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.
Oh the irony. Democrats - the party who believes minorities are incapable of achieving success without government intervention - defend racists on a regular basis, as long as the racist is on their team.
Btw, I'm not a conservative and I'm the one who brought up Sanger.
I’m a liberal I don’t believe that minority’s are incapable without gov assistance. I don’t know any liberals that believe that. Try not to paint with a broad brush
So, Margaret Sanger is imperfect. The beginning of the birth control movement is imperfect. Planned Parenthood is imperfect. But the ideal is still to move toward fewer abortions in all demographics.
I’m a liberal I don’t believe that minority’s are incapable without gov assistance. I don’t know any liberals that believe that. Try not to paint with a broad brush
Do you vote for Democrats? If so, you're lying to yourself and to us. By supporting the party which pushes affirmative action and identity politics, you are showing that you believe minorities are incapable of achieving success without government intervention.
If, on the other hand, you are a small "l" liberal who actually believes in freedom across the board and doesn't vote Democrat then the statement wasn't addressing you. Judging from previous conversations, you are a Liberal with a capital "L" who votes Democrat. In which case I stand by my statement.
Oh the irony. Democrats - the party who believes minorities are incapable of achieving success without government intervention - defend racists on a regular basis, as long as the racist is on their team.
Btw, I'm not a conservative and I'm the one who brought up Sanger.
If you believe today's Planned Parenthood should be judged negatively because of Margaret Sanger, do you also believe today's Catholics should be judged negatively because of the past atrocities of the Catholic Church?
How about the United States?
Should every white American be judged by how our founders treated blacks and Native Americans?
Using your logic, today's white Americans are all racists by default.
If you believe today's Planned Parenthood should be judged negatively because of Margaret Sanger, do you also believe today's Catholics should be judged negatively because of the past atrocities of the Catholic Church?
How about the United States?
Should every white American be judged by how our founders treated blacks and Native Americans?
Using your logic, today's white Americans are all racists by default.
1) We've already had this conversation.
2) "It's okay to do xxx because the other guy does yyy" is an argument that has only ever made sense to people under the age of 12.
3) My issue with Planned Parenthood is that not only do they not disavow Sanger, they celebrate her by bestowing an annual award with her name on it.
4) I'm agnostic, in part, because I disagree with organized religion. Why do you consistently ask me to defend any religion?
1) We've already had this conversation.
2) "It's okay to do xxx because the other guy does yyy" is an argument that has only ever made sense to people under the age of 12.
3) My issue with Planned Parenthood is that not only do they not disavow Sanger, they celebrate her by bestowing an annual award with her name on it.
4) I'm agnostic, in part, because I disagree with organized religion. Why do you consistently ask me to defend any religion?
You do not have to be religious to judge a religion, just as you don't have to be a woman to pass judgment on women, you should certainly understand that.
Today's Planned Parenthood celebrates Sanger just as Americans celebrate Presidents who presided over this country when we committed some of our worst atrocities.
First up, we should remove some of the Presidents displayed on our currency and replace them with something less offensive, right?
I don't find it juvenile to judge equally without bias.
You do not have to be religious to judge a religion, just as you don't have to be a woman to pass judgment on women, you should certainly understand that.
Today's Planned Parenthood celebrates Sanger just as Americans celebrate Presidents who presided over this country when we committed some of our worst atrocities.
First up, we should remove some of the Presidents displayed on our currency and replace them with something less offensive, right?
I don't find it juvenile to judge equally without bias.
I'm a small "l" libertarian. Most of the Presidents we've had since the mid 1800s are not high on my happy list. Quite frankly, you can put magical mushroom men on our currency. I don't care.
My opinion of Catholicism has exactly nothing to do with my opinion of Planned Parenthood. If you would like to know my opinion of Catholicism, start a thread in the religion forum and if I find the subject matter interesting I will post in it.
If abstinence only programs worked, we'd see it reflect in the pregnancy rates vs birth rates.
Higher birth rates would occur in states with limited access to abortion. Higher pregnancy rates would occur in states with limited access to either sex education or contraceptives.
Consider the following constant: people are going to have sex. The biggest argument for abstinence is it only fails because people don't stick to it. Yet, if the constant is that people will be driven to have sex, how could abstinence work? Well instead of that logic, let's look at some figures from HHS.gov - specifically teen pregnancy and birth rates.
Teen birth rates are higher in conservative states. (Google "teen pregancy rates" and find the first HHS.gov link) There's really no argument there. We might as well be looking at an electoral map for the most part. Now, this isn't surprising at all. With less access to abortions and women's services, conservatives can say that the state policies are doing their job.
However, if you take a look at teen pregnancy rates, if we wanted to say abstinence only programs work, we'd expect to see lower pregnancy rates in these states. (Google "teen pregnancy rates by state"). What may (or may not?) be surprising is that many of the states with higher birth rates also have higher teen pregnancy rates.
Wait? How could that be? If abstinence only means people aren't going to have sex, that why wouldn't the pregnancy rate be lower? Because the method is flawed. People will have sex. Teenagers especially. Offering an all encompassing sex education as well as access to women's services, such as contraceptives IS the solution.
If conservatives want to say that abortions should be limited, then empower people to not even get to that point where that might happen. Lower the number of abortions possible by helping to lower pregnancy rates instead of worrying about abortion rates. One will follow the other. That same HHS.gov shows that over time... the teen pregnancy rate has dropped AND the teen abortion rate has dropped. That's seems like a win-win. So instead of fighting it, realize that women's clinics and proper sex education IS a winning strategy. Embrace it.
I'm a small "l" libertarian. Most of the Presidents we've had since the mid 1800s are not high on my happy list. Quite frankly, you can put magical mushroom men on our currency. I don't care.
My opinion of Catholicism has exactly nothing to do with my opinion of Planned Parenthood. If you would like to know my opinion of Catholicism, start a thread in the religion forum and if I find the subject matter interesting I will post in it.
Condemning PP because of Margaret Sanger and not condemning this country because of the beliefs and actions of its founders is hypocritical.
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.
