It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: SlapMonkey
You can say that any cessation of funding from the federal government will always trickle down and affect the poorest of the nation who use said programs or services, but that doesn't mean that the government, at some point, should not get out of the business of funding abortions, especially internationally.
The US doesn't need to "get out" of the business of funding abortions, here or abroad, because it hasn't had a policy of funding abortions, here or abroad, except in cases of rape, incest and health threat to the woman. This new rule doesn't even cut US tax payer funding by one penny, it just redirects it to entities that follow an arbitrary moral code that the US can't even legally enforce at home.
My point about Planned Parenthood is that there are other avenues to recoup the money that may get lost in a cessation of federal funding (through Medicaid, Title X, or whatever) so that maybe they could become a "free" clinic and still provide care to those individuals that you mention.
Then why are you or anyone else upset about it?
originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Xcalibur254
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
The Donald would do well to remember that little fact as he sets out to create his brave new world
So why is our government giving other countries money so their citizens can get abortions if they want to?
Your argument would suggest that efforts to change things are pointless, because there will always be an equal negative effect to every positive thing we try to implement
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: rickymouse
So why is our government giving other countries money so their citizens can get abortions if they want to?
They haven't and aren't.
If the former, no amount of money will change, but if the latter, we will see a drop in spending.
...then why the need for the roller coaster ride of the policy?
Seems to me that if my tax dollars are going to something that causes abortions (speaking only about elective abortions, from my stance), even if those dollars aren't going directly to the abortion procedures, they're helping prop up the facility that performs the abortions, regardless.
It looks like Donald Trump's international foil may be emerging. Surprisingly it's the Netherlands. Since his inauguration they have released a video trolling the new President.
I have to say that if the Netherlands can keep up this troll game it should make for an entertaining four years.
originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: windword
... (speaking only about elective abortions, from my stance) ...