Planned Parenthood Reports Record Abortions, High Profits

[johnlal]

Since Reagan, Catholics have been voting for Republicans with the single issue of abortion in mind. Now, we have a Republican in the White House. For most of his presidency, he had a majority of Republicans in the legislature. The Supreme Court has a majority of Republican appointees. The majority of the states have Republican Governors.

These are optimal circumstances for the Republicans to end abortion, if it is in their power to do so. But instead, we see record numbers of abortions.

Are we ready to concede that the Republicans aren’t going to end abortion? Maybe we need to look at quality of life issues, the social safety net, poverty, and other issues as a possible way to address the crisis?

 

[mapleoak]

What is interesting is the ascertation that Planned Parenthood does not make the claim for record abortions. That is like if the weatherman where I live were to report that it rained 10 inches of rain today. He may not specifically say it was a record rainfall, but it no less detracts from the fact that it would be a record. This holds true whether if he altogether fails to report that it even rained that day. Some arguments are only for the sake of argument and have no point to them whatsoever. Try this one, “Planned Parenthood is Murder, Inc.”

 

[Ilroy]

.

So roof…do you own stock in PP or some such nonsense as that? The reason I ask is because every time a thread starts up about the utter immorality of PP you jump all over it and start in with your pro-PP rants.
You have almost the same exact wording in some of your posts on this thread as I noticed on some of the previous threads on the subject. Your diatribes are really getting quite old…there are only so many ways you can say the same old garbage.

 

[Stolen_Rutters]

Let’s break this down.

Part one:
“Planned Parenthood Reports Record Abortions”

From link, plannedparenthood.org/files/PPFA/Annual_report.pdf

Planned Parenthood Reports 264,943 abortions.

This happens to be a record according to original link (in the OP). Let’s trust this statement unless someone point out that Planned Parenthood performed more adoptions than this in any year previous.

Therefore, Planned Parenthood reported a record number of abortions in the report linked. Conclusion? This part of the original statement is actually true.

Next?

“Planned Parenthood Reports … High Profits”

From same link, the number is $55.8 million in “profit” out of $902.8 million in revenue. Net “profit” margin = 6.1%. If this organization were for profit, 6.1% is not high at all and is barely beating inflation… it’s not a very good return on investment. For a non-profit, the rules may be different.

Part 2 conclusion? From an investor’s standpoint this statement is most certainly NOT true, since they will look at the rate of return. This is NOT a stock to own if you are in it for the return. For a non-profit, who knows?

My $0.02,
Stolen Rutters

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Let’s break this down…

Planned Parenthood Reports 264,943 abortions.

This happens to be a record according to original link (in the OP). Let’s trust this statement unless someone point out that Planned Parenthood performed more adoptions than this in any year previous.

Is that keeping with the catechism? I think not. I think you’ll find the speaker was not speaking for Planned Parenthood, and provided no documentation for his options. Also he does at least indicate the 2006 adoption rates are his opinions alone. Is his opinion designed to convey truth or provide a derogatory image?

Therefore, Planned Parenthood reported a record number of abortions in the report linked. Conclusion? This part of the original statement is actually true.

Are you sure? Did you know reported abortions are down in the US? Did you review all the numbers? I have only seen two numbers. It seems there should be more than two numbers.

Next?

“Planned Parenthood Reports … High Profits”

From same link, the number is $55.8 million in “profit” out of $902.8 million in revenue. Net “profit” margin = 6.1%. If this organization were for profit, 6.1% is not high at all and is barely beating inflation… it’s not a very good return on investment. For a non-profit, the rules may be different.

Part 2 conclusion? From an investor’s standpoint this statement is most certainly NOT true, since they will look at the rate of return. This is NOT a stock to own if you are in it for the return. For a non-profit, who knows?..

Actually I have not seen any “profit” reported at all, and thus the problem is repeated. Revenue minus expanse is not the definition of profit. So why would some one say this is profit? The correct term is gross margin many business reporting losses report gross margins which exceed 6%. The issue here is not if they have money. The issue is were the Catholics discussing the subject violating Catholic teachings to achieve goals involving deceiving others about the truth.

 

[manualman]

These are optimal circumstances for the Republicans to end abortion, if it is in their power to do so. But instead, we see record numbers of abortions.

Are we ready to concede that the Republicans aren’t going to end abortion? Maybe we need to look at quality of life issues, the social safety net, poverty, and other issues as a possible way to address the crisis?

Nice try there. Optimal circumstances will be when either Roe is overturned or there are enough votes in Congress to warrant trying an amendment. I can count, so I know that neither of these conditions is present. Try anything before that and the SC will bounce it.

While a majority of the Court are nominal catholics, the majority of the court SUPPORT Roe v. Wade. You realize this, right? Of the justices that are realiably pro-life (Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito) how many are Republican appointees? Answer: All of them. When was the last time a Democratic President appointed a justice who voted against abortion? Answer: NEVER (since the Roe decision, I admit ignorance of who appointed who before Roe).

Republicans have an inconsistant record on appointing pro-life justices, true. But democrats have an extremely consistant record of appointing hard-line Roe supporters. The brutal truth is that Roe might be history by now if Clinton had never been elected.

We need to continue to expose the lie that abortions do any good for women AND we need to continue to vote for those who will replace judicial power justices with strict constructionists. Then whichever “optimal circumstance” arises first should be pursued to end abortion in this country.