Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
 
Old 02-01-2017, 07:15 AM
 
8,170 posts, read 6,017,879 times
Reputation: 5963

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by JanND View Post
I have been middle of the road on abortion/antiabortion for my adult life. I guess I'd be more pro-choice if I had to be put into a category. But, I am interested in the history of this organization, so I researched.

Planned Parenthood is an organization.

Google it's founder Margaret Sanger to understand how it started. Here is just one blogspot of hundreds of links to biographies: The Truth About Margaret Sanger: Margaret Sanger, Snopes, Planned Parenthood and the Ku Klux Klan


My opinion is If someone wants birth control they can visit their Dr. if someone wants an abortion, they should go pay for one....But, why should our tax dollars pay for it, especially Globally?

If we continue to federally fund abortion, shouldn't we also pay for right to life agencies? If you don't want the gov't choosing your birth control method, then it stands to reason that you also should not be expecting the gov't to pay for it.
I recently received a new IUD. Cash pay was $2k. I would not expect a minimum wage earning, single mom to be able to fund that out of pocket. It would have been a struggle for me at 2 times minimum wage.

I would rather have the government pay $2k, then cover the expense of unwanted pregnancies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-01-2017, 07:20 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,768 posts, read 44,581,069 times
Reputation: 13612
Quote:
Originally Posted by LowonLuck View Post
I recently received a new IUD. Cash pay was $2k. I would not expect a minimum wage earning, single mom to be able to fund that out of pocket. It would have been a struggle for me at 2 times minimum wage.

I would rather have the government pay $2k, then cover the expense of unwanted pregnancies.
Why couldn't low-income men and women use a less expensive form of BC? Generic BC pills are $8/month. Condoms are less than $1 each. Diaphragms are much less costly than that $2,000 IUD.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2017, 07:21 AM
 
16,235 posts, read 25,145,170 times
Reputation: 27047
Quote:
Originally Posted by LowonLuck View Post
I was married when I had my oldest and got pregnant with my second. The divorce was final days before my youngest was born.

I had no idea I would be a single mom at the start of either pregnancy. Life is not always predictable when you have other people's decisions that effect your life. I would not have chosen a single parent life, but it was the cards dealt to me. I do a remarkable job supporting them the best I can, but assistance does provide health care. I do work full time.
No one should fault anyone for taking advantage of income based programs that provide health care. All of our taxes pay for these programs, and other programs needed by low-middle income families.

CHIPS has been available for low-middle income families who do not meet the low income guidelines of poverty based programs well before Obama Care.
https://chipmedicaid.org/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2017, 07:26 AM
 
8,170 posts, read 6,017,879 times
Reputation: 5963
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
Unlike tattoo artists most pharmacists will not take sexual services in lieu of cash.
Are you suggesting that women should turn to sex for bartering?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2017, 07:30 AM
 
4,279 posts, read 1,897,886 times
Reputation: 1266
Quote:
Originally Posted by LowonLuck View Post
Please explain the logic. You have a group of individuals that want abortion to be illegal. They want planned parenthood (birth control to low income) to stop being funded, and the same group, are the first to tell a single mom that should not have had kids, she could not afford.

Life does not work that way. You can't take away someone's ability to prevent an issue, but then blame them when they have an issue.

Seriously, someone please explain the thought process because it really makes no sense.
1. Killing a child is not prevention, it is a reaction.

2. Refusing to pay for peoples birth control is not refusing them access to it.

3. People advising (ie through promotion) that a person should not increase their burden is not dictorial, a person can take the advice or not.

4. Responsibility is what adults do, but unfortunately too many people exist as adult children and have no concept of such.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2017, 07:30 AM
 
Location: San Diego
50,149 posts, read 46,802,981 times
Reputation: 33983
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Interesting... In 17 states, Medicaid pays for abortion. How is that Constutional? That violates taxpayers' First Amendment rights just as much as paying for abortifacients violates the Hobby Lobby owners' and Little Sisters of the Poor's First Amendment rights.

Want an abortion? That's your choice. But don't violate anyone's First Amendment rights to pay for it. Pay for it yourself. The death is your responsibility. And FYI... 38 states have feticide laws, so yes, it is a death.
They won't admit it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2017, 07:44 AM
 
Location: Coastal Georgia
50,164 posts, read 63,611,250 times
Reputation: 92851
Quote:
Originally Posted by LowonLuck View Post
Please explain the logic. You have a group of individuals that want abortion to be illegal. They want planned parenthood (birth control to low income) to stop being funded, and the same group, are the first to tell a single mom that should not have had kids, she could not afford.

Life does not work that way. You can't take away someone's ability to prevent an issue, but then blame them when they have an issue.

Seriously, someone please explain the thought process because it really makes no sense.
I will try. Taking away a right, and not paying for it, are two separate issues.

Firstly, you can see that free abortions and birth control have done nothing to stop single mothers from having children they can't take care of. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make her drink. Taxpayers still have to support them.

Most of us are pro choice, and fought for women's rights to control their own bodies and reproduction. There are many who are also against abortion and that is their right too. Nobody is against birth control, but go to the drug store and get it on your own dime. Why should I pay for your's?

Regardless which side you're on, there is no reason why government tax dollars should be used for these things, any more than the government should pay for everyone to have a new car, or a house, or a swimming pool.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2017, 07:56 AM
 
8,170 posts, read 6,017,879 times
Reputation: 5963
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Why couldn't low-income men and women use a less expensive form of BC? Generic BC pills are $8/month. Condoms are less than $1 each. Diaphragms are much less costly than that $2,000 IUD.
Well for myself, I get physically sick all day long on birth control pills. I have a pill baby and a condom
Baby. I miscarried my IUD baby, so for me, my doctor thinks an IUD is most effective for me. I do not want to be like the lady in the shoe with 20 kids running around.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2017, 08:01 AM
 
Location: Kent, Ohio
3,429 posts, read 2,722,961 times
Reputation: 1667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retroit View Post
Very simple:

-Unborn children are human beings
Biological human, yes. "Persons"? I'm not so sure. But for the sake of argument, I'll let this slide.
Quote:
-My tax dollars should not be used to kill human beings
Here I think you mean "innocent American human beings, except by accident." Unless, of course, you don't want your taxes to support the military, the police, and capital punishment.
Quote:
-My tax dollars should not be used to raise liberals' mistakes, er, children
For what it is worth, I suspect that an economic cost/benefit analysis will reveal that it is actually less expensive for tax payers, in the long run, to use taxes to make sure that ALL children (even "liberal mistakes") are cared for as well a possible. If, hypothetically, I happen to be right about this, would you still insist on your position? (In other words, are you basing your view on pure economics - "they cost me money" - or, instead, is your position based on a deeper matter of principle - "Even if it could be proven beyond reasonable doubt that I, as a taxpayer, could save money, I'd still oppose welfare for children born accidentally.")

And two quick questions:

You don't want tax dollars to pay for abortion, but would you go the next step and make abortions outright illegal? Should a women go to prison for murder if she gives herself an abortion? (Or "conspiracy to murder," if she finds someone to do it for her?)

If it could be proven that funding & promoting free birth control actually reduces the number of abortions, would you oppose having taxes used to fund free birth control?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2017, 08:03 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,478 posts, read 59,655,644 times
Reputation: 24860
OP - Because all of these policies punish uppity women.
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

All times are GMT -6.

© 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