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.
If an eagle destroyes its own egg, it is not prosecuted.
If a woman destroyes her own fetus, she is not prosecuted (within limits)
If you destroy an eagles egg, you are prosecuted.
If you destroy another womans fetus, you are prosecuted.
What, again is your arguement?
First post I've read so far that actually makes sense. If we're going to use comparisons in this discussion, at least we should be using ones that are equal... and it seems things are fairly equal, as laid out in the quote above. When we start persecuting Eagles for breaking/killing their own eggs, then we'll have an actual debate here.
Well, not all of them, but according to the Left (PPFA), "17 million needy Americans required govt-subsidized family planning services, including abortion during the previous year."
In the last year, our affiliate health centers served 3.1 million women, men, and teens, providing the services that people have come to rely on us for, including contraception (38 percent of our total services), testing and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases and infections (29 percent), cancer screening and prevention (19 percent), and abortion services (three percent). We also provided comprehensive, medically accurate sex education to an additional 1.2 million women, men, and teens.
But maybe you somehow became confused and meant ALL women who accessed subsidized family planning services, not just at PPFA. Well, no...that number would be 12 million, not 17 million.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewMexicanRepublican
In fact, in Feb 2008, the Left (PPFA) was crying about Bush's proposed FY2009 budget, stating:
The president's proposed $500 million cut to the Social Services Block will have disastrous consequences for those who cannot afford the necessary family planning care needed. The program was funded at $1.7 billion in FY 08 but the president proposes cutting these vital services to $1.2 billion in FY 09.
Aw...the Social Services Block Grant provides funding for Title XX programs. Family planning programs are funded under Title X. Title XX includes things such as adoption, day care, foster care, home health care, meals-on-wheels programs, and that sort of thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewMexicanRepublican
From their 2006 annual report, PPA indicates they received 1/3 of their income from Govt. grants. They also indicate they performed almost 300,000 abortions in the same year. Directly or indirectly, your tax dollars fund abortion. Maybe not 100%...but some portion.
No, Planned Parenthood receives federal funds under two programs: Title X Family Planning and Title XIX Medicaid. They receive those funds because the state governments responsible for administering these programs contract with PPFA-affiliated clinics for provision of such services. PPFA happens to be the nation's #1 provider. Payment is made only for the specific services contracted for -- stuff like pelvic exams and Pap tests, breast exams and instruction on breast self-examination, testing for high blood pressure, anemia, and diabetes, screening and appropriate treatment for sexually transmitted infections, safer-sex counseling, basic infertility screening, and referrals to specialized health care where indicated.
Zero Title X dollars have ever been paid out for an abortion, but every year some Medicaid dollars are. Federal law prohibits the use of federal Medicaid funds for abortion except in the cases of rape, incest, and to protect the life of the mother. No health exception...substantial risk of dying has to be the alternative. In 2006, there were a total of 196 Medicaid funded abortions. That's the grand total of subsidized abortions from all sources...versus the OP's claim of 1.2 million. He was only off by a factor of about 6,122. That's like coming home from a poker game and admitting to the wife that you lost twenty bucks, when actually, you lost over $120,000.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewMexicanRepublican
So many Demmies...so little time.
Right.
Last edited by saganista; 02-11-2009 at 06:22 PM..
Just letting that embryo sit on a countertop after it was removed from a woman would it be viable?
No it would not, it would need dramatic medical intervention- unlike the EAGLE EGG.
.org/]AdoptUsKids - Children In Foster Care Awaiting Adoption[/url] or Welcome to AASK
Lay a two month old baby by the side of the road, and leave it there for two days. Would it survive? Probably not. Is it 'viable'? I think so.
Hey Mac the reason I equate abortion to suicide is because what are we going to accomplish by making either of those illegal?
You can't throw someone who has committed suicide in jail.
Can we throw a mother who takes a pill to abort her baby in jail?
Maybe it is apples and oranges, but I see similarities in that: Moral as many think it may be, I don't see a logical punishment for these crimes.
If it were a crime, and a mother said "I rejected the baby" or "I don't want it" isn't that part of natural selection?
It just seems to be nothing more than a religious argument, and religion much of the time is not logical. I am not even saying I agree with abortion, but what can really be done about it?
Not suggesting draconian punishments for a woman who's so deperate she aborts her OWN child...I agree, it's much like a suicide. Maybe no punishment at ALL, for her. I AM, though, objecting to turning it into a profit-making "industry" as though it was a tummy-tuck.
If abortion is "wrong", it should be illegal. In that case, no third party should make it his business to "aid" in this wrong.
And on the other hand, if it is wrong to COMPEL a woman to be pregnant against her wishes, that should be illegal. And that's what Roe is all about...a woman's right not to be pregnant. Abortion enters into it only secondarily. So where is the logic? What morality allows you or anyone else to impose upon a woman your wishes over hers in the matter of reproduction? Compulsory childbirth is not really a very palatable idea in a country that prides itself on individual freedom...
I AM, though, objecting to turning it into a profit-making "industry" as though it was a tummy-tuck. Not a simple subject, I'll admit.
Well, it isn't as complex as it might appear to be after folks have loaded it up with religious beliefs and pseudo-science. Meanwhile, abortion is a big money-losing operation. Fees are charged on a sliding-scale basis and are heavily underwritten by the generosity of concerned and compassionate donors. In 2005, the average cost to the patient for an abortion at 10-weeks gestation was just over $400. Having a cranky wisdom tooth removed would have cost more.
And on the other hand, if it is wrong to COMPEL a woman to be pregnant against her wishes, that should be illegal. And that's what Roe is all about...a woman's right not to be pregnant. Abortion enters into it only secondarily. So where is the logic? What morality allows you or anyone else to impose upon a woman your wishes over hers in the matter of reproduction? Compulsory childbirth is not really a very palatable idea in a country that prides itself on individual freedom...
I see people being 'compelled' to do all SORTS ot things...to raise their families, to feed their children....to refrain from leaving the kids alone in the house overnight, to 'water' their pets, to pay their taxes, to serve on a jury...etc etc.
As I said, it's not an EXACT fit with anything else, as it DOES involve a woman's body...but "compelling her to be pregnant"? I didn't get her pregnant, SHE got her pregnant...I'm only compelling her to care for her kid, for just nine months...THEN, if she so desires, we can take it away.
Sorry, but that's about the best I can do. If you don't want to BE pregnant, by all means, don't GET pregnant. If you DO, then you've got to own up to what you did. Killing the 'kid' isn't an option.
A safari guide is "compelled" by law to finish what he's started. Get halfway out on 'safari' and abandon your clients, and you COULD be in trouble. Practicing open-heart surgery? Don't think of 'walking off' midway through the procedure...you're "compelled" to finish up. Doing 'half the job' is called murder.
Lots of people are 'compelled' to do things, for a certain, specified period of time...USUALLY as a result of voluntarily putting themselves in that position. If you take students up to learn to skydive, you're legally "compelled" to get them safely down. If you agree to drive an ambulance, you're legally "compelled" to deliver your sick charges to the hospital. Don't WANT to feel 'compelled'? Fine..then don't take those sorts of jobs. Don't want to be 'compelled' to be pregnant? Don't get pregnant. If you don't like 'compulsion', don't put yourself in a position to be 'compelled'.
But in ANY case, no matter how much you hate 'feeling restricted' by your job, you're NOT allowed to "kill", or even ABANDON, your 'charges'. You're compelled to 'see it through', under penalty of law.
As I said, it's not an EXACT fit with anything else, as it DOES involve a woman's body...but "compelling her to be pregnant"? I didn't get her pregnant, SHE got her pregnant...
This is not "Agnes of God", women don't just "get" pregnant, it does take sperm. So yes, you & every other man is a participant, whether you like it or not.
This is not "Agnes of God", women don't just "get" pregnant, it does take sperm. So yes, you & every other man is a participant, whether you like it or not.
By your logic, both the man and the woman should have an equal say in the decision to abort the child. Guess how many states honor the man's right?
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.
If we're going to use comparisons in this discussion, at least we should be using ones that are equal... and it seems things are fairly equal, as laid out in the quote above. When we start persecuting Eagles for breaking/killing their own eggs, then we'll have an actual debate here. 
