Against Abortions mean you are Pro-Life

Using "definitions" to frame an argument is the surest way I know of losing said argument.

 

so I provide facts from Planned Parenthood itself and you put up some left wing gripe about some TV show talking heads?

I am not sure what your point is, if in fact you had a point at all.

 

No it doesn't. The legislation allowing financial aid to PP specifically precludes it from being used to fund abortion.
What you are saying is factually untrue.

 

No you aren't.
You are simply pro-freedom.

 

I simply do not believe that is possible. You can't claim you are giving Al Quaeda money to buy food for the troops but you aren't supporting their terrorist activities...try it with Homeland Security and see if that logic works..

the legislation forces me to provide aid to an organization that openly admits in its OWN report that it recommends and encourages abortions a hundred times more than adoption. (actually a lot more than a hundred times...compare over 300,000 abortions compared to less than a thousand adoptions.)

 

And yet abortion is a small percentage of the services they provide.
Are you actually comparing the transparency of accounting of PP with Al Queda? Seriously?
Your argument, your sole and only argument, is that you don't believe it? No evidence or reason for your belief?
Their recommondations and their use of funds are not related information. That is not an argument, it is paranoia.

 

it is truth!

I do not like Planned Parenthood, I do not like their founding prinicples, I do not like their mission and I do not like my tax money being given to them. No matter how you dance around it, TAX money is being used by an organization that I do not agree with.

that's not opinion, it is a fact. I don't need an 'argument'. All I need is the annual report that shows tax money being put in their coffers.

THAT's the evidence you can't change or refute.

 

No. I refuted the argument you were making before you moved your goalposts. You said your money went to supporting abortions. It doesn't, you know that, so now you are changing your argument and pretending that is the one I was addressing. It is the tactic of creating a strawman, and I think you are quite aware that what I am saying is completely accurate.
It just didn't work. Noone was fooled.

 

To thebrucebeat:

http://mediamatters.org/research/201201050021

 

Thanks for the backup!

 

To thebrucebeat: I'm so happy you agree with Laura Ingraham and Bill O’Reilly?

 

You didn't read your citation did you?

It is punking O'Reilly and Ingraham, showing they are completely in error in their facts.

Go read it. You will be very embarrassed.

 

To thebrucebeat: I posted the link for the video. Everybody is free to compare MediaMatters text to the things Ingraham and O’Reilly say. I’m confident that most agree with the position Ingraham and O’Reilly represent.

 

In spite of the facts that are provided to show their inaccuracy.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good political rant.

That about says it all about you, Flanders. Nothing more to say.

 

To thebrucebeat: There is only fact that counts. Planned Parenthood will not show how it segregates government funds from its abortion business. Until PP proves no government money is used for abortions everything Laura Ingraham and Bill O’Reilly said remains undisputed. At the very least all government funding should stop until PP does prove tax dollars do not pay for abortions in violation of the law.

 

No, that is factually untrue.
Only 3% of PP's activity is abortion.
That is not what they said.
They are agenda driven hacks preying on the simple minded and easily swayed.
Quite obviously it works.

 

I have stated previously that they do almost six times as many cancer screenings as they do abortions - but it seems people here think cancer screenings are a bad idea.

 

I don't want women who have an abortion to be charged with murder, or be locked up for 10-20 years.

And at the same time, I think that contraception is so effective that a woman should never put herself in the position that she feels she has to get an abortion.

Abortion was criminalised in the past, and it resulted in women either getting dangerous illegal abortions, or injuring themselves as they attempted to abort on their own. We don't want to return to such laws.

And so I am in favour of decriminalised abortion, but not in favour of abortion as a form of contraception. It's not that hard to understand.

 

To thebrucebeat: If it is only three percent why is PP refusing to provide documentation that will prove tax dollars do not pay for abortions? Even if three percent is an accurate number, how many abortions in that three percent are paid for with tax dollars? It only takes one to be in violation of the law!

And anybody who takes the word of MediaMatters should not be so quick to call others simpleminded and easily swayed.

To cassandrabandra: That’s easy. Sever abortion from everything else. The owners of PP can setup a totally independent company doing abortions only. In that way the new company gets paid for performing approximately 329 THOUSAND abortions a year. That should be enough of an income for any medical industry business without also getting tax dollars. Completely separating the two entities will also make it a snap for PP to prove it is complying with the law.

To Ziggy Stardust: I assume you oppose abortions being paid for tax dollars. If not, what is your justification for forcing everyone to pay for something they oppose on every level?

 

PP is required to submit an annual report disclosing all revenue and expenditures. It is regularly audited by The Department of Health and Human Services Inspector General along with state Medicaid programs. So why do you say PP refuses to provide documentation? In spite of constant scrutiny, baseless claims and demands for further investigations are continually made by anti-choicers, which is nothing more than harassment and a waste of taxpayer dollars.

Please notice MediaMatters provides documentation for its claims.

 

So if I don't care if people collect stamps, does that mean that I am pro-stamp collecting?

I think not.

The OP's argument doesn't make sense.

 

To Cady: Because it is true:

Congressman Cliff Stearns holds Planned Parenthood accountable in House hearing
September 29, 2011 - 9:24am — Jim Backlin

Planned Parenthood, the most infamous organization in American history -- besides the Klu Klux Klan -- is finally being held accountable for its corruption over the past several decades by a committee in the United States Congress.

The heinous group -- which has killed millions of children in its abortion mills over the past several decades since the most infamous Supreme Court decision in history, Roe v. Wade, in 1973 -- was founded by the racist and eugenist Margaret Sanger in 1921 in Brooklyn with the name American Birth Control League which became a part of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) in 1942. In 2006, Planned Parenthood brutally killed 289,750 unborn children in their mothers' wombs. Even as America's abortion rate is going down, Planned Parenthood performs more abortions each year.

What is truly shameful is that the Republicans in Congress still have not been able to stop the flow of federal tax dollars to Planned Parenthood which has received tens of millions of dollars of hard-earned American tax dollars in recent years, including the 12 years -- after the historic 1994 election -- during which the Republicans controlled the United States Congress. Indeed, they had a Republican president during six of those years.

Hopefully, that is about to change under Speaker of the House John Boehner, a dedicated prolifer from Ohio. Congressman Cliff Stearns, R-FL, the Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Investigations Subcommittee, has demanded that Planned Parenthood fork over documents from the past decade in his committee's probe to see the ways in which the organization is spending public money on abortions. Using federal money for killing unborn children is a violation of federal law.

Chairman Stearns wrote a letter to Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richard saying: "The committee has questions about the policies in place and actions undertaken by PPFA and its affiliates relating to its use of federal funding and its compliance with federal restrictions on the funding of abortions." He is also demanding that descriptions of how "segregation between family planning and abortions services is accomplished" be provided to his committee and he wants "any state audits of PPFA for the last 20 years that have not been made public."

Christian Coalition of America has commended Chairman Cliff Stearns for holding hearings on the malfeassance of Planned Parenthood's abortion business which may lead to possible criminal prosecutions if Planned Parenthood has been violating the law, which is likely the case.

http://www.cc.org/blog/congressman_cliff_stearns_holds_planned_parenthood_accountable_house_hearing

 

Your posts have been pretty much humiliated on here, and as much by your hand than anyone elses.
First you provided me with great ammunition with your embarrassing O'Reilly link. I want to thank you again for that. Very useful.
Then this post above, that has the Christian Coalition pushing for hearings that "may lead to possible criminal prosecutions if Planned Parenthood has been violating the law".
Do you understand how funny it is to use this as some kind of evidence? No evidence is shown of any wrong doing. None. But "if" something is found, well everybody better watch out! The first paragraph announces that PP is corrupt. The rest of the article shows that no proof of that has been found.

You are the gift that keeps on giving.

 

LOL, true because the Christian Coalition says so? Stearns based his attack on a report from AUL which has been thoroughly refuted. Audits by the Department of Health and Human Services, and annual reports mean nothing to you? I know you want to believe the worst about PP, but numerous audits have nothing out of order.

http://www.examiner.com/women-s-issues-in-national/planned-parenthood-refutes-claims-of-aul-report

 

This is the point of the thread.

Sure, you could call me anti-choice if you please. I will call people who use the ill-conceived term (pardon the pun) "pro-choice" as "pro-death for in utero children".

Without agreeing to definitions of terms there can be no debate.

I find it hard to believe that they spent 3% on abortions, and 33% on condoms and birth control pills. In fact, if they were giving out that many birth control pills and condoms, there would in fact be no need for 300K+ abortions that they do every year.

Did women ever go to jails for abortions? I don't mind if doctors or others go to jail for performing them. If women get dangerous illegal abortions or injure themselves trying to abort themselves then they deserve to get what happens to them. There is an alternative to illegal abortions, and that is for them to take responsibility for their actions which got them pregnant, and take the child to term. After all, the child did nothing wrong, and shouldn't have to pay for the woman's mistake with his/her life.

Your analogy doesn't make sense. There is no comparison when it comes to stamp collecting and abortion. Nobody dies as a result of stamp collecting.