Senate GOP Fast-Tracks Bill To Defund Planned Parenthood

State Funding of Abortions Under Medicaid


Public Funding for Abortion


There are "ways"

a reply to: OptimisticCynic

You know, I'm half tempted to educate you on the REAL history of Margaret Sanger, but then again I'm pretty sure you'd just ignore it in favor of your revisionist version. She was no saint, but she certainly didn't set up PP to be racist. And even then, blaming the social direction of an organization currently on the actions of its long dead founder is a straight up logical fallacy. That is like saying that America is racist because it was founded by racists.

originally posted by: OptimisticCynic

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: OptimisticCynic
a reply to: introvert

Other organizations haven't been caught doing it yet. I suppose if they are they will get the same treatment. Simple really

Other organisations already do it. Why aren't we going after them as well as PP?

Proof other organizations are illegal selling baby parts for profit please

You've already stacked the deck in an unfair manner. I cannot provide proof that some other clinic is selling illegal parts for profit. If I was able to prove that, the authorities would have already shut them down.

Do you wish to rephrase the request?

originally posted by: xuenchen
State Funding of Abortions Under Medicaid


Public Funding for Abortion


There are "ways"

How about actually showing what those "ways" are?

At present, the federal Medicaid program mandates abortion funding in cases of rape or incest, as well as when a pregnant woman's life is endangered by a physical disorder, illness, or injury.

Do you not agree with that or something?

a reply to: OptimisticCynic
proof that planned parenthood is....
please??
the ones who put out these videos have already caused congress to investigate this in 2000 with similar accusations, no action was taken.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

great cherry-pick



"mandates"

a reply to: xuenchen

Cherry pick? That was the whole second half of the first paragraph. Plus it was more than YOU provided. You just said something then linked something so that it makes it look like the situation is worse than it seems. Now you are disputing the definition of "mandate". You know DAMN well what mandate means.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Right revisionist history. Like taking her actual quotes?

Anyone can google her and find out

You can spin it however you want

She was a racist eugenicist who spoke at KKK rallies and advocated for the eradication of black people

Anyone can read her words on it and she founded PP

PERIOD. End of story

It's an organization w a racist history whose intent was to destroy the black community

And your bs spin and pandering can't change that.

You can't claim to be about equal rights and scream about how racist the GOP or the confederate flag is, while supporting a n organization whose creation was to eradicate the black populace

Now they are caught selling baby parts for profit.

The length progressives go to make excuses for all of this is sickening

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: OptimisticCynic
proof that planned parenthood is....
please??
the ones who put out these videos have already caused congress to investigate this in 2000 with similar accusations, no action was taken.

That's pretty easy listen to the video.

In what upside down world do we live I where someone actually saying exactly what the charges being leveled at them , ON VIDEO , is not considered proof

People have lost their damn minds

a reply to: OptimisticCynic

Thanks for proving my point buddy. No links or anything. Heck you didn't even quote bomb her. You just TALKED about her quotes. You aren't interested in learning anything. Your confirmation bias already tells you what you want to hear, and that's good enough for you.

originally posted by: OptimisticCynic

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: OptimisticCynic
proof that planned parenthood is....
please??
the ones who put out these videos have already caused congress to investigate this in 2000 with similar accusations, no action was taken.

That's pretty easy listen to the video.

In what upside down world do we live I where someone actually saying exactly what the charges being leveled at them , ON VIDEO , is not considered proof

People have lost their damn minds

For someone who has a patriotic avatar in his profile, you apparently don't understand how our us legal system works. PP isn't guilty of ANYTHING until it can be proven in a court of law. Ever heard of that thing called, "innocent until proven guilty"?

Unreal. Yet it explains so, so very much.

Fox's Attempt To Smear Planned Parenthood With "Taxpayer Calculator" Doesn't Add Up

Finally, Fox's investigation of Planned Parenthood's revenue and the American taxpayer's contribution to that revenue provides no useful context for the viewer. In 2014, the federal government spent nearly 900 times more than Planned Parenthood collected from all government sources in 10 years; the $4.3 billion price tag Fox highlighted represents a miniscule portion of total government spending over the same period. Likewise, the 10-year burden shouldered by Fox's "average taxpayer" represents a tiny fraction of their total income over that period. According to Fox News, a taxpayer with earnings in excess of $2.5 million over a decade would contribute only about $40 annually. Meanwhile, the average taxpayer, with a median household income of roughly $52,000 per year, would contribute only about $1.50 per year to Planned Parenthood, according to Fox's own calculations.

And that $1.50? It's for ALL their services, of which abortion, IF you even in your imagination include it, at the higher of the 3%-5% estimates, comes out to .075 cents. Not even a penny.

a reply to: IanFleming

Let me summarize:

You only want to apply to rules to others not yourself, and, you believe that your opinion or perception is fact.

Carry on!

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Crazy people?

Come on now you're smarter in debate than to resort to ad hominem attacks.


I also like to call your argument The YouTube Fallacy...
The idea that because it's on YouTube it can be discounted as a terrible source...


But YouTube isn't the source, the source is the horse's mouth talking about "negotiations" and "losses" and "doing better than breaking even"...

YouTube is just the vehicle in which to share this information.


But we're crazy, right?

Let the investigation clear that up.

Take this wherever you wish.

Opposition Claims About Margaret Sanger

In my opinion, it is people of the same ilk as those releasing the deceptively edited videos.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Crazy people?

Come on now you're smarter in debate than to resort to ad hominem attacks.

Sorry man, anyone who thinks that Youtube is a valid source of information is delusional and/or crazy. It just isn't one.

I also like to call your argument The YouTube Fallacy...
The idea that because it's on YouTube it can be discounted as a terrible source...

That isn't a fallacy, it is just simple honesty and intellectual integrity. Any yahoo can post anything to Youtube. There are ZERO checks for authenticity. The uploader doesn't even have to IDENTIFY himself so we know his credentials. It just ISN'T a valid source of information. I mean, at least Wikipedia makes you SOURCE all your claims at the bottom of the page.

No this isn't a fallacy. You discount things that originate from dubious sources. Sure there MAY be a few grains of truth, but there is no way to tell the difference between the good and the bad. Heck, after viewing ONE video, you are likely to be suggested a follow up video that will tell you the exact opposite thing.

But YouTube isn't the source, the source is the horse's mouth talking about "negotiations" and "losses" and "doing better than breaking even"...

PLUS some video editing software to cut and snip parts of the video to make it seem like the conversation went in a worse direction.

YouTube is just the vehicle in which to share this information.


But we're crazy, right?

Well if you refuse to believe that those videos could possibly been touched by video editing software before being put on the internet, then yes, I do believe that. Pro-lifers have been shown to be VERY dishonest in the ways they go about trying to make abortion illegal. Heck, I have trouble just having a civil debate with many of them here on ATS without them getting all emotional and bringing extra baggage into the conversation. Even WITHOUT that negative stigma, I still don't trust that a video on the internet.

Let the investigation clear that up.

Right, which investigation though? This OP shows that the Republicans are skipping that little piece of the puzzle and going STRAIGHT to legislation (which has been shown the legislation they are pitching is already in effect so they are really just trying to defund PP from all the OTHER things it provides). I mean EVERYTHING about this whole situation seems dishonest and shady on the pro-life side that it is just more likely that this whole song and dance is a manufactured scandal.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: OptimisticCynic

Thanks for proving my point buddy. No links or anything. Heck you didn't even quote bomb her. You just TALKED about her quotes. You aren't interested in learning anything. Your confirmation bias already tells you what you want to hear, and that's good enough for you.

I'm on an iPhone or I would. Some of us actually get out from behind the computer. A Google search will turn up everything.

originally posted by: OptimisticCynic
Confederate flag " history of racism and is harmful to people ban it now!"

PP - started by a eugenicist , racist, woman who was hell bent on destroying the black populace by stopping their offspring and has been caught selling baby parts - "oh no pp does great work "

Progressive logic

I'm a progressive and you failed to sum me up in your pithy description.

Where do we go from here...
Considering this is a clash of morals and not politics.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: IanFleming

Let me summarize:

You only want to apply to rules to others not yourself, and, you believe that your opinion or perception is fact.

Carry on!

Complete deflection. Not surprising, though. Have a good day.

a reply to: OptimisticCynic
I have, the first one is a 7 or so minute edited cut of one that is over 2 hours long....I've listened to both.
I can see where some might find it a bit offensive, but well, there's no proof that they were doing anything illegal. and they were investigated around 2000 when the same accusations were made by the same people who did the video....nothing was done then and well, I can only assume that nothing was done because it was all legal, or that nothing was done because the lawmakers had their sight hindered by the many dollar signs floating in front of their eyes... after all there's profit to be made by the research isn't there?
because of the way the first one was presented, I find reason to suspect the second, although I am not sure if the full video of that short clip was ever posted. and what I find particularly suspicious is the person who is trying to get the evidence is trying to push the price up and get her to agree to it. the lady seems to be really not that sure of what she should do and keeps saying that she will have to ask around about it. she also points out that it's illegal for the doctor to change how he aborts the baby just to ensure that the tissue is preserved in usable form and she'd have to consult with him.
this newest one I really don't see where there is anything illegal going on....it's legal to donate the fetal tissue, to transfer it to a third party (research group), and to charge enough to cover the cost of processing the tissue for transfer.

but here are the facts as I see them.....
the will be abortions, even if you outlaw them there will be abortions. and well, there ARE women who need to have them to preserve their life!
there is also a market for the tissue, one that is regulated at the present time, and part of those regulations restrict the amount of "profit" that can be received from the transfer of that tissue, at least from the abortion clinic to the whoever gets it next.
and well, even if you do defund planned parenthood and put it out of business, if there aren't others who are doing the same thing operating now, they will pop up... at least with planned parenthood, you have an organization that is watched like a hawk.