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.
My mistake on the 60 %. How do you know about clinic capacity and if they will accept low income and how do you know if there is mass transit to those facilities that may be 20 miles away.
Again, as already stated, they are taxpayer-funded FP clinics. Of course they serve the low-income or they wouldn't need taxpayer funding. 17 of them, all located within a 10 mile radius of the geographical center of a low-income zip code. The 5 PPs also located there are redundant and unnecessary.
If PPs were instead located in rural poor areas, maybe you would have a point. But they aren't located there, and so you have no point.
Actually Title X was passed in 1970 by the Nixon administration with overwhelming support from both parties. Obama was just trying to protect poor people from the nutty right wing that decided they need to punish poor people from using a clinic because they hated the name.
Why can't poor people use the many times more publicly-funded FP clinics located throughout the country?
Honestly, only the ignorant think PP is the only choice there is for FP and women's health services for low-income women. Nothing could be further from the truth. I'm thinking brainwashing has fooled many of you.
"An African-American woman is almost five times likelier to have an abortion than a white woman, and a Latina more than twice as likely, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention."
Again, as already stated, they are taxpayer-funded FP clinics. Of course they serve the low-income or they wouldn't need taxpayer funding. 17 of them, all located within a 10 mile radius of the geographical center of a low-income zip code. The 5 PPs also located there are redundant and unnecessary.
Why is Planned Parenthood redundant? Why aren't the other clinics redundant? '
You're making absolutely no sense, nor are you using logic; just spouting and respouting your idiotic hyperbole and prejudice against Planned Parenthood.
Maybe that "Informed" part of your moniker is just wishful thinking?
Why is Planned Parenthood redundant? Why aren't the other clinics redundant? '
Public Health Department FP Clinics aren't redundant. They're a taxpayer-funded government service. If a private organization wishes to duplicate those services, they should do it on their own dime, no taxpayer funding.
Additionally, why should taxpayer funding go to a white supremacist organization? As already posted, PP targets Black and Hispanic women for abortions. They're 5 times and 2 times, respectively, more likely to have an abortion than White women.
Last edited by InformedConsent; 04-03-2017 at 05:09 AM..
"2010 Census results reveal that Planned Parenthood is targeting minority neighborhoods. 79% of its surgical abortion facilities are located within walking distance of African American or Hispanic/Latino neighborhoods."
That's no coincidence. Eugenics has been the focus of PP since the very beginning. Margaret Sanger was a proponent of eugenics and wished to limit the population of "undesirables."
That's no coincidence. Eugenics has been the focus of PP since the very beginning. Margaret Sanger was a proponent of eugenics and wished to limit the population of "undesirables."
To keep spouting the now out-of-date bs against Planned Parenthood, is like saying that the Republican party of Lincoln's time and the Republican party of today have the same identical goals! Just like informedconsent and non-informednoconsent are the same thing!
Again, as already stated, they are taxpayer-funded FP clinics. Of course they serve the low-income or they wouldn't need taxpayer funding. 17 of them, all located within a 10 mile radius of the geographical center of a low-income zip code. The 5 PPs also located there are redundant and unnecessary.
If PPs were instead located in rural poor areas, maybe you would have a point. But they aren't located there, and so you have no point.
I see you have been reading the usual Life News ploy, "PP is redundant". The very last thing you would want to do is toy with inner city family planning services in places like Chicago or Baltimore. Already stated to you many times but you don't have any idea whether those other clinics are convenient and many of them are most likely working at maximum capacity. Intentionally defeating a program that is working based on pure ideology is the definition of extremism. Do you want to prevent unwanted pregnancies or just prove a point and take it out on poor people.
Like I pointed out there are PP clinics in states like Idaho where they have only 2 clinics in an area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Why can't poor people use the many times more publicly-funded FP clinics located throughout the country?
Honestly, only the ignorant think PP is the only choice there is for FP and women's health services for low-income women. Nothing could be further from the truth. I'm thinking brainwashing has fooled many of you.
Texas already did an experiment on state run FP clinics when they attempted to take away PP funding, they failed. This argument is no longer about PP it is about women getting health care.
To keep spouting the now out-of-date bs against Planned Parenthood, is like saying that the Republican party of Lincoln's time and the Republican party of today have the same identical goals! Just like informedconsent and non-informednoconsent are the same thing!
Look at the facts. According to the CDC, Black and Hispanic women are 5 times and 2 times more likely, respectively, to have an abortion than White women. And then look at where 79% of PP's Surgical Abortion Facilities are located: within walking distance of Black and/or Hispanic neighborhoods. They're targeted for abortion, no doubt about it.
If you're good with supporting a white supremacist organization, that's on you.
I suggest Planned Parenthood stop providing abortions. I mean it is only 3% of their services. Seems pretty stupid to keep providing them when it means the loss of federal funds.
They perform abortions because women want them, this has absolutely nothing to do with the recent action by congress.
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.
; it's FACT:
Just like informedconsent and non-informednoconsent are the same thing! 
