2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)

[firstdown]

How Many Abortions does Planned Parenthood Perform Each Year?
In 2006, Planned Parenthood performed 289,750 abortions, or approximately 23% of all abortions, making them the largest abortion provider in the United States. Even as the overall national abortion rate goes down, Planned Parenthood continues to perform more abortions every year.



Read more: Planned Parenthood - Abortion Facts Planned Parenthood - Abortion Facts

I'm personaly not against abortion I'm against federal dollars funding a place that is the largest provider of abortions.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by firstdown

How Many Abortions does Planned Parenthood Perform Each Year?
In 2006, Planned Parenthood performed 289,750 abortions, or approximately 23% of all abortions, making them the largest abortion provider in the United States. Even as the overall national abortion rate goes down, Planned Parenthood continues to perform more abortions every year.



Read more: Planned Parenthood - Abortion Facts Planned Parenthood - Abortion Facts

I'm personaly not against abortion I'm against federal dollars funding a place that is the largest provider of abortions.

Google Hyde Amendment when you get a moment. Prohibits federal dollars from funding abortion procedures.

[Giantone]

Repost: What Planned Parenthood actually does, in one chart - The Washington Post


(Planned Parenthood)


As you can see in the chart atop this post, abortion services account for about 3 percent of Planned Parenthood’s activities. That’s less than cancer screening and prevention (16 percent), STD testing for both men and women (35 percent), and contraception (also 35 percent). About 80 percent of Planned Parenthood’s users are over age 20, and 75 percent have incomes below 150 percent of the poverty line. Planned Parenthood itself estimates it prevents more than 620,000 unintended pregnancies each year, and 220,000 abortions. It’s also worth noting that federal law already forbids Planned Parenthood from using the funds it receives from the government for abortions.
So though the fight over Planned Parenthood might be about abortion, Planned Parenthood itself isn’t about abortion. It’s primarily about contraception and reproductive health. And if Planned Parenthood loses funding, what will mainly happen is that cancer screenings and contraception and STD testing will become less available to poorer people. Folks with more money, of course, have many other ways to receive all these services, and tend to get them elsewhere already.
The fight also isn’t about cutting spending. The services Planned Parenthood provides save the federal government a lot of money. It’s somewhat cold to put it in these terms, but taxpayers end up bearing a lot of the expense for unintended pregnancies among people without the means to care for their children. The same goes for preventable cancers and sexually transmitted diseases

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Google Hyde Amendment when you get a moment. Prohibits federal dollars from funding abortion procedures.

I'm sure they have a seperate account with federal dollars to pay some bills and then other money to pay for the abortions. LMAO Its the democrat abortion for all women fund no matter what your age or how many months preg you are.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Google Hyde Amendment when you get a moment. Prohibits federal dollars from funding abortion procedures.

The Hyde Ammendment is a joke.

Hiding Behind Hyde - YouTube

for Giantone: Planned Parenthood's facility income is approximately 37% from abortions.

How about this for a reasonable compromise; Planned Parenthood stops any non-morning-after pill abortions and keeps their funding.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

The Hyde Ammendment is a joke.


for Giantone: Planned Parenthood's facility income is approximately 37% from abortions.

How about this for a reasonable compromise; Planned Parenthood stops any non-morning-after pill abortions and keeps their funding.

Sorry Sammy I'll go with the washington post over ....well who ever that is.Sammy you are male and so am I, why should you and I decide what a woman can do with her body?

Sammy your'e wrong,again.

[Giantone]

For sammy...........,read the link.

FactCheck.org : Planned Parenthood


Q: How much of Planned Parenthood’s services are dedicated to abortions? Does the federal government fund those procedures?
A: Abortions represent 3 percent of total services provided by Planned Parenthood, and roughly 10 percent of its clients received an abortion. The group does receive federal funding, but the money cannot be used for abortions by law.


3% not 37%,again scare tatics.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Sorry Sammy I'll go with the washington post over ....well who ever that is.Sammy you are male and so am I, why should you and I decide what a woman can do with her body?

Sammy your'e wrong,again.

Please read my statement it is 100% factually correct. I also did not dispute your 3% number. My numbers and yours just frame the argument differently.

"for Giantone: Planned Parenthood's facility income is approximately 37% from abortions."

We are both male, however that's not the point. Why should federal tax dollars fund abortion? If a woman wants an abortion it's her choice...I vehemently disagree with it....but it is legally (currently) her choice. However, what about the unborn girls & boys...do they get a say in this. When does the baby become a baby and not just a mass of cells....2 months, 4 months, 6 months, whenever that happens it's no longer just the mother's choice.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

The Hyde Ammendment is a joke.

Hiding Behind Hyde - YouTube

for Giantone: Planned Parenthood's facility income is approximately 37% from abortions.

How about this for a reasonable compromise; Planned Parenthood stops any non-morning-after pill abortions and keeps their funding.

Ah the old "fungibility argument". If we applied that argument to all gov't funding and took it to it's logical conclusion, we'd all be up the creek. Nothing would be funded, nothing would get built, no gov't programs would exist for the good of our society.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Ah the old "fungibility argument". If we applied that argument to all gov't funding and took it to it's logical conclusion, we'd all be up the creek. Nothing would be funded, nothing would get built, no gov't programs would exist for the good of our society.

There's a lot of illogic to this whole debate to me. Among many quandaries: How do you choose between an late term abortion where it really is a baby just still in the womb (whenever you think that is). Or telling a woman she must give birth to a child she doesn't want to. Both are immoral IMO.

And when does a fetus turn into a baby? I'd say based on pure logic (which may not apply here), have a study determine at what brain activity is considered "sentient" for a fetus/baby. But it seems to me both sides are scared about what that answer might be, so they argue the extremes: "conception" vs. "partial-birth-abortion".

Planned parenthood is full of, for lack of a better word, confusion to me.

1. Talking about government funding in your post above. It's good that we apply the "all or nothing" approach to organizations and educational entities. They must follow federal law on civil rights, mandates on quality of care or education, or they lose all funding. So why does Planned Parenthood get a pass on the "all or nothing" requirement when it comes to funding abortion?

2. It seems like the name Planned Parenthood is just a PR move. It's not really wrong, people frame debates all the time by calling someone pro-abortion or anti-choice. It just strikes me as disingenuous that they name themselves after a situation they aren't needed in: a planned parenthood. Contraception, abortion, STDs apply in any case parenthood or not, isn't what their name implies. Fertility clinics, conception aids, and birth centers are what an organization named "planned parenthood" would be about, IMO.

3. The statistics being tossed about. I really have no idea what's the truth. On Planned Parenthood's website, they say "One in three women has an abortion at some point in her life. Do you know anyone who has had an abortion?" Yeah, but 1-3 seems high to me. Does the "1 in 3 women get abortions" ratio sound high for where you live, or about right, or an underestimate?



edit: And what is going on here? Is abortion mandated "all or nothing" here?

The Department of Health and Human Services announced on Thursday that a Texas law excluding Planned Parenthood from the state's Medicaid Women's Health Program violated federal rules, meaning the program would no longer receive any federal funding.

The Texas law, which went into effect this week, prevents patients using the Women's Health Program from going to any clinic that has an affiliation with an abortion provider, including a shared name, employee, or board member.

[12thMan]

Is Romney still running for President?

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Is Romney still running for President?

...I guess ,he's going to hold a fund rasier in Hong Kong.

Romney fundraiser planned Thursday in Hong Kong | Political Headlines | Comcast

[Chico23231]

looking forward to these:

2012 Presidential Debate Schedule « 2012 Election Central

[12thMan]

Today, BLS preliminary estimate of the benchmark revision indicates an upward adjustment to March 2012 of 386,000 more jobs than originally expected.

Meaning President Obama is now a net job creator since taking office in Jan. '09. Also puts private sector growth at 5.1 million jobs over the past 30 months.

Long ways to go, but this somewhat explains the gradual down tick in the unemployment number.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Today, BLS preliminary estimate of the benchmark revision indicates an upward adjustment to March 2012 of 386,000 more jobs than originally expected.

Meaning President Obama is now a net job creator since taking office in Jan. '09. Also puts private sector growth at 5.1 million jobs over the past 30 months.

Long ways to go, but this somewhat explains the gradual down tick in the unemployment number.

Impressive....rolls eyes. Still the worst record of any POTUS.

Bush 2 and Reagan were dealt bad economic hands by the previous POTUS yet their job gains outpaced Obamas. W created 5M jobs in the first 30 months of recovery, Reagan created 8M.

So Obama will have the worst job record of any POTUS and also a Household income drop of 4.8% during the "recovery". For folks 25-34 the income drop is 8.9%, for African Americans....11%.

Sure don't want to distort the thread with any facts, sorry about that.