Planned Parenthood defunded in NH!

The BBQ Pit
121

But you do realize that people are, as a group, irresponsible? I mean, it’s irresponsible to drink and drive, to not mow your lawn properly, to forget to pay your bill before the late fee hits–but people do those things, because human nature doesn’t always lend itself to the most responsible adult decision-making. Moralizing about what SHOULD happen doesn’t change what DOES happen.

I’m in a decent-sized town, and it is one of the very few options available to me. It is, in fact, the only healthcare I get on a regular basis because in spite of working two jobs, I can’t afford health insurance. And I’m one of the lucky ones–at least I have my jobs. Good thing, because I still have to pay for pills.

When Indiana attempted to shut them down, their bleeding heart supporters did exactly that–they supported the local PP until the Fed stepped in and put a stop to the shut-down. It’s not a matter of whether or not PP offers abortions–it’s about Medicaid disbursment on a Federal level, and I expect that NH will have the same experience that Indiana did.

122

It’s taken years to get men to realize that yes, they DO have an option for birth control. And it’s taken YEARS to drill “use a condom every time” into the heads of young people. Not only do we have fewer unwanted children, but we have fewer STDs. I see both of these as desirable things.

All it takes is ONE instance of unprotected sex to result in an unwanted baby, an STD, or both. Anyone who insists that everyone should just abstain from sex until marriage and then be monogamous is living in a dream world. Humans don’t work that way. And it’s not just the fornicators who are living with the consequences. It’s the people around them. The faithful spouse of a philanderer might very well contract an STD from the one who strayed.

Condoms are cheap and fairly easy to use. We should be delighted that we have such a cheap, easy solution to some thorny problems.

123

Q: What’s the difference between Somalia and Minnesota?

A: One of them currently has no functioning central government and is being destabilized by religious fundamentalists and anti-government groups partly funded by wealthy people outside its borders.

The other one is a country in Africa.

124

How is it being subsidized - Medicaid?

Well, it is the woman who is getting all of the handouts for the most part…

How many years are you willing to go without sex?

Um, what about those of us who never want children? That is another flaw in the anti-choice, anti-birth control “logic” - there are married, monogamous couples who don’t want children, and there are married, monogamous couples who don’t want any more children. But for some reason, they aren’t supposed to have access to birth control.

125

Oh, but marriage is a sacred pact meant for the sole purpose of making babies!!! :rolleyes:

126

They’ve shifted their focus, they are losing on the national level, but at the state level there is enough room for a determined minority to have its way. The lack of citizen involvement in national government is a disgrace, but at the state level, it is a joke. That could change, of course, and this might do it.

127

Having sex is a way of having fun, reducing tension, and in some cases reinforcing emotional bonding. If periodic sexual release keeps someone from becoming impossibly unpleasant or in some cases outright sadistic in their behavior, manner and attitudes, society (civility) does benefit from them having sex with a willing, legal partner.

128

When you put it that way, its less like a mercy fuck and more like a civic responsibility.

129

See, this thread, topic, and especially the responses of OMGABC and Blood Turnip characterize what is wrong with the GOP these days. I am sympathetic to many of the conservative principles espoused by Republicans, but they have lost their way and descended into madness.

They are the party of no, the party of no taxes, the party of no compromise, but especially the party of NO SOLUTIONS. You ask the GOP what they stand for and they proudly and emphatically declare that they stand for freedom, for lower taxes, for gun rights, and for lower taxes. But then you dig deeper:

Interviewer: “Mr. GOP person, medical costs are spiraling out of control; what is your plan to for this?”
Mr. GOP: “We will repeal Obamacare.”
Interviewer: “And the higher costs?”
Mr. GOP: “You’ll pay them. But at least you will be free from paying insurance.”
Interviewer: “Millions of Americans are out of work, losing there homes, and there is no hope in sight, what are your plans to address this?”
Mr. GOP: “We need to cut government benefits, especially Medicare and Medicaid and hold the line on taxes. This will solve the problem.”
Interviewer: “How?”
Mr. GOP: “It will free up capital to be invested in growing markets, you know, in China.”
Interviewer: “The economy sucks, the financial markets are jittery, banks are not lending and people are having a hard time getting credit, what are you going to do to address this problem?”
Mr. GOP: “We need to cut government benefits, especially Medicare and Medicaid and hold the line on taxes. This, plus we need to make everybody believe that we are going to call the full faith and credit of the US government into question; this will strengthen the markets.”
Interviewer: “OK. It has been widely acknowledged the that the yearly US government deficit is unsustainable and that we need to reduce it by about 4 trillion dollars to avert disaster; what should we do here?”
Mr. GOP: “Well we should cut government spending by 4 Trillion.”
Interviewer: "And if this should prove politically impossible because 60% of the populace and ~50% of elected officials think it goes too far?
Mr. GOP: “We should cut government spending by 4 Trillion.”
Interviewer: “What if the 60% of the populace and ~50% of elected officials
were willing to cut government spending by 3 Trillion and raise revenue (closing tax loopholes and letting 2% in tax cuts on the wealthiest 10% expire) by 1 Trillion, what then?”
Mr. GOP: “We should cut government spending by 4 Trillion. And if I don’t get my way on this I am just going to run away like a little pussy and do nothing.”

:rolleyes:

I remember an event several years ago, you know, in the golden age when Republicans held both houses and the presidency and were spending like drunken monkeys (starting two wars while lowering taxes, passing medicare D, abolishing the Pay-go rules; you know, those golden days of yore). Anyway, the CDC found that they could save the U.S. billions of dollars (BILLIONS, with a B) by funding immunization programs in Mexico. You see, the US health system was spending Billions of dollars treating many thousands of people for diseases that should be controllable with vaccines, especially since our psuedo-mandatory vaccination programs in the country had pretty much eliminated the disease. Puzzled why this was happening, they dug deeper and found that the diseases were coming in with immigrants from Mexico.

Now, we can all agree, at least for the sake of this argument, that illegal immigration is a BAD thing and that more needs to be done to stop it. That said, I believe we should also cut spending when possible. With this, it seems like a good idea to address the whole disease problem concurrently to trying to address the immigration problem (which could prove difficult to solve). To whit, let’s stop spending Billions of taxpayer (MY FUCKING MONEY!) dollars treating measles (a disease which we thought was wiped out in the fifties)! The CDC noted that, for a couple of million dollars, they could set up a vaccination program in Mexico, eliminating the disease in that country while improving the life of millions and saving the taxpayers buckets of money. I bet you can guess how the GOP reacted that that proposal. :rolleyes:

There is no pragmatism left in the GOP. No fucking cost/benefit analysis. What happened to the cold, logical, pragmatism of my Grandfather’s GOP? Defunding Planned Parenthood, the drug war, the refusal to make any compromises with the debt and revenue (taxes), the refusal to make any compromises with immigration, the list goes on and on…

The party of NO.

The GOP is intellectually bankrupt, kaput, OUT OF IDEAS. All they have left is ideology.

130

Are you trying to make OMG’s head asplode? Of COURSE everyone wants to be in a monogamous, heterosexual marriage! And to have lots of kids after they get married!

I’ve been married and monogamous for over 34 years now. Never wanted kids, but I wound up pregnant anyway (while using birth control) so you’re preaching to the choir here.

131

Yeesh, I just can’t let it go. The Republicans and the conservative right want to eliminate abortion; well and good, a noble endeavor and one that I support. But history has shown again and again that prohibition is one of the worst ways to do anything. Abortion used to be illegal and it still occurred at rates that are not much less than they are today.

So what do they do? Do they make a plan on the most effective way to lower the need for abortion and thus the rate? Make programs that are alternative for abortions: sex education including contraceptives, inexpensive or free medical care for young pregnant women and counseling on adoption or even support for young families? No. They close down the largest supplier of free and low cost contraceptives in the state. Fucking brilliant; that is a move that is sure to be successful. I can hear the abortion rate dropping from here in the Rockies.

Fucking ideologues. Morons.

132

It merely treats 3 million women a year with various services. Sure we don’t need it.

133

Fuck this shit, I feel like going out and having an abortion tomorrow. Who wants to join me?

134

Twenty-odd years too late, but thanks.

135

Stolen and facebooked.

136

First you’ve got to get fucked.

137

…Yes?

I just love this argument. Do you know what a false dichotomy is? I’m going to let you in on a little secret; it’s not a question of subsidizing one or the other. Just because you face an unplanned pregnancy doesn’t mean you’re going to end up on welfare. Anyway, just for shit’s and giggle’s, have you looked at the number of welfare recipients per state and compared that to the population of said state? If you had, you’d notice something odd. Generally speaking, Democratic/liberal states have a greater percentage of their population living off of welfare than do their Republican/conservative counterparts. For example, last I saw, California which houses about 13 - 16% of the U.S. population makes up about 50’ish% of all welfare recipients. Go figure. Liberalism run amok.

You know what I’ve found interesting about this forum? When you guys run out of meaningful arguments-- assuming you ever had one to begin with-- then you rely on faux wit. But I’ll bite.

What about Catholic Charities, run by the Catholic Church, which is the fifth largest charity in the U.S.? What about the Salvation Army, which is an evangelical organization, which is the 7th largest charity in the U.S.? What about the Adventist Health System, which is run by the 7th Day Adventists? What about Heartbeat International, CareNet, and the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates which service about 2M women per year? What about the plethora of local pro-life groups who offer free housing and free baby supplies? What about all those Conservative Christian churches who go out every week and provide food to the poor? Or are you going to continue to wear your rose colored glasses?

Anyway, let’s get down to the nitty gritty. It’s really Democrats/liberals who don’t much of care about those who are born. Sure, they like to advocate for all these nifty social programs that society can’t afford, but that’s easy to do when the cost of said programs tend to fall on someone else rather than yourself. You see, both in total dollars and as a percentage of their income, Republicans/conservatives tend to pay more in taxes than do Democrats/liberals. So when taxes go up as a result of increasing government spending on social programs, you don’t feel is as much as the other guy, yet when the other guy complains about it, you feel the need to mock him for it and tell him he doesn’t care about those born, even if he’s, on average, more generous than you (that is, he donates more of his income to charity and volunteers more often than you do). The liberal mindset is funny. Maybe one day I’ll seek to understand it (or my head will assplode trying).

(not caring about women)

I guarantee you can’t cite this, namely because it’s untrue. But humor me.

It doesn’t matter how many times this is said, it’s still false. It’s actually rather simple. Let me give you an example. Let’s say I have $3 and I’m going to use that $3 to buy me something to eat (no candy). You give me another $5 to buy food with, but you tell me that I can’t use that money on candy. I use the $5 you give me to buy food and the $3 I would have spent on food had you not given me any money to buy candy. Did I spend your money on candy? No. Did your money allow me to buy candy? Yes. It’s the same deal with PP and abortions. If Planned Parenthood is performing abortions, any money given to them facilitates their ability to do so in some way.

I hope you realize that Obama is trying to invigorate a core part of his base, because God knows with the economy the way it is he needs something to hang his hat on.

You were the one who insinuated that women can’t get low-cost contraceptives without Planned Parenthood. An assertion, mind you, which is patently absurd and downright laughable.

Services which aren’t exactly exclusive to Planned Parenthood.

138

Perhaps the GOP realized that the CDC, while undoubtedly sharp on the issue of disease eradication, wasn’t too sharp on the issue of political corruption, and further realized that the idea that they could set up an effective vaccination program in Mexico was unrealistic, because money and supplies sent for this purpose would be stolen, bribes required, and ultimately the program would cost more than planned and be less effective than planned.

Is that possible?

139

Well damn, when you put it like that, it sounds like we might as well just ship pallets of cash into Mexico. Lord knows that’s way more fiscally responsible.

140

No shit, dumbass.

:rolleyes:

[sub]Not to mention, you have to be pregnant. It’s called sarcasm.[/sub]