Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-31-2012, 08:37 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,947,200 times
Reputation: 5661

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pollyrobin View Post
I agree. PP is a private institution. Therefore, it should not be gettng
any federal funds. Isn't it nice when everyone agrees
That's a discussion unconnected with thread -- and please don't fallaciously claim that I agree with you without asking first.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-31-2012, 08:38 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,101,577 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
That's a discussion unconnected with thread -- and please don't fallaciously claim that I agree with you without asking first.
Well it was you that said Planned Parenthood had no duty to the public.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 08:45 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,947,200 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
The minute they said Planned Parenthood endorses Obama, is the minute they broke the law and entered a conflict of interest. You dont get to fund an ad from 1 division, and then say its for another, without piercing a corporate veil.
Who is "they" in "they said?" Certainly PP didn't say that. The papers and news can report it any way they want without it binding PP.

By claiming that having a separate political organization are illegitimate you are showing what little you know about the subject. All large 501c not-for-profits as well as unions have separate organizations that perform their political activities. The money is derived separately and not co-mingled with other funds. This is a long-standing practice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 08:47 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,947,200 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Well it was you that said Planned Parenthood had no duty to the public.
Actually, I said that Planned Parenthood had no duty to the taxpayer -- just like Boeing and Halliburton have no duty to the taxpayer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 08:57 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,101,577 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
Who is "they" in "they said?" Certainly PP didn't say that. The papers and news can report it any way they want without it binding PP.

By claiming that having a separate political organization are illegitimate you are showing what little you know about the subject. All large 501c not-for-profits as well as unions have separate organizations that perform their political activities. The money is derived separately and not co-mingled with other funds. This is a long-standing practice.
See you are constantly showing your complete lack of education on the legal system in america.

Planned Parenthood, a non profit, cant own a politically motivated seperate entity non profit without putting the planned parenthood in jeopardy of losing their tax exempt status. This would be like saying the Church can own all sorts of for profit businesses and that would be ok. They clearly can not.

Again, its called a corporate veil.

Owning a political active subdivision, actually VIOLATES the 501C3 charter.
A 501(C)(3) company is one that is organized and operated exclusively for any of the exempt purposes described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. These purposes do not include participation in political campaigns, and 501(C)(3) companies are prohibited from these sorts of operations, whether for or against any particular candidate. They are also limited in the lobbying they can do to influence legislation.

EVERY SINGLE DIVISION, must be for the non profit purpose, and even ONE subdivision thats politically motivated violates the IRS rules, and getting taxpayer money, and sending it onto this sub chapter, doesnt eliminate the conflict you pretend doesnt exist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 11:36 AM
 
9,879 posts, read 8,018,108 times
Reputation: 2521
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
That's a discussion unconnected with thread -- and please don't fallaciously claim that I agree with you without asking first.
I was joking, thus the
Absolutely we don't agree.

PP receives 1/3 of their income from Title X (Federal) and Medicaid (Federal and State) both derived from tax dollars paid by ALL tax paying citizens.

Now, if PP wants to stop receiving 1/3 of their income from federally legislated programs, and truly want to be a private corp who presently pays their CEO $400,000 a year - donate/ENDORSE whoever, knock themselves out, but until then.....

Damn straight, it's a conflict of interest.

Last edited by pollyrobin; 05-31-2012 at 12:07 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 11:46 AM
 
Location: Sarasota FL
6,864 posts, read 12,076,689 times
Reputation: 6744
Of the 51% of us paying income tax, half of those opposed to abortion, the government takes $500 million of it, gives it to Planned Parenthood, and they endorse Obama. An organization that is now giving 'gender selection' advice. And libs don't see any problems with this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 12:20 PM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,947,200 times
Reputation: 5661
First, it isn't Planned Parenthood running the ads. It's Planned Parenthood Action Fund, which doesn't receive ten-cents from taxpayers. All that money is donated for the purpose of political action.

Second, I have less of a problem with Planned Parenthood Action Fund running ads than shadow groups funded by the Koch bros.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 09:41 PM
 
Location: Gone
25,231 posts, read 16,935,949 times
Reputation: 5932
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
They get about $500 Million, but the issue is using TAXPAYER MONEY, to campaign for a president.
You know for a FACT that it is?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-31-2012, 10:10 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,101,577 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
First, it isn't Planned Parenthood running the ads. It's Planned Parenthood Action Fund, which doesn't receive ten-cents from taxpayers. All that money is donated for the purpose of political action.
You didnt address the issue raised either. Must be avoidance week for liberals.. Again..

Owning a political active subdivision, actually VIOLATES the 501C3 charter.
A 501(C)(3) company is one that is organized and operated exclusively for any of the exempt purposes described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. These purposes do not include participation in political campaigns, and 501(C)(3) companies are prohibited from these sorts of operations, whether for or against any particular candidate. They are also limited in the lobbying they can do to influence legislation.

Since Planned Parenthood runs Planned Parenthood Action Fund, they are violating their 501C3 charter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
Second, I have less of a problem with Planned Parenthood Action Fund running ads than shadow groups funded by the Koch bros.
Why? Because you're a hypocrite and have no problem with your side doing it, but dont dare someone else? If Koch Brothers were getting taxpayer money, and then using it to buy political ads, I'd be outraged.. Thankfully it seems some of us have higher standards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casper in Dallas View Post
You know for a FACT that it is?
First off, even if they didnt get any taxpayer money, its still a violation of IRS law which says they CAN NOT PARTICIPATE IN POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS.. Second, are you now denying that PP gets taxpayer money? The fact that this is a subchapter of PP doesnt mean its not PP as sub chapters are still subject to the laws which regulate the parent corporation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:53 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top