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.
There are many ways to support these children and help them overcome their very tragic circumstances that do not involve throwing money at their self-involved, negligent parents.
Ringwise's previous post states that the children are referred to as "Thing 1 and Thing 2" and get in the way of their mother's desired lifestyle. This is a train-wreck waiting to happen as the children internalize their mother's rejection. I find it disturbing that Ringwise would turn her back on the children, knowing that they are being mistreated.
If they are not being mistreated, then her post was hyperbolic and thus irrelevant.
Those of you who have private health care insurance and believe that your money should not be used to fund abortion services might want to take a close look at your policies.
I had a second-trimester therapeutic termination (i.e., an abortion) in 1997 following prenatal diagnosis of a severe birth defect. My insurance reimbursed all of my medical bills, so anyone who shared my provider (I believe it was UHC at the time) helped fund my procedure, and it's arguable that so did any paying patients of the large midwestern hospital and OB-GYN involved. Frankly, you'd have been better off had I been a PP client. Just thought you should know.
Parents are responsible for their children. In this case, the children are not needing money. They simply have crappy parents. What do you expect a family friend to do, anyway? No one has any power over these children's welfare, even if someone wished to step in. Your attack is not only unfair, it's just not reasonable. I don't understand what you're getting at.
Perhaps, the poster exposing her friend's lifestyle should have posted on another thread per the title of this thread.
There are many ways to support these children and help them overcome their very tragic circumstances that do not involve throwing money at their self-involved, negligent parents.
Ringwise's previous post states that the children are referred to as "Thing 1 and Thing 2" and get in the way of their mother's desired lifestyle. This is a train-wreck waiting to happen as the children internalize their mother's rejection. I find it disturbing that Ringwise would turn her back on the children, knowing that they are being mistreated.
If they are not being mistreated, then her post was hyperbolic and thus irrelevant.
First of all, they are not mistreated. And the reason I told about this family was to counter another poster's example of her liberal family that was very mainstream. I was just giving another example of a liberal family that was far from mainstream.
But conclusions were jumped to, practically demanding that these children be rescued from their immoral parents. I just took it as another chance for liberals to jump down the throat of conservatives, trying to show that we're not compassionate.
A genuine treasure to those of us with a heart and a brain.
Keep up the great journalism Lawrence, it's nice to see real emotion from people who are not programmed robots, trained like seals at feeding time to regurgitate rightwing talking points and corporatist propaganda.
I don't care about seeing the emotions of a "news reader".
Because that's what Planned Parenthood is - A place for the irresponsible to go figure out how to use a condom/birth control (its not hard to do)
Yes. People who are seeking advice about birth control are terribly irresponsible. We ought to kill them all.
Quote:
Do you honestly believe that the smartest and financially fit of our society actually use PP? Of course not.
Of course not. The financially fit, with decent health insurance, can see a private physician if they so choose. The people who benefit greatly from Planned Parenthood's family planning and health services are people with low incomes who are uninsured and underinsured. But heaven forbid we'd want people with no health insurance to attend to their personal health and prevent unwanted pregnancy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC
I've yet to find a Liberal who accurately understands the concept of personal responsibility.
I seem to be able to understand the purpose of Planned Parenthood, which you clearly cannot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zentropa
I know many intelligent, educated women who have relied on PP for routine reproductive health care at various points in their lives.
Yep, I'm one! No health insurance, just out of college, very little money for health care. Planned Parenthood was a great resource and gave good care.
Quote:
And I would venture to say that the clients of PP are the ones who care MOST about being healthy and not getting pregnant. Personal responsibility and all that, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pollyrobin
I don't think tax payers are attacking Planned Parenthood for the reasons you think. I think you need to put it into perspective. When Title X was enacted under Nixon, the expenditures for medicaid was not as it is today. Health care for the poor under Medicaid has increased by over 80 percent since Nixon
Not everyone who is uninsured or low-income qualifies for Medicaid. The Republicans want to gut Medicaid anyway.
Quote:
I'm pro choice by the way. Just not: pro take my tax
money to pay for a private organization
Sweetie, your tax money goes to a kazillion private organizations, not just one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pollyrobin
Sounds to me like an affordable cost. Pay for it yourself.
$400 is hardly an affordable cost to a college student, or to many of the uninsured, working poor. Unless you suggest she saves her money for weeks and weeks to be able to afford the test? Heaven forbid it was an emergency.
Quote:
Or go on medicaid, if you can't afford to pay a private
doctor, but then, you would actually have to prove you
were broke.
How easy do you think it is to get Medicaid?
Quote:
Originally Posted by charolastra00
Catching cancer early saves lives. 70,000 people a year in this country are diagnosed with cancer between 15 - 40 : this is the least supported age group with the least amount of aggregate medical access. As a result, many are not diagnosed until they are late stage (such as me). We can't defund what for many is the ONLY way they are getting routine screenings for cancer.
Dead on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pollyrobin
It would all go away. I just don't understand why folks can't understand: to get rid of all the B.S. we NEED single payer in this country.
Tell that to Congress.
Quote:
PP adds to the problem - they are filling a need, but not voicing what we really need, at tax payers expense.
Are you suggesting that the consumers at Planned Parenthood just put off their medical needs until we have a single-payer health care system?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1bright_future
Today, in the Liberal Orwellian World of Gov't first, individual last... Planned parenthood means the exact opposite.. that of KILLING FETUSES.
Discuss.
How about we discuss that you have no idea what Planned Parenthood does?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise
My point was not that the children were unwanted or live in poverty. The point is, she got wrapped up in a very liberal environment, and moved to the stinking cesspool of SF. There, her immoral choices are getting magnified because they are celebrated. Children be damned - it's YOUR life, so live how you want. It's that lifestyle I find disgusting.
And this has what exactly to do with Planned Parenthood?
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.