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.
Indirectly does matter because there is no accounting for the PP business side of abortions.
Just saying, "well, it's only 3% of our services" doesn't count.
About 10 years ago the government decided that I had to separate one side of my business from the other.
Why? The government wanted to make sure there was no co-mingling of money, no claiming a loss on "that side" and filtering the profits in to the other…they wanted their fair share.
So we had to form an LLC (separate from the corp), dump $100K ($100,000.00 US dollars) in to an account to SIT there b/c that's how the powers that be wanted it - and that $100K has to be maintained. Had to buy government "approved" software (3 options, not one less than $5K), a lot of other government mandated equipment, had to (and have to) get everyone who touches that side of the business finger printed and wait for clearance (small charge, but still a charge). Have to keep separate books/accounting, etc. Since we designated separate space for this business, but it's still in the main business? We have to charge rent for the space, pro-rate electric/gas, etc. Can't co-mingle.
Our accountant loves it.
Especially when we get audited every 2 years. Because the government wants to make sure it isn't being cheated.
If PP wants to prove that tax payer dollars aren't funding abortions? They can do the same.
It is the definition of revenue.
I never said PP doesn't make a minimum of 10s of millions of dollars (possibly hundreds of millions) a year off of abortions.
Indirectly doesn't count, unless you can prove that it is directly funded, this is nothing more than hot air from the anti choice crowd.
DIRECTLY funding abortion through tax payer dollars doesn't mean they aren't INDIRECTLY funding abortions.
I don't know why this concept is so hard to understand?
Because it is false.
Quote:
With PP claiming only 3% of it's services being abortions? Apparently abortions aren't a large part of the services PP offers, so it shouldn't be a big deal.
If it's not a big deal, why do some folks have their knickers in a twist about it?
What's pathetic is that either the New York Post couldn't figure out what the 3 percent refers to, or you can't figure out what the article is talking about.
Quote:
$1500 and common sense can buy a lot of condoms and birth control pills - even if seeing a GYN without insurance (mine doesn't take insurance) once a year to get those pills re-filled. $225 per year? Scrip for BC pills?
So then why are some folks brandishing their pitchforks at an organization that provides those birth control pills?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53
Why should I pay for infrastructure and emergency services for churches? Something I personally don't believe in?
This is what happens when you live in a democratic society that -- most of the time -- believes in the greater good for the whole of society. There are lots of things we all pay for that we don't use, that we don't believe is necessary, or that we believes contradicts our personal beliefs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Informed Info
Indirectly does matter because there is no accounting for the PP business side of abortions.
Just saying, "well, it's only 3% of our services" doesn't count.
You're mixing apples and oranges; therefore, your argument doesn't count.
If it's not a big deal, why do some folks have their knickers in a twist about it?
What's pathetic is that either the New York Post couldn't figure out what the 3 percent refers to, or you can't figure out what the article is talking about.
So then why are some folks brandishing their pitchforks at an organization that provides those birth control pills?
This is what happens when you live in a democratic society that -- most of the time -- believes in the greater good for the whole of society. There are lots of things we all pay for that we don't use, that we don't believe is necessary, or that we believes contradicts our personal beliefs.
You're mixing apples and oranges; therefore, your argument doesn't count.
Wrong! Try again.
Sure we do, but anti-choicers feel they are above everyone else and should get special treatment.
Bitter folks who fight PP birth control services have forgotten or never knew how powerful sexual attraction is to young people and even us older people.
I am sad for them.
Last edited by texan2yankee; 10-23-2015 at 05:44 PM..
Bitter folks who fight PP birth control services have forgotten or never knew how powerful sexual attraction is to young people and even us older people.
I am sad for them.
I am sad for those who are ruled by their groin rather than their brain.
I am sad for those who are ruled by their groin rather than their brain.
Making the effort and monetary commitment to take birth control is using the brain, Oldglory. PP is one of those choices available to get birth control.
Indirectly doesn't count, unless you can prove that it is directly funded, this is nothing more than hot air from the anti choice crowd.
It does count until PP proves that it doesn't.
PP saying it doesn't happen doesn't mean anything.
I think if PP wants to keep the brouhaha at bay, they should take steps as an organization to separate the health care side from the abortion side. They should understand that because they receive federal tax dollars and do preform a certain "service" that is a controversial topic to say the least it's in their best interest to do so.
I'm not anti-choice.
I'm pro choice with caveats - shouldn't happen after the 1st trimester (unless mothers health is at stake, rape, incest, etc.). Shouldn't be used as a designated form of birth control (meaning, "oh, don't worry, if I get pregnant I'll just get an abortion (or, "If you get pregnant I'll pay for your abortion"), so let's go for it!") or repeat birth control. If you can get your rear end to PP for an abortion, you can get there to maintain your choice of birth control. That is all my opinion, nothing more and nothing less.
PP saying it doesn't happen doesn't mean anything.
I think if PP wants to keep the brouhaha at bay, they should take steps as an organization to separate the health care side from the abortion side. They should understand that because they receive federal tax dollars and do preform a certain "service" that is a controversial topic to say the least it's in their best interest to do so.
I'm not anti-choice.
I'm pro choice with caveats - shouldn't happen after the 1st trimester (unless mothers health is at stake, rape, incest, etc.). Shouldn't be used as a designated form of birth control (meaning, "oh, don't worry, if I get pregnant I'll just get an abortion (or, "If you get pregnant I'll pay for your abortion"), so let's go for it!") or repeat birth control. If you can get your rear end to PP for an abortion, you can get there to maintain your choice of birth control. That is all my opinion, nothing more and nothing less.
So you are against abortions that happen for medical reasons? That makes no sense at all, oh and Planned Parenthood already proved that they do not spend federal money on abortions.
I disagree. So we'll just have to agree to keep disagreeing.
Quote:
If it's not a big deal, why do some folks have their knickers in a twist about it?
When I said it's not a big deal I meant it shouldn't be for PP to prove to those who have their knickers in a twist about it.
Quote:
What's pathetic is that either the New York Post couldn't figure out what the 3 percent refers to, or you can't figure out what the article is talking about.
Ok, then what does it refer to?
Quote:
So then why are some folks brandishing their pitchforks at an organization that provides those birth control pills?
You'd have to ask them.
Quote:
This is what happens when you live in a democratic society that -- most of the time -- believes in the greater good for the whole of society. There are lots of things we all pay for that we don't use, that we don't believe is necessary, or that we believes contradicts our personal beliefs.
No kidding.
Quote:
You're mixing apples and oranges; therefore, your argument doesn't count.
My argument is straight forward, no mixing of anything.
What's yours?
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.
