Planned Parenthood will stop taking reimbursements for fetal tissue.

[GodFearinGunTotin]

The rules are in place to attempt to keep discussion on a civil track. No more or less than that. Curse filters are required and naked avatars are verboten for obvious reasons.
This topic is a hot button pusher and some folks are just to sensitive to participate. Religion was put back on the board in hopes that the membership could embrace the topic and keep things in line. For the most part that has been the case

I suggest those of tender sensibility's refrain.

I also suggest that this topic be viewed and discussed for exactly what it is......a real part of the world we live in. Good bad or indifferent we can all use common sense and stay on track. Put the proper social filters in place and carry on.

Just like a radio that is blaring out an uncomfortable song, way to easy to change the station.

-CM-

Yep.

 

[bwframe]

Putting the murdered babies aside, what about the obvious corruption taking place in this gov't funded business? Why would said business turn tail and turn down income for this "legit" sale unless there is a huge problem?

It looks like to me this move is an admission of guilt?

 

[PaulF]

I thought everyone had insurance now, and with few exceptions had to cover birth control.

ObamaCare is a mystery to me. I have no idea how many people are really covered my medical insurance, or what their plans actually cover. I struggle enough to understand my own non-ObamaCare plan.

I do know that a woman can walk into Planned Parenthood, receive a pelvic exam and PAP smear and leave with their month's supply of oral contraceptives for very little out-of-pocket (Nothing, in some cases).

I know that a proper annual exam can detect cervical cancer, and that can save a woman's fertility...or her life, and I know that this is a service that Planned Parenthood does provide.

I do know that proper use of birth control helps to lower abortion rates. Planned Parenthood provides the medical exam necessary to receive a prescription for the most popular type of birth control in the country, and they also dispense it on-site.

If you value these things so highly, find a suitable charity to donate your money to. The rest of us don't want to pay for this.

I can understand that. There is plenty I don't want my tax dollars going toward, as well.

 

[skulhedface]

They're not the only provider available to those in need.

Free/Low-Cost/Sliding-Scale Clinics - NeedyMeds

Lots of other options for those that need low/no cost care.

On a side note, glad to see the topic isn't completely forbidden anymore.

 

[Lowe0]

Putting the murdered babies aside, what about the obvious corruption taking place in this gov't funded business? Why would said business turn tail and turn down income for this "legit" sale unless there is a huge problem?

It looks like to me this move is an admission of guilt?

Not necessarily. From a dollars and cents perspective, it may just be cheaper to give up that money rather than pay someone to continue fighting over it.

 

[17 squirrel]

If you value these things so highly, find a suitable charity to donate your money to. The rest of us don't want to pay for this.

I mean can you really be that niave ?
Do you drink milk ? Peanuts ? And the list goes on and on.
An agricultural subsidy is a governmental subsidy paid to farmers and agribusinesses to supplement their income, manage the supply of agricultural commodities, and influence the cost and supply of such commodities. Examples of such commodities include; wheat, feed grains (grain used as fodder, such as maize or corn, sorghum, barley, and oats), cotton, milk, rice, peanuts, sugar, tobacco, oilseeds such as soybeans, and meat products such as beef, pork, and lamb and mutton. Such subsidies are extremely controversial, both because of their complex effects and because of their political origins, which involve heavy lobbying from groups representing the interests of agribusiness. And that's just for starters, there is 100's of billions of dollars spent on more subsidies here in the States.
But that's a straw man argument to.

 

[bwframe]

...From a dollars and cents perspective, it may just be cheaper to give up that money rather than pay someone to continue fighting over it.

Why not give up the Fed money and be done with it all together?

 

[PaulF]

Putting the murdered babies aside, what about the obvious corruption taking place in this gov't funded business? Why would said business turn tail and turn down income for this "legit" sale unless there is obviously a huge problem?

It is this type of rhetoric exactly that gets these threads closed.

While I understand that people on this forum have strong feelings about abortion, it must be clearly stated: abortion is not murder.

Murder has a definition in State and Federal law, and (at least for now) it does not include abortion. Women who have abortions are not murderers, and neither are the doctors that performs the abortion at the woman's request. Not now, and for good reason.

There was a time in this country when we treated people who aborted a pregnancy as criminals. It wasn't successful, as it only drove abortion underground and made it more dangerous for those women who felt they needed to end a pregnancy. Treating abortion as murder doesn't "save babies" it kills pregnant women.

So, I'm going to ask you all to stop this.

If you want to talk about abortion, fine. I'll entertain it...so long as it stays relevant and adult. If you want to keep talking about murdering babies, we won't be having a discussion about abortion on INGO.

Can everybody be on board with that?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

It is this type of rhetoric exactly that gets these threads closed.

While I understand that people on this forum have strong feelings about abortion, it must be clearly stated: abortion is not murder.

Murder has a definition in State and Federal law, and (at least for now) it does not include abortion. Women who have abortions are not murderers, and neither are the doctors that performs the abortion at the woman's request. Not now, and for good reason.

There was a time in this country when we treated people who aborted a pregnancy as criminals. It wasn't successful, as it only drove abortion underground and made it more dangerous for those women who felt they needed to end a pregnancy. Treating abortion as murder doesn't "save babies" it kills pregnant women.

So, I'm going to ask you all to stop this.

If you want to talk about abortion, fine. I'll entertain it...so long as it stays relevant and adult. If you want to keep talking about murdering babies, we won't be having a discussion about abortion on INGO.

Can everybody be on board with that?

Yes, it's murder. It just is. Close the thread and/or ban me but your strongly worded, mod-powered post, does not make universal truth.

 

[Fargo]

It is this type of rhetoric exactly that gets these threads closed.

While I understand that people on this forum have strong feelings about abortion, it must be clearly stated: abortion is not murder.

Murder has a definition in State and Federal law, and (at least for now) it does not include abortion. Women who have abortions are not murderers, and neither are the doctors that performs the abortion at the woman's request. Not now, and for good reason.

There was a time in this country when we treated people who aborted a pregnancy as criminals. It wasn't successful, as it only drove abortion underground and made it more dangerous for those women who felt they needed to end a pregnancy. Treating abortion as murder doesn't "save babies" it kills pregnant women.

So, I'm going to ask you all to stop this.

If you want to talk about abortion, fine. I'll entertain it...so long as it stays relevant and adult. If you want to keep talking about murdering babies, we won't be having a discussion about abortion on INGO.

Can everybody be on board with that?

no

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Requesting thread close. There are a couple of particularly poison members here (on both sides), and if no one is going to warn/mod them out... it's going to continue downhill.

I got the news out. You're all now up-to-speed on the PP situation. Those that had to inject their politics - Thanks. Thanks a ton.

 

[PaulF]

Yes, it's murder. It just is. Close the thread and/or ban me but your strongly worded, mod-powered post, does not make universal truth.

Banned...wut?

no

So...just so I understand: rather than lose one rhetorical arrow from your quiver, you'd like to close the discussion altother?

 

[Lowe0]

Why not give up the Fed money and be done with it all together?

Stop accepting the only form of payment some of their patients can offer? Not going to keep the doors open very long that way....

 

[17 squirrel]

Requesting thread close. There are a couple of particularly poison members here (on both sides), and if no one is going to warn/mod them out... it's going to continue downhill.

I got the news out. You're all now up-to-speed on the PP situation. Those that had to inject their politics - Thanks. Thanks a ton.

I don't know why you think this was not going to happen again, it happens everytime you do a PP post..
Weren't you warned awhile back about this very topic ?

 

[ArcadiaGP]

edit: not worth it.

 

[Fargo]

So...just so I understand: rather than lose one rhetorical arrow from your quiver, you'd like to close the discussion altother?

No. I am not now, nor will I ever be, on board with allowing you to define terms for me. I define murder as the intentional killing of an innocent person. I have no interest in allowing you to dictate otherwise just as I have no interest in some 1970s lawyers in black robes trying to do so either.

 

[PaulF]

No. I am not now, nor will I ever be, on board with allowing you to define terms for me. I define murder as the intentional killing of an innocent person. I have no interest in allowing you to dictate otherwise just as I have no interest in some 1970s lawyers in black robes trying to do so either.

OK. Your definition means nothing. To anyone.

That is the point I am trying to make.

 

[Fargo]

OK. Your definition means nothing. To anyone.

That is the point I am trying to make.

I am unclear where you get off thinking that you can decide what my definition means to me or anyone else?

 

[17 squirrel]

I started a post the other day about business owners personal opinions being posted on the internet and social media and what if any is the fallout on hot topics.
This is one of those times and topics I was thinking about.

 

[Libertarian01]

It is this type of rhetoric exactly that gets these threads closed.

While I understand that people on this forum have strong feelings about abortion, it must be clearly stated: abortion is not murder.

Murder has a definition in State and Federal law, and (at least for now) it does not include abortion. Women who have abortions are not murderers, and neither are the doctors that performs the abortion at the woman's request. Not now, and for good reason.

There was a time in this country when we treated people who aborted a pregnancy as criminals. It wasn't successful, as it only drove abortion underground and made it more dangerous for those women who felt they needed to end a pregnancy. Treating abortion as murder doesn't "save babies" it kills pregnant women.

So, I'm going to ask you all to stop this.

If you want to talk about abortion, fine. I'll entertain it...so long as it stays relevant and adult. If you want to keep talking about murdering babies, we won't be having a discussion about abortion on INGO.

Can everybody be on board with that?

Paul,

With respect, I believe that the issue is how we define the value of life and death.

I for one do not value "life" in the slightest. What I value is personhood, or rather, the grey matter between our ears that makes each and every one of us a unique being. A unique "person" who can think, smile, laugh, cry and be different from every other "person" who also has functioning grey matter between their ears.

So, with this as my test (ie. personhood) I do believe that some abortions have been potential murders while others have not. However, some of those have been justified, as in the life of the mother was threatened. That is certainly not all, but some few measurable in number.

However, the destruction of less than a few thousand cells (or maybe even a few million) does not come close to a murder. This is where I disagree with the zealots. Some extreme zealots consider the morning after pill an immoral act, whereas I simply do not. But I do admit that if a fetus has developed to a certain point where a definitive personality has formed, then I do have an issue with abortions that lack extremely justifiable reason, such as the life of the mother being endangered.

It is my belief that Planned Parenthood is simply trying to deflect the negative press by abolishing a practice that causes so much controversy in the first place. They could have totally negated this issue had they laid down organizational rules for parts value nationally, and taken local "negotiations" out of the equation altogether. Alas, they did not and some very disturbing, very edited video was released.

That said, I don't see how we have become so entrenched on both sides to not be able to defund them of direct federal grants. It was congress that defunded the Vietnam War with both republicans (a majority in the house) and democrats cutting military spending. Back then republicans and democrats alike could work together. Today...?

We need to also understand that Planned Parenthood gets money for providing legitimate medical services, not referring to abortions here, and simply billing medicaid for the performance of those services just as any other medical provider. Those should not, in my opinion, be threatened in any way. If a pap smear costs X dollars at another place there is no reason Planned Parenthood shouldn't also receive X dollars for it.

In the end, the extreme of one side or the other will never be happy, and the struggle will go on and on.

Regards,

Doug