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.
Then perhaps Planned Parenthood should drop its non-profit status and be ran like a normal business whose balance sheet is reflected by the market it serves. If there's a market for their services, then there should be a premium associated with those services that ensure its survivability (pardon the pun). Then it wouldn't need social support and it could shed the controversial nature of its business. Correct?
No, not correct. As long as taxpayers have to pick up the tab for welfare and uninsured pregnancies, it is in the best interest of the taxpayers to try to mitigate that burden.
No, not correct. As long as taxpayers have to pick up the tab for welfare and uninsured pregnancies, it is in the best interest of the taxpayers to try to mitigate that burden.
If that's the going philosophy, then why isn't the Federal Government in the business of doing this? Why does it let Planned Parenthood take the criticism and onslaught of taxpayer demands that funding be reduced?
Because even liberals understand that abortion is killing a person, and even liberals understand that using taxpayer dollars to officially sanction abortion is not the right thing to do. In other words, you support killing babies and you support Planned Parenthood's services, but you're not willing to take the fight to the Federal Government and demand that it engage in this activity.
Liberals love having the middleman involved so as not to look like supporters of government sanctioned murder.
That's because many people who are opposed to abortion feel using birth control is wrong, immoral and goes counter to God's will.
Too bad. The rest of us taxpayers do not get to cherry pick what our tax dollars are spent on, so, until we do, they just need to learn to live with it like the rest of us do.
Texas already has a lot of legal requirements before an abortion. I assume the goal is to make abortion providers so frustrated that they just stop performing abortions.
Not to mention the added harassment of pregnant women who must be punished for the crime of having sex.
Note that they did not rule the law constitutional. Instead, they're simply saying it can be enforced while it's being challenged.
I don't want this to turn into another general abortion thread and hope that discussion is limited to this ruling, the laws in question, and similar laws or proposals in other states.
I don't see how it would be unconstitutional. If the person does not want to look at the screen, they don't have to. But it should be available should the person want to look. I have heard people say they have changed their mind when they saw the baby/heartbeat/movement and since the procedure is not dangerous in any way, it should be done if it can help decrease abortions. It's really not that expensive, either. Furthermore, it can date the pregnancy to see which kind of abortion would be best. I hate saying those words but I wonder how often the wrong procedure is used. A fetus CAN feel pain.
I know when I had my first u/s at 6.5 weeks, I was enamored. Of course my child was wanted and tried for, but still. Seeing your own child in this manner is empowering.
Because even liberals understand that abortion is killing a person, and even liberals understand that using taxpayer dollars to officially sanction abortion is not the right thing to do. In other words, you support killing babies and you support Planned Parenthood's services, but you're not willing to take the fight to the Federal Government and demand that it engage in this activity.
Liberals do not believe abortion kills babies.......because abortion DOES NOT kill BABIES.
I would be happy if my federal tax dollars went to fund Planned Parenthood and abortions because my overall tax burden would go down.
Liberals do not believe abortion kills babies.......because abortion DOES NOT kill BABIES.
I would be happy if my federal tax dollars went to fund Planned Parenthood and abortions because my overall tax burden would go down.
So, in other words, you support abortion as a method of birth control. That's the only conclusion that can be made when one uses tax dollars as a means to discourage human life through unlimited on-demand abortion paid for by the government.
This bill is nothing more than unnecessary harrassment put upon women seeking to abort.
Nice try. How big was the sample? Could've been 20 people, hardly generalizable. Also note that your data show that the women believed it to be a positive experience so there goes your "harassment" theory.
I am far from a liberal. If Planned Parenthood is funded, the number of children/families needing welfare will go down, saving taxpayer money in the longrun and helping to make welfare cuts more politically feasible. In addition, the number of abortions will go down.
I wouldn't mind PP if they did not perform abortions.
I don't see how it would be unconstitutional. If the person does not want to look at the screen, they don't have to. But it should be available should the person want to look. I have heard people say they have changed their mind when they saw the baby/heartbeat/movement and since the procedure is not dangerous in any way, it should be done if it can help decrease abortions. It's really not that expensive, either. Furthermore, it can date the pregnancy to see which kind of abortion would be best. I hate saying those words but I wonder how often the wrong procedure is used. A fetus CAN feel pain.
I know when I had my first u/s at 6.5 weeks, I was enamored. Of course my child was wanted and tried for, but still. Seeing your own child in this manner is empowering.
No, it can't.......not until well after most abortions are performed. By the time they can feel pain, only medically necessary abortions are performed....and then pain control should be administered.
The report, commissioned by the British government and published this week by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, consists of a review of studies conducted since 1997 on the neuroanatomical and physiological development of the fetus. It concludes that fetuses at the 24-week stage of development do not possess the wiring to transmit pain signals from the body to the brain's cortex. Even after 24 weeks, the fetus likely exists in a state of "continuous sleep-like unconsciousness or sedation," due to the presence of chemicals such as adenosine in the surrounding amniotic fluid.
Don't let the facts get in your way.
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.
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.
