Court: Texas can cut off Planned Parenthood funds

[swamp]

Aug 22, 2012 11:17:30 GMT -5 Taxman10 said:

Aug 22, 2012 11:15:21 GMT -5 justme said:

I'm willing to bet there's a fair number of people who got a STD from a supposedly committed partner who cheated on them. Plus there's the whole condoms don't prevent everything and the latency window from when you're infected to when the tests show as much is rather large for some of them.

those people should have been a better judge of character then :-)

You know, those words could come back to bite you in the ass. I'm sure your wife is a lovely lady, but you never know what someone is going to do................

I don't know what world you live in, but in my world not everyone acts the way they're supposed to.

[973beachbum]

Aug 22, 2012 11:16:16 GMT -5 Taxman10 said:

Aug 22, 2012 11:12:01 GMT -5 swamp said:

That's nice. Too bad it's not reality.

But why can't it be?

I'm not trying to be snarky (to you at least), but why does "society/taxpayers" have to fund basic healthcare??

Are people really too stupid to take care of themselves??

I am going to answer this seriously.

There are parts of this country where the ONLY place that does regular gyn type exams is PP. PP relys on the funds it gets from the state to stay open to keep doing those regular GYN exams. Les than 1% of their services rendered are abortions but cutting off all funding closes all 100% of them.

So if someone has the money to not just pay the $60 for the visit that's nice but it won't help much when the whole office is closed down and they would need the money to take a day off from work and drive 200 miles one way.

That is why PP is so important in this country.

[swamp]

Aug 22, 2012 11:21:33 GMT -5 973beachbum said:

Aug 22, 2012 11:16:16 GMT -5 Taxman10 said:

But why can't it be?

I'm not trying to be snarky (to you at least), but why does "society/taxpayers" have to fund basic healthcare??

Are people really too stupid to take care of themselves??

I am going to answer this seriously.

There are parts of this country where the ONLY place that does regular gyn type exams is PP. PP relys on the funds it gets from the state to stay open to keep doing those regular GYN exams. Les than 1% of their services rendered are abortions but cutting off all funding closes all 100% of them.

So if someone has the money to not just pay the $60 for the visit that's nice but it won't help much when the whole office is closed down and they would need the money to take a day off from work and drive 200 miles one way.

That is why PP is so important in this country.

I live in a rural county that has approximately 10 OB/GYNs to cover a population of 100,000. Most of the docs don't take medicaid. at least 10% of the population is on medicaid. These women have to be getting their healthcare somewhere.

[Deleted]

This is the wrong direction - this planet needs more abortions.

[Formerly SK]

I used PP for years (from 18 until I had a "good job" with medical benefits). The care I got from them meant I was able to access affordable birth control...which meant no abortion and no taxpayer assistance raising kids from an oops pregnancy. I don't understand why people who hate PP don't get the cause/effect they are proposing.

[swamp]

Aug 22, 2012 11:53:31 GMT -5 Formerly SK said:

I used PP for years (from 18 until I had a "good job" with medical benefits). The care I got from them meant I was able to access affordable birth control...which meant no abortion and no taxpayer assistance raising kids from an oops pregnancy. I don't understand why people who hate PP don't get the cause/effect they are proposing.

because abortion is bad, mmmkay??..............

[midjd]

I guess the part about elective abortion totally slipped by.

"elective" as opposed to what? Forced?

[midjd]

I've said this before, but I used PP for my primary healthcare provider all through college. They were the ones to diagnose me with thyroid cancer at 19. If not for that, I'd probably be dead by now. I have since gone on to become a productive, taxpaying citizen.

So yeah, keep telling me how evil Planned Parenthood is...

[Deleted]

I think abortion is a legitimate issue, not one of these fluff issues. People of sound mind and good conscience can disagree when a "life" is really a "life". My personal belief is if it can survive outside the body, it is life.

The second part of that equation is what role any government money should play. And let's be clear, an organization with non-profit status is different than a for profit abortion clinic. Non-profit = government money in lost revenues.

[justme]

The one thing I've never gotten, is that if (most) people up in arms over PP would leave them alone if they stopped abortions, and PP itself has said abortions are an insignificant portion of what they do (a poster here said 1%, I've heard 3%), I don't get why they don't just stop that insignificant amount and hand out cards to private clinics that do abortions just to get everyone to shut the hell up and get off their back while they continue to get all the government funding.

I would think the money they'd save (legal, marketing, organizing, etc) just by not having to fight those people would be worth it.

[midjd]

I wonder if it isn't the "give an inch, they'll take a mile" philosophy. If PP's opponents can get them to stop doing abortions, what's to keep them from going after free birth control, STD tests, and whatever else the fringe right wing sees as dangerous?

I highly doubt people will leave PP alone if they stop doing abortions. They'll just find something else to be up in arms about.

[Deleted]

Aug 22, 2012 11:53:31 GMT -5 Formerly SK said:

I used PP for years (from 18 until I had a "good job" with medical benefits). The care I got from them meant I was able to access affordable birth control...which meant no abortion and no taxpayer assistance raising kids from an oops pregnancy. I don't understand why people who hate PP don't get the cause/effect they are proposing.

because they're idiots?

[kittensaver]

Aug 22, 2012 11:14:41 GMT -5 Taxman10 said:

Aug 22, 2012 9:15:12 GMT -5 kittensaver said:

Uh yeah - all this from the state that has the highest execution rate in the country .

The Great State of Texas can kiss women's backsides on this one. Because until y'all eliminate the death penalty, I'm calling you out on your anti-abortion/pro-life stance: hypocrites.

death penalty = putting to death a murderer

abortion = killing an innocent baby, who's parents happen to be idiots.

yup - big hypocrisy there....

**rolling eyes**

If you TRULY believe all life is sacred, you won't kill anyone.

Hypocrisy, I tell ya.

** rolling eyes back ***

[973beachbum]

Aug 22, 2012 12:12:52 GMT -5 justme said:

The one thing I've never gotten, is that if (most) people up in arms over PP would leave them alone if they stopped abortions, and PP itself has said abortions are an insignificant portion of what they do (a poster here said 1%, I've heard 3%), I don't get why they don't just stop that insignificant amount and hand out cards to private clinics that do abortions just to get everyone to shut the hell up and get off their back while they continue to get all the government funding.

I would think the money they'd save (legal, marketing, organizing, etc) just by not having to fight those people would be worth it.

I said 1% but maybe it is 3%. The problem is that in huge swaths of the country PP is the only place that does abortions.

So them stopping preforming abortions is the same as outlawing it since the vast majority would be denied all access because of where they live and lack of funds to fly to another state type thing.

This would be like me giving someone here a check for a million dollars instead of giving them a million dollars. They have the check but no way is it going to cash.

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

I highly doubt people will leave PP alone if they stop doing abortions. They'll just find something else to be up in arms about

x 1000

[justme]

Maybe? I just don't see a large faction of people picketing a blood test or prescriptions. (Given that they're not picketing over Medicaid already doing that, at least I think they would pay for it?) The fringe, yeah. But the abortion issue is one that resonates with a lot more than the fringe. So yeah, I could see some people still being against PP because they're Christian scientists or something and don't believe in medical care, but no where near the number of people fighting against abortion. The people that I've talked to that have a problem with PP have all said point-blank, stop the abortions and I'm fine with government money going to PP. I think the majority of people against PP feel that way, though I could be incorrect.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

I don't get why they don't just stop that insignificant amount and hand out cards to private clinics that do abortions just to get everyone to shut the hell up and get off their back while they continue to get all the government funding.

Because they are some of the few clinics in some states that will do abortions.

My data's old and I've not checked in the last 7 years or so, but in KY there are 3 clinics in the whole state that will do an abortion. This is REGARDLESS of insurance.

[midjd]

I doubt people would picket a blood test or prescriptions, but many (not just the fringe) do have a problem with taxpayer-funded birth control. And at least two posters in this thread don't seem to agree with STD tests, since obviously you don't get an STD if you aren't doing something horrible and dirty.

If abortion went, those things would be next. And then PP would just be a glorified Minute Clinic...

[midjd]

Rick, you still haven't defined "elective abortions".

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

just don't see a large faction of people picketing a blood test or prescriptions.

Go over to the P&M thread about Akin and his rape comment.

There are more people than you will ever be comfortable admitting that would love to see more than just abortion made illegal.

Next would be Plan B, then would be birth control because after all good girls who wait until they are married and believe that children are a blessing from God don't need those things.

[midjd]

I would assume you are smarter that that , elective means because you decide you want one.

As opposed to what? (I'd assume that most women who have abortions have "decided they want one." Otherwise you ARE talking about forced).

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

Aug 22, 2012 12:25:34 GMT -5 @rj said:

Aug 22, 2012 11:57:35 GMT -5 midjd said:

"elective" as opposed to what? Forced?

I would assume you are smarter that that , elective means because you decide you want one.

OK. Is this an elective abortion?
Woman is pregnant and diagnosed with breast cancer.
Woman has a fetus that is incompatible with life and will not survive.
Woman was raped (forcibly and legitimately).
A 12 year old child whose stepfather f***ed her and got her pregnant.

[midjd]

I'm just trying to get Rick to come out and say that elective abortions are bad but life/health/rape exceptions are OK. And I just can't respect that stance - if abortion is bad, abortion is bad, right? At least be consistent.

PS, you know what happens when you get rid of elective abortions but keep the life/health/rape exceptions? A whole lot more people start claiming they were raped, or that their fetus has birth defects. Or just doing it themselves with herbs or a coat hanger. Because guess what? People who want abortions are going to get them, one way or another. Even if they end up killing themselves along the way.

[midjd]

You are thick headed.

Pot, meet kettle.

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

People who want abortions are going to get them, one way or another. Even if they end up killing themselves along the way.

It's easier to deny it happens and write off the women who do it as "immoral" when it is in the back alleys and shadows.

A lot harder to convince yourself of that when it is a legal medical procedure.

[midjd]

What I am saying is that the elimination of government funding for "elective" abortions is going to do absolutely nothing to reduce the number of government-funded abortions (and hence, cost). People will find a way to get in under one of the exceptions.

What it will do is essentially deny healthcare services to millions of rural, low-income women.

Doesn't quite balance out for me. But if you feel that eliminating the number of government-funded "elective" abortions justifies denying access to health care for millions of women (and men), I guess there's not much more to discuss.

[happyhoix]

Aug 22, 2012 12:12:52 GMT -5 justme said:

The one thing I've never gotten, is that if (most) people up in arms over PP would leave them alone if they stopped abortions, and PP itself has said abortions are an insignificant portion of what they do (a poster here said 1%, I've heard 3%), I don't get why they don't just stop that insignificant amount and hand out cards to private clinics that do abortions just to get everyone to shut the hell up and get off their back while they continue to get all the government funding.

I would think the money they'd save (legal, marketing, organizing, etc) just by not having to fight those people would be worth it.

PP is evil to a segment of the American public because they dare to discuss and distribute BC. There isn't anything PP could do that would satisfy this part of the population, except possibly restrict their clients to married women only, or go out of business completely.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

Aug 22, 2012 12:31:31 GMT -5 @rj said:

Aug 22, 2012 12:28:00 GMT -5 midjd said:

As opposed to what? (I'd assume that most women who have abortions have "decided they want one." Otherwise you ARE talking about forced).

You are thick headed.

Medical necessity?

Rick, answer my question. A friend of mine was diagnosed with breast cancer 3 weeks after she found out she was pregnant.

Her choices were to undergo treatment for her cancer, or have a child. Chemotherapy is incompatible with gestating a fetus.

She chose to have the child and her daughter was 6 months old when her mother died. She also left 2 older sons, who resented the hell out of her little sister.

[cronewitch]

Elective abortion is when you can keep the baby if you want to. I was pregnant once for about a month. I lost a couple of pints of blood so went to the emergency room where they did the pregnancy test. After the transfusions they brought me a consent for for a threatened abortion and I refused to sign it. I said I would rather have a baby than an abortion but they said I didn't have a choice. The baby wouldn't be born alive even if I hadn't already lost it. That much trouble the first month meant it was defective. So I let them do an abortion. When you are pregnant longer than a couple of months it is a miscarriage but early on it is a spontaneous abortion or non elective if you have it removed when you rather keep it.

I believe life starts at conception but abortion should be an option for females who for any reason think it is right for them. I think it is the wrong option some times but sometimes it is worth losing a pregnancy that might be medically bad for the mother result in a child with disabilities that would be painful or miserable or even just at the wrong stage of life for the family.

[justme]

It'd be interesting to see the numbers of people against tax payer funded abortion vs people against tax payer funded BC/STD test/etc. I don't think the latter is anywhere near the former in numbers, but that's based on my non-scientific knowledge of no one who is against both.