Planned Parenthood stops taking money for fetal tissue donations

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Oh come on, federal,dollars pay for the building and the utilities and probably pay for the doctors and staff but not the abortion procedure........uuuuhhhhh.. What?

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
a reply to: deadeyedick

Seriously, still playing that game, nobody did anything illegal, but hey if you cry wolf long enough your the proof that people will believe anything there told.

No one is crying wolf here.

PP was paying for body parts and now they are not.

If there was a clause that allowed for money to be transferred to aid in the gathering of the body parts then said clause would be contradictory to the law and thereby unlawful.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Love when people have to compare it to things that are just completely irrelevant to try and make a point.
Even more sad when people eat it up...

Different look ....

There’s an unasked question in all this reporting: if Planned Parenthood no longer receives reimbursement for its baby parts business, who pays? There are still costs involved. They think this solves the problem, but what it does is raise additional questions that the overhead associated with the fetal tissue donations will be paid for with taxpayer money.

Free baby parts from Planned Parenthood, no loner accepting $

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Lots of corporations get government monies for certain projects, but their whole business model isn't dependent on those funds for anything other than what they're earmarked for. Planned Parenthood's business model doesn't depend on federal funds any more than any other medical provider.

A university may get federal funds to research a certain project. That doesn't mean that the funds are somehow supporting the college basket ball team.

If you don't believe that businesses and mega corporations know how to separate funding sources, or have an some unspoken practice of using funds earmarked for one thing on another thing, then I guess that reflects your business practice ethics and I hope not to have to deal with you in business. But, there is NO evidence that this is what is happening at Planned Parenthood.

Just because a corporation gets federal funding for one project, that doesn't mean that the federal government has the right to dictate what other legal business projects that company can or cannot keep offering.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Oh come on, federal,dollars pay for the building and the utilities and probably pay for the doctors and staff but not the abortion procedure........uuuuhhhhh.. What?

If you don't get it after this explanation, then it's pointless:

The tax dollars that used to possibly pay for the abortion procedures now can't, so in your example, the tax money that they would have used to pay for the abortions now goes to pay for rent and utilities, while the non-tax money that used to go to rent/utilities is now shifted over to pay for the procedures.

They shuffle the money, but the end result is still the same--the money goes to PP, and is used to stay in business and keep abortion procedures happening. That's the point. The little nuances and semantics being used to support the Hyde Amendment are akin to a shell game and nothing more.

Get it?

I'm not saying that they're doing anything wrong or against the law, this is just the reality of it all.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

So in your eyes as long as the service is offered there then tax dollars are paying for the service?

Well that means we will need to do away with all the clinics then, since PP isn't the only one that offers the service.

a reply to: windword

Actually, it reflects my profession--I help support the prosecution of people (and, by extension, their corporations) at the federal level who illegally handle money. I see this all the time in my job, so I know what I'm talking about.

You're little childish insult as to my business ethics aside, I'm not an idiot on this topic, regardless as to how much you may want to pretend that I am.

Like I said in another response, I'm not saying that they're doing anything illegal or wrong, I'm just pointing out what should be the obvious, here--the end result is the same, as PP is still getting the money, the same procedures are still getting done. The only difference is the legal shell game that goes on to appease the Hyde Amendment.

a reply to: SlapMonkey


I completely agree. It's just shuffling money around to make it look good. It's still the same pot of money.

a reply to: Sremmos80

You're a late-comer to this discussion with me...I'm not going to restate everything for you, too.

It's like someone can't even point out a simple, benign fact that the Hyde Amendment just creates a shell game that is meant to appease ignorant people opposed to tax dollars paying for abortion and not get interrogated over it.

But, you know, maybe we should do away with all of the abortion clinics...but that's another topic for another day. I'm not getting into that one in this thread, especially knowing that everyone engaging me about the shell-game reality of the Hyde Amendment differs in my opinions on abortion.

a reply to: windword

Now if they'd just split off their abortion business from their women's clinic so that tax dollars wouldn't subsidize abortions ...

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Yes I read what you have to say, not a late comer.

Think it is just a off base stance, and it is you playing the game.
The stance of "since they get any federal funding that means it is paying for abortions"
With that stance you would have to strip federal funding for a vast amount of places, which I know sounds nice to all the hardcore conservatives, not saying that is you, but that sounds like a dangerous road to go down to.


The only way you can say they are paid for by tax dollars is if they are, which they are not.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Actually, it reflects my profession--I help support the prosecution of people (and, by extension, their corporations) at the federal level who illegally handle money. I see this all the time in my job, so I know what I'm talking about.

Then you, of all people, should know that Planned Parenthood has not broken any laws.

You're little childish insult as to my business ethics aside, I'm not an idiot on this topic, regardless as to how much you may want to pretend that I am.

But, you're assuming, based on nothing, that Planned Parenthood accountants, cpas and auditors are all in cahoots, and are diverting dollars that they receive in medicare reimbursements, like any other medical business does, to illegally cover the cost of abortions.

Abortions are not subsidized with tax dollars.

Churches are. Big Corporations are. Warmongers are. But not abortions.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: windword

Now if they'd just split off their abortion business from their women's clinic so that tax dollars wouldn't subsidize abortions ...

It is already illegal for tax dollars to pay for abortions. Why is this so hard to understand? It's been said over and over, a thousand times, throughout this drawn-out debate.

originally posted by: deadeyedick

PP was paying for body parts and now they are not.

You've got that backwards.

The mantra is "PP was selling body parts ..."

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: windword

Now if they'd just split off their abortion business from their women's clinic so that tax dollars wouldn't subsidize abortions ...

They have. It's the law, see the Hyde Amendment. Unless you think that the law makers are so stupid, that they wrote a law, the Hyde Amendment, but didn't attend to the accounting issues, and don't care if, and no mechanism to check if funds are co-mingled?

a reply to: windword

... or that if any Republican anywhere could prove that any Federal funds are subsidizing abortions they'd be all over it.

That doesn't matter though, and those repeating it know it doesn't matter.

You just have to say it enough times that it lodges in consciousness.

That's how propaganda works ...

originally posted by: windword
Planned Parenthood does bill the government for services rendered, just like any other care provider that accepts Medicare, etc. Again, tax payers don't pay for abortions, see the Hyde Amendment, nor have they paid for fetal tissue storage or transfer.

I think it's pretty ironic that PP will still help women donate their fetal tissue, but the storage and shipping of the tissue will now be paid for with a government grant instead of by the research company. This whole brouhaha resulted in less cost for the researchers, and more cost for taxpayers.

originally posted by: ketsuko
Now if they'd just split off their abortion business from their women's clinic so that tax dollars wouldn't subsidize abortions ...

Naturally, the goalposts will have to be moved to support the continued assault on PP by the right.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
About time, they should have never started selling the tissue in the first place.

They weren't selling it. Even after probably 10,000 posts on this site and investigations all over the country, you can still, when you posess a brain, use the word SELL?