WH: Indiana Planned Parenthood Funding Cut Illegal

[Magneto]

Obama Administration Calls Indiana's Ban of Planned Parenthood Illegal - FoxNews.com

 

[E5RANGER375]

obamatard. he is a joke. he can take his disgraceful presidential opinions and keep them to himself. states rights mr dousch bag

 

[88GT]

Nullifcation is gaining traction. I just hope states can maintain the intestinal fortitude necessary to enforce it. Though when Texas of all places caves, I have to wonder about our chances for success.

 

[theweakerbrother]

Texas is weak. You can't even open carry there. The only thing you see a cowboy wear on his hip is a fancy cell phone.

I'm waiting for redneckmedic to come and choke me out for saying that.

But it's cool, he'll be able to revive me since he is a medic and all.

 

[ghunter]

This is the problem with taking federal money. As I love to say: When Mom and Dad pay for the wedding, they get to invite the guests.

 

[ATOMonkey]

The Federal Government can shove it. They created a program and forced the State to implement it, then they get pissed at how that is done. pound sand...

I wonder if the White House understands how the 10th works.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I'm taking down the stars and stripes and raising our State flag in its place.

 

[E5RANGER375]

BOOOO HOOOOO, the white house is crying because now their leaches on society who give the democrats votes cant no longer reproduce and get some things for free. which translates into .... hard working americans no longer have to pay for certain lazy americans crap. I wish we could get rid of all the freeloader programs!

The state of Indiana needs to tell the govt to kiss our butts!!! we all need to write the governor and our state reps and tell them this. I dont care what a court says either. if they dont like it then deploy the national guard and walk all the feds peacefully to the state border. we will do it on our own happily!

 

[eldirector]

Eventually the States need to suck it up, stop taking Federal money (yeah, I know its OUR money), and tell the Feds to pound sand. As long as the feds hold the purse strings, they will call the shots.

 

[Boiled Owl]

Eventually the States need to suck it up, stop taking Federal money (yeah, I know its OUR money), and tell the Feds to pound sand. As long as the feds hold the purse strings, they will call the shots.

Really suck it up and quit sending them money......that would get attention! Not income taxes but any other fees that they impose.

 

[jdhaines]

I actually really like and support planned parenthood...that said, the Fed should stay out of Indiana business. That got passed fair and square. As far as I'm concerned the people have spoken. Maybe it'll get changed in the future, maybe it won't. I hope we don't nix the funding on a good organization like PP and then keep funding bull**** stuff. If PP is just the first program on the chopping block to cut spending, then I say lets sharpen our pencil and start cutting.

 

[cosermann]

I actually really like and support planned parenthood...that said, the Fed should stay out of Indiana business. That got passed fair and square. As far as I'm concerned the people have spoken. ...

Yeah, that's really the point. Regardless of whether one supports Planned Parenthood or not, we have a right to decide how we spend our state's revenues.

BTW, I hope everyone's noticed by now how the White House only cites the law when it benefits them. Otherwise they ignore it. The rule of law means nothing to them.

Doesn't engender much respect for them or the law they claim to uphold.

 

[insanemonkey]

It is pretty childish to threaten to take away funding for other things, just because you don't like something that was passed at the state level.

It makes no sense. We don't like that you took away funding for something. So we will take away more funding for things we like to get back at you. Maybe we can use this to our advantage. Lets start passing a bunch of stuff that they don't like so they will stop spending our money.

 

[iwearcowboyboots]

Yeah, that's really the point. Regardless of whether one supports Planned Parenthood or not, we have a right to decide how we spend our state's revenues.

BTW, I hope everyone's noticed by now how the White House only cites the law when it benefits them. Otherwise they ignore it. The rule of law means nothing to them.

Doesn't engender much respect for them or the law they claim to uphold.

If it was truly about ending abortions, the state should have also cut all Medicare/Medicaid funding for hospitals and DR offices that provide similar services. Instead, this was a punishment to a few specific businesses in an attempt to grab votes. Plus, just think of all the monies that would have been saved if all of those hospitals (roughly 10% of hospitals offer abortion services) and the labs/clinics/etc owned by those hospital groups lost funds. But nevermind because this was simply about trying to close PP. That is why I would agree that it is bad legislation.

 

[88GT]

I actually really like and support planned parenthood...that said, the Fed should stay out of Indiana business. That got passed fair and square. As far as I'm concerned the people have spoken. Maybe it'll get changed in the future, maybe it won't. I hope we don't nix the funding on a good organization like PP and then keep funding bull**** stuff. If PP is just the first program on the chopping block to cut spending, then I say lets sharpen our pencil and start cutting.

You're (or anybody, I'm not singling you out specifically) free to support with word or deed or money whomever and whatever you desire. But using the Government (in any form) to take money from one person and give it to another that the former would not approve of having it should be wrong on all levels.

It should work this way for all entitlement programs which are nothing more than glorified charities funded at the point of gun.

 

[iwearcowboyboots]

It is pretty childish to threaten to take away funding for other things, just because you don't like something that was passed at the state level.

It makes no sense. We don't like that you took away funding for something. So we will take away more funding for things we like to get back at you. Maybe we can use this to our advantage. Lets start passing a bunch of stuff that they don't like so they will stop spending our money.

They won't stop spending our money, they will just redistribute it to those states who play by their rules. Weren't they trying to redistribute the high speed rail funds that some states refused?

 

[ATOMonkey]

I believe they still allowed money for abortions to Hospitals and Dr. Offices, in the event that an abortion will save the life of the mother.

Almost all abortion legislation was written this way prior to the RvW case. For example, abortion is illegal except in the event that the mother's health or life is at risk.

In this case, the issue was, abortion for convenience, from what I can tell.

Interesting fact, PP was originally founded as part of a progressive eugenics plan. The same people that PP was intended to eliminate now clamor for its services. Just interesting the way things work out.

I also agree that redistributive policies are wrong and should be done away.

 

[jdhaines]

Interesting fact, PP was originally founded as part of a progressive eugenics plan. The same people that PP was intended to eliminate now clamor for its services. Just interesting the way things work out.

Although Margaret Sanger who founded planned parenthood in the early 1900s did believe in eugenics and wanted the following:

Apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.

I think it's a bit myopic to believe that it is the sole reason the organization was formed or that it was Sanger's sole purpose and agenda. She was one of the biggest leaders pushing for female reproductive education and birth control use at a time when it was unheard of. Early on abortions weren't something even being discussed (that I could fine evidence of) but was mostly forms of birth control from diaphragms to education.

I've known multiple girls at different ages who needed some place to go and have questions answered, procedures done, and general female health related services performed while living in a family with strict religious beliefs that it was wrong. It was an unhealthy situation and PP was the only place around to go that wouldn't tell your parents you wanted a pap smear or wanted to know how to practice safe sex.

I realize we have vastly different views ATO and don't want to stir anything up, I'm just clarifying my position. I agree completely with the reasons for defunding it, I just wish it was one of many programs being defunded for fiscal responsibility rather than being part of an agenda.

 

[iwearcowboyboots]

I believe they still allowed money for abortions to Hospitals and Dr. Offices, in the event that an abortion will save the life of the mother.

Almost all abortion legislation was written this way prior to the RvW case. For example, abortion is illegal except in the event that the mother's health or life is at risk.

In this case, the issue was, abortion for convenience, from what I can tell.

Roughly 10% of hospitals perform elective abortions. They are the less likely location of choice for the service though due to the vast difference in cost. Anyone who has any out patient procedure done in a doc's office/clinic vs having it done in a hospital knows the difference in costs. If a doctor puts a bandage on your wound while you are in his office, it likely is part of your office visit charge (a mere $96 for your 15 to 29 minute visit) whereas that same bandaid in a hospital will be an additional $12, plus you are paying a doctor bill, plus you are paying a room/bed fee, etc etc.

An abortion at a clinic is probably 10 to 20 times cheaper than an abortion at a hospital, well unless you have insurance because many insurers cover elective abortions... Then it all just depends on where you are at with your deductible and out of pocket totals.

 

[NYFelon]

You're (or anybody, I'm not singling you out specifically) free to support with word or deed or money whomever and whatever you desire. But using the Government (in any form) to take money from one person and give it to another that the former would not approve of having it should be wrong on all levels.

It should work this way for all entitlement programs which are nothing more than glorified charities funded at the point of gun.

I really love reading your posts. You're always right on (inasmuch as for the most part I agree with all your posts that I've read), and it's a real pleasure to read levelheaded rational discourse.

Heck, in fact most of the posters here maintain their composure even over the most heated topics. I like this place.