Girl Scouts distribute pro-abortion Planned Parenthood Sex Guide at UN meeting

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Disposable Heart

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 99.6%
    246   1   1
    Apr 18, 2008
    5,807
    99
    Greenfield, IN
    Ok, another question. Does a 30 week baby have the right to life? Follow up: If so, should that right to life be protected?

    Seeing as I was hoping to stay away from that arguement of abortion, but I will state the views: Its not MY decision. If it was, I would follow my views on that subject. Personally, I believe in the use of contraceptives and pills. I do not believe in ramming a coat hanger (or medical variant of) and going nuts. Prevention, in other words. First term abort is acceptable in my book. Once again though, it is NOT my decision to make that choice. Not yours, not mine, not anyone's other than the corpus who made that baby.
     

    ATOMonkey

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 15, 2010
    7,635
    48
    Plainfield
    I understand what you're saying.

    My position is that the Liberty and Life of the unborn child should at least be considered.

    What is the practical difference between a 30 week abortion, and allowing a 30 week premature baby to expire from neglect after birth?

    At what point does the baby become his/her own person?
     

    dross

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 27, 2009
    8,699
    48
    Monument, CO
    ATO: I do not support late term abortions, however, I also support people's choice to do so and will FIGHT to the death to support people's right to choice. Shoving agendas down other's throats (not saying you are) is the mark of someone who is wearing two masks politically: in other words: Many so called "liberty" lovers are hunky dory for freedom, until it is something that they don't like., then they turn into cask smashing tea toddlers of old who are hypocrites and base their unintelligible arguements on fairy tales filled with even more hypocracies and pathos laden imagery..). :dunno:


    Your argument ignores the other side's major premise. This is one of the problems with this debate, the premeses upon which the arguments rest. Your argument leaps over what is most pertinent and takes place on ground where you are most comfortable. In doing so, you miss the point.

    If I am against abortion because I truly believe that a fetus is a human being with the full rights of a human being, the choice argument becomes moot. In fact, it would be YOU who is making the anti-liberty argument, because you'd be defending the choice of one over the life of the other.

    If you believe a fetus is a human being with the same rights as a born child, and that abortion is a personal choice, then you either must also believe that a parent should be able to kill an already born child.

    If you believe that a fetus is not a human being with the same rights as a born child, then it's understandable that you would believe abortion is a persona choice.

    It is an unfair argument, however, to assign your own premise to the anti-abortion position, then based on the premise you assigned, to then declare the position as anti-liberty.

    You must first make your case that a fetus is not a person.
     
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Nov 19, 2009
    2,191
    36
    Central Indiana
    How many of the people participating in this thread actually READ THE BROCHURE? The word "abortion" appears three times - and in the context of one possible option for teens who are HIV positive and have an unexpected pregnancy.
     

    Disposable Heart

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 99.6%
    246   1   1
    Apr 18, 2008
    5,807
    99
    Greenfield, IN
    While the other side does have a compelling arguement, I take solace in probably the most simple and direct arguement in regards to abortion: The parent has the choice as it is a "consequence" of their action. Finding liberty and drawing a line at what point does that fetus become eligbile for liberty of choice/right to life is difficult. Alot of the arguements that I have seen are based only on religion or sketchy science.

    I understand the arguement against, but like religion and some political issues, some people cannot be swayed. Unlike some others, ATO and Dross offer VERY realistic and convicing, not to mention fact based and direct answers to philosophical questions. I appreciate your arguements the most.

    But in cases like this, where the "well, if this is this, then" or "what about..." questions can pop up very quick, I choose my heart over these. Granted, some people cannot live unless they have pointed out another's ignorance or foolhardy decisions, I need straight, simplistic and realistic choices and decisions in my life. A thousand different outcomes can come of this arguement, but all arguements based on life are inevitably based on feelings and passions. I stick by my answer as I feel the entire arguement is based in core on feelings.
     

    ATOMonkey

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 15, 2010
    7,635
    48
    Plainfield
    How many of the people participating in this thread actually READ THE BROCHURE? The word "abortion" appears three times - and in the context of one possible option for teens who are HIV positive and have an unexpected pregnancy.

    Just read it. You may have taken something different from it, but to me it slanted towards encouraging sex, while give very little attention to the negative consequences.

    While they are discussed, the pamphlet seems to marginalize the risk.
     

    Booya

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    44   0   0
    Aug 26, 2010
    1,316
    48
    Fort Fun
    rambone;1500003 In New York said:

    Correct that is no accident. I do not mean for this comment to sound racist though some may interpret it that way. The people having those abortions, didn't get pregnant by accident, they got pregnant by lack of preparedness or lack of education.

    The statistic, I don't believe, has everything to do with PP. It exists due to lack of protection and maturity. I find it hard to believe that the women that produce that statistic opt out of using protection or taking precautions because they are thinking "It's all good, if I get pregnant I can just hit the local PP and get this all fixed up.".
     

    ATOMonkey

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 15, 2010
    7,635
    48
    Plainfield
    While the other side does have a compelling arguement, I take solace in probably the most simple and direct arguement in regards to abortion: The parent has the choice as it is a "consequence" of their action. Finding liberty and drawing a line at what point does that fetus become eligbile for liberty of choice/right to life is difficult. Alot of the arguements that I have seen are based only on religion or sketchy science.

    I understand the arguement against, but like religion and some political issues, some people cannot be swayed. Unlike some others, ATO and Dross offer VERY realistic and convicing, not to mention fact based and direct answers to philosophical questions. I appreciate your arguements the most.

    But in cases like this, where the "well, if this is this, then" or "what about..." questions can pop up very quick, I choose my heart over these. Granted, some people cannot live unless they have pointed out another's ignorance or foolhardy decisions, I need straight, simplistic and realistic choices and decisions in my life. A thousand different outcomes can come of this arguement, but all arguements based on life are inevitably based on feelings and passions. I stick by my answer as I feel the entire arguement is based in core on feelings.

    I can respect that.

    The world in which we live demands that we draw borders around those feelings though and make clear delineations as to where they stop and start.

    Yes, it is a very fuzzy line as to where life begins. Much of it is philosophical, but much is also fact based.

    I err on the side of caution regarding the preservation of Life which is tantamount to any preservation of Liberty.

    One can not be free if one is not alive.
     

    ATOMonkey

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 15, 2010
    7,635
    48
    Plainfield
    I won't ask if you have children or not, as I don't think it should matter.

    You did speak of feelings though. I just have to say that my feelings changed GREATLY before having children, after having children, and after having lost a child.

    So, yours might as well. Just something to consider. :)
     

    Bondhead88

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Oct 26, 2010
    1,223
    38
    Currently In Toronto
    This is a few months old, but I don't think anybody caught this one.

    Regardless of your thoughts about abortion, this guide is way over the top to distribute to Girl Scouts. And it is not right that they be used as pawns in the middle of any political agenda.

    You can view the PDF of the sex guide by clicking the link.

    Anything that mixes Planned Parenthood, the United Nations, & Girl Scouts... is a recipe for EPIC FAILURE from the start.


    Girl Scouts Distribute Planned Parenthood Sex Guide at United Nations Meeting

    Happy, Healthy and Hot

    ippf-brochure-happyhealthyhot-425sd03172010.jpg



    Yup, they think they have a right to our children, without our consent.
     

    rambone

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    18,745
    83
    'Merica
    Since the Girl Scouts is an organization that I have no say in, I do not have a say in their programs or pushes.

    I just wondered what your thoughts were, from a perspective of a Planned Parenthood supporter and donor. The pamphlet seems to really push sex and is aimed at kids.


    Your arguement is based in over 80 year old quotes from someone who no longer lives and the current organization's presidents have likely disparaged. I understand your beliefs on the matter, albeit dated, but to further push the arguement based on old information is akin to argueing that tobacco is clearly good for us, let's get out kids to smoke too.

    Show MODERN evidence (and not correlative stuff that has no true backing other than statistical coincidence) of racial malcontent that Planned Parenthood has NOW (not over 80 years ago). :dunno:

    So Planned Parenthood spent its first few decades being a black-hating genocide machine, and then Margaret Sanger died and something changed? If so, what? The only thing I can see is this; They used to openly advocate killing minorities, and now they butter them up and "extend their services" to them as often as possible. I gave you an article that referred to CDC numbers, showing that in their most successful areas, they are convincing black mothers to kill their babies SIXTY PERCENT of the time. Is there no other criteria for racism, other than speaking to it overtly?


    Correct that is no accident. I do not mean for this comment to sound racist though some may interpret it that way. The people having those abortions, didn't get pregnant by accident, they got pregnant by lack of preparedness or lack of education.

    The statistic, I don't believe, has everything to do with PP. It exists due to lack of protection and maturity. I find it hard to believe that the women that produce that statistic opt out of using protection or taking precautions because they are thinking "It's all good, if I get pregnant I can just hit the local PP and get this all fixed up.".

    Lack of preparedness and education would result in a high birth rate.

    Marketing their "services" results in a high abortion rate.
     
    Last edited:

    Bondhead88

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Oct 26, 2010
    1,223
    38
    Currently In Toronto
    I just wondered what your thoughts were, from a perspective of a Planned Parenthood supporter and donor. The pamphlet seems to really push sex and is aimed at kids.




    So Planned Parenthood spent its first few decades being a black-hating genocide machine, and then Margaret Sanger died and something changed? If so, what? The only thing I can see is this; They used to openly advocate killing minorities, and now they butter them up and "extend their services" to them as often as possible. I gave you an article that referred to CDC numbers, showing that in their most successful areas, they are convincing black mothers to kill their babies SIXTY PERCENT of the time. Is there no other criteria for racism, other than speaking to it overtly?




    Lack of preparedness and education would result in a high birth rate.

    Marketing their "services" results in a high abortion rate.
    good points!

    I got a kick out of the comment

    I understand your beliefs on the matter, albeit dated
     

    Arthur Dent

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Sep 21, 2010
    1,546
    38
    Just read the pamphlet material. I took from it "Be responsible and use your head. Don't let people pressure you into doing something you don't feel is right."

    The Girl Scouts of America is seperate but affiliated with the World Association of Girl Scouts and Girl Guides.
     

    Site Supporter

    INGO Supporter

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    530,636
    Messages
    9,955,717
    Members
    54,897
    Latest member
    jojo99
    Top Bottom