Not signed in (Sign In)
This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.
    • CommentAuthorjmmurrow
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2011
     (9573.1)
    So the Republicans in their infinite wisdom (said with such grating sarcasm as would make Lucifer himself cringe) have decided to defund Planned Parenthood. My question is: why?
    For those who don’t know, Planned Parenthood provides screenings for breast and cervical cancer, contraceptives and yes, abortions. However, abortions make up less than 2% of what they do and no tax payer’s money goes toward it. Thoughts?
    • CommentAuthorRenThing
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2011
     (9573.2)
    @jmmurrow

    Purely morale and vote-based reasons. PP is one of the largest providers of abortions across the nation and that's all they see. Yes, PP provides all of those other services but because they provide abortions, they must go. There is no room for both, as evidenced by several reps saying they'd totally vote to fund PP if they only stopped those pesky abortions.

    Additionally, one can argue that it's further war on the par that the GOP seems so into these days as evidenced by the recent budget the House GOP put forward; cut most of the programs that are supposed to go toward helping those people who are low-income, such as Head Start, but don't touch the defense spending at all.
    • CommentAuthorDC
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2011
     (9573.3)
    abortions make up less than 2% of what they do
    Facts don’t matter to Fox Ne… I mean, republicans. They will say Planned Parenthood promotes abortion and that’s reason enough for the GOP’s hard line to want to kill it.
    Not quite related but here is an interesting article about deceiving Christian pregnancy centers I read last week. In it there’s a testimony of someone who went to PP and got all sort of “keep the baby, don’t abort!!!”.
    • CommentAuthorFan
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2011
     (9573.4)
    > My question is: why?

    Wasn't it part of a bill to reduce government spending?

    Are you asking why anyone might want to reduce US government spending? Are you aware that there's a budget deficit/debt, and that some people don't like being taxed?
    • CommentAuthorRenThing
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2011
     (9573.5)
    @Fan

    To say that it is simply a matter of trimming the budget is a bit disingenuous, especially when the defunding of PP was it's own bill separate of the budget proposal.
    • CommentAuthorFan
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2011
     (9573.6)
    > To say that it is simply a matter of trimming the budget is a bit disingenuous

    There's nothing to stop you seeing ulterior or pseudo-religious motives; and, fair enough, deciding what to spend money on is a 'value judgement', after all.

    > ... defunding of PP was it's own bill separate of the budget proposal

    Is it? I just saw headlines like, "House of Representatives has proposed cutting the entire $317 million program of aid for family planning, known as Title X, in a 2011 spending bill that is expected to pass by the weekend".

    So I thought it might be about spending.
    • CommentAuthorjmmurrow
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2011 edited
     (9573.7)
    Just today, after posting this, I found a poster at my school claiming that abortion is the leading cause of death amoung African Americans. And that inclues heart disease, cancer, cerebrovascular disease, accidents, homicides, suicides AND diabetes COMBINED! They also invoked Martin Luther King jr., which made it all the more classey.
    • CommentAuthorFan
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2011
     (9573.8)
    Incidentally: I may have mentioned this before, but this man (Brad Hicks) has a theory/story of how the Republicans came to be aligned with the Religious Right and conversely how some Churches (in the States) became aligned with the Republicans i.e. the anti-socialist plutocrats:

    Part 1 - "False Gospel" - http://bradhicks.livejournal.com/118585.html
    Part 2 - "Anti-communist" - http://bradhicks.livejournal.com/118805.html
    Part 3 - "Republican Gospel" - http://bradhicks.livejournal.com/119283.html
    Part 4 - "Birth control" - http://bradhicks.livejournal.com/119661.html
    Part 5 - http://bradhicks.livejournal.com/119950.html
    • CommentAuthorStefanJ
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2011
     (9573.9)
    @Fan: ". . . and that some people don't like being taxed?"

    What?

    Jeez, dude, I honestly didn't know. Why didn't you say something earlier?
  1.  (9573.10)
    The point of defunding Planned Parenthood is to rally Mormons, Catholics and Evangelicals together against an entity they all dislike. If the GOP doesn’t throw them some meat now and then the evangelical leaders might slip up and and start calling the religious minorities the Whore of Babylon. They used to do it with gay marriage but the GOP is losing that issue and moving back to abortion.

    So I thought it might be about spending.

    Only indirectly. The big attack on spending will come when they start hashing out the budget in public next month. This one is a religious thing. If we had a trillion-dollar surplus the GOP would still go after Planned Parenthood.
    • CommentAuthorRenThing
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2011
     (9573.11)
    @Fan

    Are you aware that there's a budget deficit/debt, and that some people don't like being taxed?

    Some people don't like the fact that the government gives money to anyone that isn't them. I don't like the fact that so much of my tax money goes to defense spending to be used on wars and intelligence gathering methods that I don't approve of but that's how the government spends the money. Most people simply refer to that as life.

    There's nothing to stop you seeing ulterior or pseudo-religious motives; and, fair enough, deciding what to spend money on is a 'value judgement', after all.

    Well, when Pence is framing it the way he does it's easy to say that it's a morale issue and not just a financial one. Also considering that the text of the bill is purely about abortion and not at all about the budget, yeah, I'd say anyone claiming this is just about taxes and money is either deluded or making excuses. It is merely an attempt to make abortions harder to get by making them more costly.
  2.  (9573.12)
    Speaking of gay marriage... Obama Whitehouse declares Amendment 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional & refuse to defend it in court it any longer. Cue xtianfuckwit screams in 3,2,1... and the inevitable knock-on effect of them pushing even harder with their anti-woman agenda.
  3.  (9573.13)
    Look, the right and the right leaning libertarians have been engaging in a culture war with everyone not them for quite some time now. It's just this year they've been far more open about it. To hell with creeping Sharia, you got creeping Dark Ages going on.

    They've been able to do this because only the yahoos that would vote for them are the only ones to get off their asses and vote. Moderates and liberals tend to stay at home and then complain when the big business/ Jebus-loving minority put one of their meat puppets into power. You get the democracy you deserve. So if this and what's going on in Wisconsin pisses you off, make damned sure that you and everyone you know gets into the voting booth the next time one opens up.

    And if you're the type of person who agrees with the defunding of Planned Parenthood: You are clueless dolt and I have no respect for your opinion.
    • CommentAuthorRenThing
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2011
     (9573.14)
    Let's please not turn this into a troll fest. If we want to have discussion, great, but let's leave the insults at home lest Ariana and Warren bring the eels.
    • CommentAuthorSBarrett
    • CommentTimeFeb 23rd 2011
     (9573.15)
    Why? Because they are opening drive through abortion centers in Minnesota!

    Or well...not really...but Michele Bachmann would like everyone to think that they do.

    My tax dollars go to all sorts of things I might not care for. Too bad. That's how life and taxes work.
    • CommentAuthorjonah
    • CommentTimeFeb 25th 2011
     (9573.16)
    What bugs me more is that they are cutting funding to early childhood education programs at the same time. Education has positive effects against most of the "moral" issues republicans have and beyond. Even just being evilly pragmatic, these programs help create more productive workers. I wonder what their long term goal is?
  4.  (9573.17)
    I suspect their long term goal is to have their cake, eat it, and blame the lower class when it's gone.
    • CommentAuthorArgos
    • CommentTimeFeb 27th 2011
     (9573.18)
    Are you asking why anyone might want to reduce US government spending? Are you aware that there's a budget deficit/debt, and that some people don't like being taxed?


    So the House's logical solution for the deficit is to defund Planned Parenthood but to continue to allow the Pentagon to fund NASCAR? It's also been shown that Planned Parenthood more likely saves the government money by helping to reduce the number of unwanted and teen pregnancies. So, no, this isn't about saving money because of our deficit, it's about trying to get rid of anything that is pro-choice :/ Planned Parenthood provides an incredible amount of help to people that need it, whether it's about sexual health or just taking care of your body (they saved my friend's life a few years back when her kidney's were failing and she couldn't afford the care she needed because she didn't have health insurance at the time, during the time in between having graduated from college and getting a secure job).
    •  
      CommentAuthorJay Kay
    • CommentTimeFeb 27th 2011
     (9573.19)
    From what I understand, Planned Parenthood gets most of their funding through private means and donations--any damages from pulling the government funds would be minimal.

    Really, this is just the Republican-run House wanting to appear to be "budget slashers" by taking out the minimal funding while still appealing to their base.
  5.  (9573.20)
    Even just being evilly pragmatic, these programs help create more productive workers. I wonder what their long term goal is?

    The 20th century brought all these brown people into America. The goal is to undo the 20th century, or run the country in the ground by consistently doing nothing that can be interpreted as domestically or diplomatically advantageous -- whichever is achieved first. Some people's vision of "win the future" is the return of Jim Crow, being at war with Spain, and cholera outbreaks.

    This isn't a budget issue. There just isn't a very good fiscal argument for defunding Planned Parenthood. While the argument that Planned Parenthood is good for the economy isn't air-tight, but is reasonable enough. I don't have time to link, and anyway most statistics on the issue end up being disputable, but Americans who give birth later tend to end up being more educated and make more money. More personal income means more tax revenue. Also, I don't have time to link-scrawl on this one either, but we can take a pretty safe guess that children born of younger parents end up in prison more often, and this country already pays too much for prison. Reproductive empowerment in general is probably good for the American economy.

    Speaking of probably debatable statistics, funding for contraception is more efficient than other methods for reducing carbon emissions:
    The report concludes that when taken purely as a method of reducing carbon emissions, family planning is far more cost-effective than the current leading low-carbon technologies.

    Between 2010 and 2050 each $7 spent on basic family planning can reduce emissions more than a ton; to achieve that same level of reduction using low-carbon tech would on average cost $32 per ton.

    For more specific comparison, wind power would cost $24/ton, solar $51/ton, carbon capture and storage $57-83/ton.

    Another thing is that Roe repeal-workarounds are within pattern for Republicans in state legislatures right now, and this just falls into that pattern, sorry. Like the bill here in Texas which Perry has just declared an emergency item that "mandates that a woman seeking an abortion first view a sonogram, hear a verbal description of the image and listen to the fetal heartbeat." Wow! It's just like when the budget's tight in a real family, the first thing you do is mandate verbal descriptions of sonograms.

This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.