Harry Reid: We’ll shut down government before we shut down Planned Parenthood funding

  • Thread starter Thread starter Abyssinia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
estesbob said:
Why? Heres my votes for president.:

McGovern, Carter, Reagan, Reagan, Bush,Bush,Dole,Bush, Bush , Obama.

I am not even ashamed of my first two votes. As the old saying goes “Those who are not Liberal when they are young have no heart, those who remain Liberal as they mature have no mind.”
Click to expand...
You voted for Obama?
 
ishii said:
You wrote, " You seem to think I’m in favor of abortions and pro-choice.
I’m not, I’m very much pro-life. However, on other life issues, (Obama is) more pro-life than many who claim to be pro-life because they oppose abortion."

Sentences like the above are often used by Catholics to justify their votes for pro-abortion rights Democrats. I was just wondering if you voted for a pro-life (i.e. anti-abortion rights candidate) in 2008.

Ishii
Click to expand...
I was merely pointing out the flaw of calling Obama the most pro-abortion politician we’ve ever had.

He is no match for the Clintion’s.

Jim

Jim
 
JimR-OCDS said:
40.png
Erich:
40.png
Suudy:
40.png
JimR-OCDS:
Because the Hyde Ammendment prohibits federal funds going for abortions, even outside the country. The Mexico City policy in effect cut off any federal aid to poor countries for all health services.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Only insofar as they provide abortion services. Poor countries have the choice of offering health services that don’t include abortion and receive federal aid, or they can choose to go without and offer abortion services. Don’t blame the Mexico City policy for poor countries’ lack of funding for health services.
Besides, abortion is emphatically *not *a “health service”. The very idea that child killing is health care is ironically absurd. Abortion obviously isn’t healthy for the baby, as it leads to a violent death.
You seem to think I’m in favor of abortions and pro-choice.

I’m not, I’m very much pro-life.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t trying to imply any such thing… I was just responding to the use of the terms “health service” and “abortion” in the same sentence – as if they weren’t polar opposites.
 
Erich said:
I wasn’t trying to imply any such thing… I was just responding to the use of the terms “health service” and “abortion” in the same sentence – as if they weren’t polar opposites.
Click to expand...
They are opposistes, but the fact is, there are health clinics that provide health-services which don’t include abortion.

Jim
 
Georgia said:
If we shut down the entire Department of Defense, all of it, we would be running a deficit. The entire DOD is about 20% of the budget. So, if we turn every landing strip into grazing land, if every ship is allowed to rust into the sea, if every member of the military goes home, we will continue to spend more than we take in.

We now borrow about 40% of our national budget. Our country cannot survive at that rate. Yes, I do think Planned Parenthood would be a wonderful place to start cutting.
Click to expand...
I think as opposed to cutting Planned Parenthood (PP), why not cut military, foreign aid and pork barrel projects? PP is just a drop in the bucket and would have a negative impact on their non-abortion services.
 
gamewell45 said:
I think as opposed to cutting Planned Parenthood (PP), why not cut military, foreign aid and pork barrel projects? PP is just a drop in the bucket and would have a negative impact on their non-abortion services.
Click to expand...
They are not mutually exclusive. However from a moral standpoint cutting of funding for the the number one abortuary in the country seems to be a win win situation
 
JimR-OCDS said:
They are opposites, but the fact is, there are health clinics that provide health-services which don’t include abortion.

Jim
Click to expand...
Right. Just not enough of them. (It was actually Suudy who said, “Poor countries have the choice of offering health services that don’t include abortion and receive federal aid, or they can choose to go without and offer abortion services. Don’t blame the Mexico City policy for poor countries’ lack of funding for health services.” – and I think we’re all on the same page!)

The Mexico City policy required any non-governmental organization that provided abortions, counseled about abortion, advocated abortion in any way, or was affiliated with other organizations that did any of these, would be barred from receiving US money, supplies, training or technical support. NGOs in Romania and Colombia adapted to the new U.S. guidelines and continued to qualify for federal funding. The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) did not alter its operation and immediately lost more than 20% of its total funding. Other family planning organizations, such as the Family Guidance Association of Ethiopia and the Planned Parenthood Association of Zambia, likewise did not make the changes required by the Mexico City Policy and had their funding cut.
 
estesbob said:
They are not mutually exclusive. However from a moral standpoint cutting of funding for the the number one abortuary in the country seems to be a win win situation
Click to expand...
If it was strictly abortion they were providing, then I might agree; however they provide so many other non-abortion related services, in this case I think funding would hurt those women who either are or are not pregnant and need the services they offer. Why not just de-fund the abortion provided services instead?
 
gamewell45 said:
If it was strictly abortion they were providing, then I might agree; however they provide so many other non-abortion related services, in this case I think funding would hurt those women who either are or are not pregnant and need the services they offer. Why not just de-fund the abortion provided services instead?
Click to expand...
Surely we can provide health care for the poor without forcing them to go to an organization that has a vested interest in killing their child.
 
JimR-OCDS said:
I was merely pointing out the flaw of calling Obama the most pro-abortion politician we’ve ever had.

He is no match for the Clintion’s.

Jim

Jim
Click to expand...
Give him time. The Clintons had eight years to establish their pro-abortion rights credentials. Obama is no slouch though, especially if you believe what he says on the issue and how he voted as a senator - he always got a 100% NARAL rating as I’m sure Hillary did as well. Hard for me to believe that one 100% Naral politician is “no match” for another 100% Naral politician. I would say that the difference between Obama and Hillary on abortion is small compared to the difference between the two parties on the issue.

Ishii
 
You mean that the chips in the microwave remind you of his temper and that he could “explode”? Or something else? What do you call potato chips in Ireland?

Ishii
 
ishii said:
You mean that the chips in the microwave remind you of his temper and that he could “explode”? Or something else?

Ishii
Click to expand...
As one who is married to a Brit I suspect he is refering to this:

 
I have learned a bit being married to a Brit. She was born and raised in a small town in Wales-while we were dateing I once refered to her as “English” and barely lived to tell the tale!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top