think what the newspaper did was wrong? I'm not one to throw around "unAmerican" when describing someone.....but compiling a list of law abiding citizens who's ideals run counter to your own is unAmerican.

 

Just like compiling a list of women who've had abortions. I know one actually happened and one is just some stupid knee jerk proposal, but both show the ugly side of America which is an abundant intolerance for those who we disagree with.

Winnah

[BudBro 117]

Are you asking what brand(s) of public repercussion would it take for women to be too scared of getting an abortion, despite personally wanting one?

yes, i guess. i'll rephrase. let's change obama's current gun obsession distraction (he must be pulling off something somewhere else) and focus it on abortion. let's say obama wanted to stop abortions (i realize there are some leftists here who have no creativity and will say he would never do that). what would be the leftist strategy that would convince a woman to avoid or be scared to get one?

[FeelingMN 273]

yes, i guess. i'll rephrase. let's change obama's current gun obsession distraction (he must be pulling off something somewhere else) and focus it on abortion. let's say obama wanted to stop abortions (i realize there are some leftists here who have no creativity and will say he would never do that). what would be the leftist strategy that would convince a woman to avoid or be scared to get one?

 

Out of curiosity, what other legal actions do you want people to be scared about doing?

[BudBro 117]

Out of curiosity, what other legal actions do you want people to be scared about doing?

none. just wondering how we might change the culture about killing babies. is that bad? to wish to reduce the number of abortions?

[NewbieJr 540]

none. just wondering how we might change the culture about killing babies. is that bad? to wish to reduce the number of abortions?

Murdering babies is illegal. Toddlers, too. You are a very confused man.

[BudBro 117]

Murdering babies is illegal. Toddlers, too. You are a very confused man.

any suggestions from you that may help your daughter not consider an abortion, if that circumstance ever arose? or would you rather just quip and name-call?

[NewbieJr 540]

any suggestions from you that may help your daughter not consider an abortion, if that circumstance ever arose? or would you rather just quip and name-call?

Yup. I'd hope she was smart enough to wait till she's older to have sex. And abstain until she was very serious with a boy and then practice safe, responsible sex. If *that* circumstance should arise at her current age, I would suggest she get an abortion.

[cbfalcon 824]

You mean like those with pre-existing conditions wanting help.

 

[BudBro 117]

Yup. I'd hope she was smart enough to wait till she's older to have sex. And abstain until she was very serious with a boy and then practice safe, responsible sex. If *that* circumstance should arise at her current age, I would suggest she get an abortion.

i appreciate your candor. 335,000 others didn't heed your suggestion, so i was just kinda looking for some ideas that could help encourage more people to take your safe and responsible sex advice, so abortion would become less of an option.

[FeelingMN 273]

none. just wondering how we might change the culture about killing babies. is that bad? to wish to reduce the number of abortions?

 

I know you'll disagree, but I think a large percentage of Americans think unfavorably of abortion. Nobody wants to get an abortion. Do some people use it to repair irresponsible decisions? Yeah, and I don't think too highly of those folks. But nobody is gettin' down and thinking....if we get pregnant, we'll just get an abortion. People just think they won't get pregnant.

 

I think American attitudes on the subject aren't in lockstep with the law. As Newbie has explained, and which I totally agree, pro-choice is different than pro-abortion. But we recognize that to make it illegal is to make ourselves more like other oppressive cultures. Look at Middle Eastern attitudes toward women and look at their abortion laws. No coincidence that most industrial nations favor a woman's right to choose, and most nations who oppress women don't.

 

I wish there were fewer abortions too. Dunno how to go about changing it though. If it does change, I would rather see it come from the bottom-up, rather than from the top-down.

[Frank M 181]

i appreciate your candor. 335,000 others didn't heed your suggestion, so i was just kinda looking for some ideas that could help encourage more people to take your safe and responsible sex advice, so abortion would become less of an option.

 

The encouragement should come from the family, not any kind of shame based tactics or government incentive.

[BudBro 117]

I know you'll disagree, but I think a large percentage of Americans think unfavorably of abortion. Nobody wants to get an abortion. Do some people use it to repair irresponsible decisions? Yeah, and I don't think too highly of those folks. But nobody is gettin' down and thinking....if we get pregnant, we'll just get an abortion. People just think they won't get pregnant.

 

I think American attitudes on the subject aren't in lockstep with the law. As Newbie has explained, and which I totally agree, pro-choice is different than pro-abortion. But we recognize that to make it illegal is to make ourselves more like other oppressive cultures. Look at Middle Eastern attitudes toward women and look at their abortion laws. No coincidence that most industrial nations favor a woman's right to choose, and most nations who oppress women don't.

 

I wish there were fewer abortions too. Dunno how to go about changing it though. If it does change, I would rather see it come from the bottom-up, rather than from the top-down.

i agree in every way.

 

i would like to see guns dealt with the same way also, not from the top down.

[BudBro 117]

The encouragement should come from the family, not any kind of shame based tactics or government incentive.

right, but how? we're currently using the "shame" tactic and the govt tactic regarding guns. i'm sure you'd agree. i was just proposing turning the tactics toward the abortion front. disregarding that it goes against the platform of the left, would it work?