But that is not what this is about.
For those not happy with the other petition.
but I consider some government spending "money well spent", this is one of those times.
You are simply against abortion, I am not. I believe in a woman's right to choose and depriving a woman of the means to end an unwanted pregnacy is depriving her of her right to choose. Three hundred million dollars in a multi trillion dollar budget hardly seems like a rallying point for less government spending. It sounds more like someone campaigning against abortion and is looking for any angle he can get.
and most people here consider me a "right winger" Good luck with the lefties on this board.
In all fairness, at least you posted this on the correct board. lol
I also know I am not going to get much support on this board but I have also taken it the streets. I have collected close to thirty people to online and have a few committed to go door to door later today. My goal is to have over a thousand by weeks end. I put my money when my mouth is.
but you have every right to "put your money where your mouth is".
It is still a relatively free country, and you are free to lobby to change any law that you see fit. For now at least, freedom of choice is still the law of the land. I for one, hope it stays that way.
It is more about not forcing close to half the country to pay for something they feel is evil. It is not about making abortion illegal as this will not do that. It likely will not close down Planned Parenthood for that matter ether. No one is trying to stop those who feel Planned Parenthood is a good thing from donating to it. And no it will not make a real dent in the deficit.
Truth be told this is such a small thing in the greater scope of things to that it does not matter that much. It is mostly a moral thing on our side and a government subsidies thing on the other. Some think the government should buy their condoms and others feel they should take care of their selves when it comes to reproductive heath.
-- Modified on 2/20/2011 2:52:03 PM
It's like gun control, anti gunners know they can't just come out and ask for all guns to be made illegal even though that is there long range goal. Instead they chip away at gun owners rights, hoping that some day their rights will have been eroded to the extent that gun ownership will be completely illegal.
But that is not what this is about.
If you keep repeating it, even you might start believing it, but I won't.
It most definitely is NOT about forcing half the country to pay for something they feel is evil. No federal money is spent by Planned Parenthood or any other medical facility on providing abortions. Federal law prohibits it. This is all about the Republican right seizing on a red meat issue for the base to cut an inconsequential appropriation that will have no real impact on reducing the deficit.
So yes No Taxpayer Funding for Abortions Act does stop direct tax dollars to going to abortions but not indirect dollars. It would be like tax money going to keep the NRA lights on for you lefties.
I keep seeing you say this, and it just really bugs me. It's not 'preform', it's perform.
as you should be aware, Planned Parenthood clinics are the ONLY available means of regular, quality health care for many millions of women AND men as well, believe it or not. they provide physicals, cancer testing, STI testing and treatment, birth control, and are a valuable community source of awareness and support for abused/battered women. without a local Planned Parenthood, countless women would have zero plausible access to birth control or even so much as an annual physical. or do you find it preferable for a hard-working 19 yr old college student to suffer an unplanned pregnancy because she could not afford the Pill, or for a young mother of two to die of cervical cancer because she cannot afford a simple PAP test?
it's certainly your prerogative if you are anti-abortion, but the fact is that abortion is only one of the countless medical services provided by Planned Parenthood, and certainly not their primary function. moreover, patients seeking an abortion at Planned Parenthood must pay for the procedure in FULL. your tax dollars would never support abortions, it can only support very necessary and often life-saving medical care for those who have no other alternative. unless somehow you personally have come up with one?
I give thousands to charities that pay for health care for those who can not afford it. When the government pays for a thing the tend to take it over. I want the government out of my health, and my bed room, and I want to keep them away from my dinner table. I have never accepted government welfare, never will.
-- Modified on 2/20/2011 2:54:35 PM
Obamacare is a much bigger evil than is a few hundred million spent on planned parenthood.
I am against bigger government as well and certainly want to keep them out of my bedroom, and my right to self determination.
That said, Government does have a role in our lives and even a Tea Party sympathizer like myself can not argue that subsidizing such things as planned parenthood is not a good use of my tax dollars. I would argue against any expansion of PP that would make it a multi billion dollar obligation of the taxpayers, unless and until it could be proven the there was any tangible benefit to the expense.
but the Planned Parenthood is the largest provider of sexual heath service in the country and if you want to keep the government from encroaching even more on the bed room better stop them from supplying the condoms. What the government pays for they try to control. Just look at almost anything they have paid for in the past.
I have many more fears of the religious right barging into my bedroom than I do the condom doling, loony left.
That is the beauty of our two party system, they often times just cancel each other out.
it is ACCESSIBLE and affordable health care, there is a tremendous difference. also i am willing to bet that the "charities" you state you support which provide funding for those in need, may well be of great benefit to some of the very poor, but does nothing to assist the many millions of people...particular young people...who cannot afford decent health insurance but do not qualify for any sort of government assistance, i.e. "welfare." i was in that boat myself until i married and was able to be covered by Husband's insurance. before that point i depended on Planned Parenthood for much of my basic health care, and most especially for affordable birth control. and even so-called quality health insurance has become a joke these days...due to some ludicrous legislation, my particular brand of birth control is no longer covered under my, or any other major insurance company. so i found myself turning to Planned Parenthood again for that purpose, and because of them i have been able to continue using the birth control most effective and healthy for me, at a cost of $20 a month, rather than the $80 i would have to pay otherwise. and yes, sure i could afford that, but where would the sanity be in that?
also, on this point we will surely disagree. i firmly believe that all human being should have the fundamental right to receive basic and necessary health care. unfortunately this is not a right we are ever likely to enjoy in this country, and millions of men, women and children will continue to die yearly because of it.
That someone opposes government funding for some program does not mean they oppose the program itself. Planned Parenthood is perfectly free to solicit private donations. Providing people with health care seems like a noble cause. What I object to Planned Parenthood about is their opposition to population growth. For the reasons why, look up Julian Simon and his book "The Ultimate Resource".
It is immoral for government to use tax money extorted from me to finance something I am morally opposed to.
nothing more than an abortion clinic.
of lackeys with hidden agendas trying to say that they are cutting the budget when in reality they are pursuing social agendas ment to exercise more control over our lives.
Because each side is convinced they are morally right so there is no middle ground. On one side, you have the "pro-lifers" who believe a fertilized egg is a God-created individual with a soul. Even if they are against big government, they want that same government to force laws on people who disagree with them that would dictate what women can, and can't, do with their bodies, based entirely on a religouis belief.
On the other side (where I stand), we're appalled at what we believe is an unwarranted intrusion by government that would force the religious beliefs of a minority on the conduct of the rest of us. To us, it seems to violate the separation of Church and State. And, of course, we see a great deal of hyopcrisy in this selective desire for big government on the part of social conservatives who claim to hate the government. We also find it ironic that so many of these same life-affirming social conservatives also support the death penalty, oppose gun control and support a foreign policy that too often props up dictatorial thugs who butcher and oppress their people.
I'm not expecting to convince anyone on the other side. I simply wanted to state the case as I see it in order to make it clear that there's no point in a real debate on this because neither side will ever be able to convince the other, or even agree on a compromise.
-- Modified on 2/20/2011 7:35:34 PM
as for supporting a foreign policy that props up dicators, that's a rather broad subject. I was for and still believe invading Iraq was the right thing to do, and there is no question the he butchered and oppressed his own people.
All that said, which according to you, should put me at odds with you on this issue. I still believe in a woman's right to choose what she can do with her own body, which includes injesting recreational drugs, selling her body for sex, and terminating an unwanted pregnancy.
Tough to shoehorn everyone into nice neat little categories isn't it?
I already knew your position, GaGa, so don't accuse me of shoehorning you. I mean, how could I have missed it on the other threads below this one? That said, you are probably the exception that proves the rule! It's likely that you and I are the despised mavericks within our respective camps. My motto (which I offer to you) comes from Ralph Waldo Emerson: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
both GaG and inicky on some of this. I don't agree that going to Iraq was a good idea (otoh, both my son and son-in-law went over there, so I have a personal dislike for that whole thing). But, I agree about the death penalty, pro second amendment, a woman's right to do what she wants with herself (heh, no surprise there) and so on.
However, having said that, I want to include this:
I don't like abortions. I don't think it's the correct choice for anyone unless it's the only way to save a woman's life - and even then I think there are often more alternatives than the ladies are given at the time. I don't like it that ladies think it's the only thing to do even if raped. And I believe that the fetus is alive the minute it's conceived.
BUT BUT BUT I am NOT living any other woman's life. I cannot and will not speak against the women who choose abortions. (It's far better to have it done in a sterile environment and save the lady's life than return to the back-alley way of doing things.) EVERY woman has the right to choose for herself - even down to having or not having an abortion.
It comes down to this:
EVERYONE... every single one of us on this board and throughout the adult world has alternatives and choices to make every single day. And every one of us makes choices that someone else doesn't like, whether they don't like it for religious reasons or just because it's their personal ethos. (How many centuries have churches told their people that they couldn't eat certain foods?) Their disapproval won't stop any one of us from making the choices that are right for our own lives.
I'll get off my soapbox for now.
There is a middle ground. You should try asking someone in the middle. Unfortunately, you got partisan clowns on both sides of the aisle that dominate the debate. And based on your posts, you're one of them.
So enlighten me then? What's the middle ground?
I'm OK with funding of Planned Parenthood. The majority in the middle are pretty sensible. Hey, I'm OK with repealing DADT, Gay Marriage, Stem Cell Research.
I said the same shit last week at one of the liberal West LA cocktail parties. Guess what? I got cornered by a group of liberal activists, or whatever they call themselves. They had no clue who I was. I told them the same stuff. They were having little mini orgasms right in front of me. Somehow we moved to education. I think I mentioned I was for school vouchers. I think I might have mentioned that the UTLA (LA Teachers Union) was run by a bunch of idiots. Any cred I got with the initial liberal issues when out the fucking window.
Here's the deal. If you are 20% on the left, or 20% on the right, you have to buy into their agenda 100%. There is no deviation.
Based on your posts you are part of the 20% of the so-called progressive left.
but count me in the camp that tells both sides to "fuck off". Lefties think I am a righty and righties think I am a lefy.
I really don't understand how anyone could claim to be either a Republican or a Democrat. Both sides are equally narrow minded and insist on blind loyalty to their "cause".
Oh as if you didn't already know, I too have no issues with Gay Marriage, Stem Cell Research, or repealing DADT. I don't claim to have the moral authority to tell others how to live thier lives, but I expect the same in return.
OK, then you and I can agree but I don't think that's a middle ground because we're the only ones occupying it! OK, maybe GaGa will drop by on occasion. Anyway, thanks for clarifying.
Yeah, let's defund an agency providing sensible family planning, safe sex and counseling services to the people who need it most.
Who is dreaming this lunacy up?
I am pro-choice when it comes to petitions, but anti-planned causes. People should write in what they are signing for and reject the cause of the petitioner. You don't have to accept their their premise. Also sign as a fictional person or sign as an unregistered voter.