Democratic Party takes major stand for reproductive freedom

Again, abortion is a legal medical procedure.

In the United States we provide assistance both at the Federal, State and local levels with medical needs.

There is no reason that these funds cannot help with all medical procedures because of superstition and political agenda.

Abortion is a legal procedure; the Hyde Amendment is superfluous, and further, legal abortions are supported by the majority of the American people.

So the claim by the anti-abortion agenda that the American people are in favor of the Hyde Amendment is spurious.

originally posted by: In4ormant

originally posted by: Tsukimidnightmoon
a reply to: In4ormant

Murdering a child you created because you don't want the responsibility of raising that child is being responsible?

Birthing a child and hoisting that responsibility off "being responsible"?

You know what, I'm gonna make an exception just this one time. I'm going to subsidize your contraception for the rest of your life. Send me a bill. I can't in good conscience let any offspring from someone so intellectually destitute as you to populate this planet

Now you are wanting to decide that i don't deserve to have children because i argued against you on an online forum??

Funny how prone you are to denying others what they want. Freedom, i guess.

Where's my freedom of choice Mr. Libertarian

Oh, "your" freedom of choice, but not the woman who wants an abortion?

That's pretty much what it boils down to, eh?

Not "forcing" anyone to do anything except carry a pregnancy to term because *you* don't agree with it.

Got it. Talk about hypocrisy and double standards.

Go figure.

a reply to: Tsukimidnightmoon

Good morning, all. Lemme see where we left off... (My responses are going to start off pretty general, so I can catch up)

Blue laws: aren't you glad they're not national laws? You can move or go elsewhere (another state) for the services...

Government IS a thing...

Survival: don't take away my right to choose how I survive as long as I don't take away others rights...

4. Why are we debating, then? I'm trying to do my part...

5. Guess we'll have to pass laws and stuff first to see what's in them?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Then what was your point?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Thank you for letting me have my rights...

Your explanation is wrong...

I don't want to pay for anything I don't agree with...

Who's still here? (I want to know who I should direct comments towards)

I don't think this debate is about taking away the rights of women to choose... It's about NOT taking away the rights of tax payers to choose... If you want to support abortion, donate to your local abortion doctor... It shouldn't be governmentally funded...

a reply to: ketsuko

You can address me. Don't talk about me when I'm right here.

Yes, I would have thought you'd be the every-sperm-counts type. Glad to hear you're not.

Funny how just today the Supreme Court of the United States struck down Texas's stupid restrictions on abortion clinics requiring that the doctors have a hospital affiliation.

originally posted by: In4ormant

originally posted by: Orionx2
Well I am not a Hillary fan but I am also pro-choice. There are already to many people in the world and anyone that wants to abort will not make the best of parents if denied the choice. The kid will have a miserable life and will probably end up being very negative to the world.

Your trying to predict the future. Just because you think the child will have a bad life it's ok. That excuse is pathetic. The kids not gonna be anything so it's OK to kill em. Seriously mate? That's all it takes for you to be ok with this?

I agree it's a silly stance, especially on a case by case basis. however, there is ZERO doubt that abortion being legal is incredibly beneficial to society as a whole. Read freakonomics, they have an excellent chapter on it. Essentially, when a city makes abortion legal, about 15-20 years like crime rates plummet, because obvious reasons.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

You talking to me? (I'm not sure)

If yes, anything about whatI've posted you want to debate?

Or you can make a statement, and I'll respond...

...and go!

a reply to: japhrimu

Wasn't really specifically talking to anyone, but glad you're here!

Did you hear about the SCOTUS decision telling Texas to stand down?
LOL!!!! Freaking Texas. Insane legislators in what is a really progressive, cool town and an otherwise basically okay state. Such an unlikely arrangement. I have family there, and friends. It's like their legislature is the same as Kansas's idiocy, only on different topics.

a reply to: dr1234

Dr, there is very rarely anything that has zero doubt... But I digress...
This isn't about the legality of the procedure. (That's for a different thread, I believe.)
It's about forcing people to contribute towards something they don't want to, since the government (allegedly) wants to fund it...

a reply to: japhrimu

No, they don't. Other services are provided which the federal funding finances. Abortions are paid for by the client.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Thank you.

Nah, I just woke up... I'll have to look into it, but I think I can assume what it means...

Assuming I'm right about what it means, it gives more individual choice to the participants. (The Preggos and Doctors)

If I lived in TX, I still wouldn't want to have to contribute towards it...

I guess I'll add that maybe if a medical practice offers killing services, they shouldn't be funded by the gov... It should be subsidized by donations... (This could be expanded to apply to other things, but I'm trying to stay on-topic.)

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

The thread, if I remember correctly, says the DNC wants government to be able to fund abortion...

Let's take PP, for example... If they rely on gov funding, and they also offer abortion, then yes, the abortions are gov funded.
(This may need more explanation, which I'm glad to provide, but I'd like some feedback, first, please.)

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: japhrimu

No, they don't. Other services are provided which the federal funding finances. Abortions are paid for by the client.

But But

Recently, Planned Parenthood was caught “cooking the books” in an attempt to neutralize the argument that its primary mission is to provide abortion services. Planned Parenthood has often cited that abortions actually make up less than 10% of their overall services.

Upon closer scrutiny, it is found that the organization counts each abortion performed as one visit—even though it actually requires several trips to the clinic. This is while giving a 12 month packet of birth control pills is counted as at least 12 visits—despite the fact that only one clinic trip is necessary. As former Planned Parenthood director Abby Johnson has pointed out, this has the effect of “skew[ing] the numbers. You have an overwhelming number of ‘visits’ for family planning compared to abortion, even though you may have seen the same number of patients.”

After unraveling Planned Parenthood’s deceptive statistics, it is found that 96% of its services provided to pregnant women are abortions.

Debunking Planned Parenthood’s Numbers

a reply to: mOjOm

I'm sure some women use it without even thinking about it or for some kind of birth control too.

Only really mentally ill women would do that.

For once I agree with what DBspitcat said: It's a horrible decision to have to make.
Women do not go into it lightly. There is a waiting period, it's no a "walk-in baby-destroyer clinic."

It's traumatizing. A woman never "gets over it."

Being shamed for having an abortion is nothing compared to the grief of having to make such a horrible decision.

That said, a clump of cells that might eventually form a healthy human child (but not always) is not aware of its existence. Stosh asked about the "cutoff" - 12 weeks is the standard. It looks like a fish the size of a kidney bean, and is more of a "tumor" or "growth" than it is a person.

MILLIONS of miscarriages happen every day, all around the world. That is spontaneous abortion. The woman's BODY decided to eject it. It happens. Women have known how to avoid pregnancies (and also how to terminate them) for millennia.

a reply to: xuenchen

But but but:
Here's the "about" section of your chosen source:

National Pro-Life Women’s Caucus
The Caucus is a project of the Susan B. Anthony List to identify, organize, and advance women lawmakers who are dedicated to ending abortion in America by passing laws that save lives.

The Caucus aims to:

CONNECT women to model legislation, allied groups, ground-breaking research, legal support, and other resources they need to introduce and defend pro-life legislation.
PROVIDE women with the grassroots and media support they need to pass pro-life legislation.
TRAIN women and their male colleagues on how to best articulate the pro-life message
RECRUIT women to run for office and connect them with the resources they need to win whenever possible
“The strong women leaders in the NPLWC bring a wealth of knowledge, diverse experience

and so on and so forth.

That source is obviously biased and is written by a bunch of weirdos crusading to end all abortion.
It's bogus.


Jeezy Kreezy, xuen - that's as bad as the stupid video bullcrap that Fiorina fell for.
STOP presenting JUNK arguments!

a reply to: japhrimu

No, federal funds DO NOT pay for the abortions!
Please don't believe that stuff! The books of clinics keep the incoming and outgoing funds separate. It's no different budgeting for a household. Some money goes to mortgage or rent, other money goes to food, etc. I'll pay the rent if you'll buy the food kind of thing.

The client pays for the abortion. Are you aware of how organizations get and allocate their money?
I worked for a 501c3 that got federal funding, local grants, donations, etc. The program I ran was funded by ONE SPECIFIC SOURCE of incoming funds - the money was not to be used to pay for ANYTHING ELSE going on there. It was earmarked and set aside only for specific expenses.

a reply to: xuenchen

what another load of disinfo crap from you.

here:

it's important to note that federal dollars are not used to provide the service at the center of the political debate around Planned Parenthood: abortions. That's been banned by law in almost all cases since 1976. (The details of the ban have shifted over time.) Instead, the organization uses money from other sources — private donors and foundations as well as fees — to fund its abortion services.

All told, abortions comprise about 3 percent of all the services Planned Parenthood provides, according to the organization's own data. (In 2011, FactCheck.org also examined this question and found the organization's reports to be accurate) The rest of the organization's revenue, including government dollars, are used to fund services in a way that breaks down like this:

Click on this to see how it breaks down: How Planned Parenthood Actually Uses Its Federal Funding

It even has pretty charts!! Go to the link for some real information!