Advertisement

Archive for Wednesday, May 19, 2010

Advocates rally to protest cuts to Kansas budget that hurt Planned Parenthood

Abortion rights advocates deliver petitions to Gov. Parkinson’s office

Holly Weatherford, program director for the ACLU of Kansas and Western Missouri, helps deliver petitions asking that Gov. Mark Parkinson veto a provision in the state budget bill that would divert federal family planning funds from Planned Parenthood. Abortion rights advocates held a short rally in the Capitol on Wednesday.

Holly Weatherford, program director for the ACLU of Kansas and Western Missouri, helps deliver petitions asking that Gov. Mark Parkinson veto a provision in the state budget bill that would divert federal family planning funds from Planned Parenthood. Abortion rights advocates held a short rally in the Capitol on Wednesday.

May 19, 2010, 8:21 a.m. Updated May 19, 2010, 6:21 p.m.

Advertisement

Stack of petitions opposed to provision aimed at stopping federal family planning funds from going to Planned Parenthood.

Stack of petitions opposed to provision aimed at stopping federal family planning funds from going to Planned Parenthood.

— About a dozen abortion rights advocates Wednesday delivered petitions to Gov. Mark Parkinson, urging him to veto a provision in the state budget that would take federal family planning funds away from Planned Parenthood.

“I don’t want women’s bodies to be political playgrounds,” said Sarah Gillooly, lobbyist and public affairs manager for Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri.

Those who oppose abortion placed in the budget an amendment that says the state must allocate $2.4 million in federal family planning funds to local health departments, hospitals and safety net clinics.

The provision would divert approximately $230,000 away from Planned Parenthood clinics in Hays and Wichita.

Parkinson vetoed a similar provision last year, and abortion rights groups are asking him to do it again.

But those who support the amendment include Kansans for Life. Jeanne Gawdun, spokeswoman for that group, said of Planned Parenthood, “It is a morally unacceptable organization to have our tax dollars going to.”

Planned Parenthood has argued that under the law none of the federal funds can go toward abortions.

Gillooly said the federal funding pays for about 42,000 health care visits by women in Kansas each year, and that if Planned Parenthood doesn’t receive those funds many low-income Kansas women will not get proper health care. She said the Planned Parenthood clinic in Hays could close if Parkinson doesn’t veto the provision.

She said her group had approximately 1,000 signatures on petitions for Parkinson, who supports abortion rights. Parkinson’s office declined to speculate on whether he would veto the provision.

Comments

Paul R Getto 4 years, 5 months ago

Heaven forbid we encourage family planning. That might reduce the need for abortion. Without abortion as their lightning rod, where would the guns, gods and gays party be?

0

SettingTheRecordStraight 4 years, 5 months ago

If the $230,000 in taxpayer money isn't being used to pay for abortions, why are the protesters consistently described as "abortion rights advocates"? If taxpayer money doesn't fund abortions, why is Planned Parenthood making this all about abortion?

Answer: Because taxpayer money is the lifeblood of Planned Parenthood's abortion business.

0

redfred 4 years, 5 months ago

We need more children in the welfare system. Definetly do away with Planned Parenthood.

0

madameX 4 years, 5 months ago

Well, why should the state allocate $232k to planned parenthood to help prevent unwanted pregnancies when for the low, low price of $15 to $30k they can have Bristol Palin show up and say "Babies are work, yo! Be careful like I wasn't!" Clearly, the latter is much more fiscally responsible than the former!

Sorry, I'm not usually this snarky, and I used to be in the "leave bristol alone, she's just a dumb kid" club, but IMO she's old enough to have more common sense that this and if she's going to put herself out there like that all bets are off.

I welcome all attacks from the pro-Palin posters. You know who you are.

0

Boston_Corbett 4 years, 5 months ago

I used to think Bristol needed protection (pun intended).

But when you hire a promotional agent, as she did, you aren't being victimized, you are merchandising yourself. She is now open game by all others in my view.

0

whats_going_on 4 years, 5 months ago

"Palin [Bristol] provides public relations services and is currently an ambassador for the Candie`s Foundation.

The Candie`s Foundation is a pro-abstinence organization. "

lol.....wut

0

bearded_gnome 4 years, 5 months ago

used to think Paul was one of the semireasonable liberals around here.
not no more.


hope the cut stands: Planned Parenthood moves funds around all the time. give them money for one account, there is more in other accounts, as in funding abortion.

overwhelmingly abortions are actually birth control abortions, only about 5% are the much bannered rape incest or life of the mother. these are roclaimed to maintain abortions on demand, and often even in the third trimester.

abortion kills babies.
Scott Peterson was charged with the killing of his wife, and his unborn baby.

it is simple: we believe that the weakest and least able to represent themselves should be protected.

0

madameX 4 years, 5 months ago

And all the services PP offers that prevent pregnancy and thus prevent even the possibility that someone might be put in the position to choose to have an abortion, those should be de-funded because PP also offers abortion? Isn't that cutting off your nose to spite your face?

0

oldvet 4 years, 5 months ago

And with their budget cuts, PP can decide if they want to offer services to help family planning and pregnancy prevention or, if they prefer, they will continue offering abortions. Simple choices...

0

yourworstnightmare 4 years, 5 months ago

Paul must be terribly hurt by your disapproval, as we are all waiting with bated breath for a nod from your direction (rolls eyes).

0

Katara 4 years, 5 months ago

Social conservatives believe that the weakest and least able to represent themselves should be protected?

Is that why they advocate slashing the budget for services for the disabled, the elderly and programs for children that are already born?

It must be why they favor corporate welfare and tax cuts for corporations - most definitely the weakest and least able to represent themselves in our society.

0

texburgh 4 years, 5 months ago

So you also support government funded child nutrition programs, free universal pre-school and child care, job training for unwed mothers/tuition support, government-sponsored comprehensive health insurance coverage for all children, etc.? These are the things that make it possible for young mothers to raise their children while becoming capable of supporting them. And, of course, you are anti-death penalty because you are "pro-life."

Or are you one of the "Kansans for Life" that believe life begins at conception and ends at birth?

0

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 5 months ago

Nice shootin' Tex. Very well said. You hit every single one of my hot buttons and said it better than I could..

0

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 5 months ago

Which will be after the Apocolypse and the return of Jesus leaving the rest of us schmoes to muddle along without them.

0

yourworstnightmare 4 years, 5 months ago

Agreed. Donate to PPH early and often. Donations are tax-deductible.

0

mr_right_wing 4 years, 5 months ago

This is definitely one non-profit who should have that status pulled.

0

BigDog 4 years, 5 months ago

Just as the article says ..... the funding will still go to family planning .... instead of Planned Parenthood it would just go to hospitals, health departments and safety net clinics.

0

Katara 4 years, 5 months ago

But but but .... hospitals also perform abortions.

And health departments provide birth control which some people feel is the same as abortion. It doesn't matter if it really isn't. Some people believe that it is and that is all that matters, right?

Guilty by association so let's not fund any of them at all!

0

Adrienne Sanders 4 years, 5 months ago

Planned Parenthood is a lot more accessible than a health department clinic. With PP, you can just call them up and make an appointment like you would with a regular doctor. You pay on a sliding scale depending on your income, but even if you have to pay full cost you can have access to health care and birth control. It's pretty useful if you're uninsured. With the (local) Health care access clinic, you have to meet income eligibility guidelines before you can even set food in the door.

I don't think making family planning/ birth control harder to come by is a very good plan since a lot of people can't get a handle on it to begin with.

0

mr_right_wing 4 years, 5 months ago

Planned anti-Parenthood was founded by a racist and was a racist organization originally and has a proven ongoing policy of protecting incest, rapists, and child molesters. Even though medial and educational institutions are legally required to report any such activity. Absolutely none of our tax dollars should go to these creeps for any reason. Get your family planning somewhere where they at least have some shred of respect for human life.

0

ivalueamerica 4 years, 5 months ago

Yes, Margaret Sanger, about 75 years ago wrote something racist and vile as part of her opinion about abortion. That has nothing to do do with Planned Parenthood and you know it. Quit acting the fool and stick with the facts, man or you just come across as stupid.

0

mr_right_wing 4 years, 5 months ago

The same guy who went undercover and busted ACORN (I don't recall his name) busted PP on racist grounds. He made several calls to different PP offices in different areas of the country and played the part of a man who wanted to make a contribution; he told them he was against 'affirmative action' and he wanted to make a contribution, but only if it were to be used strictly for black women to abort. Only one location disdainfully accepted it, the others accepted cheerfully. I was shocked by this myself! I'm not just taking someones word for that, I've heard the series of calls played myself. I wish I could remember the guys name, maybe someone on here will post it, or I'll try and find it for you i-v-a. I don't make claims this strong without looking at some evidence -- that's what caused me to feel this way about this organization. Did you hear about the case in Texas where the Director of a PP actually resigned the first time she actually saw an aborted fetus herself?

0

mr_right_wing 4 years, 5 months ago

I went ahead and found it for you i-v-a. The guys name is James O'keefe. Here's the link so you can listen yourself. I do caution you; it is shocking and very offensive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiFOFUGIhFE

0

texburgh 4 years, 5 months ago

Yes, a paragon of virtue. The same James O'Keefe who was charged with a felony for illegally tampering with a Senator's phone line. Oh, here's the link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35083861/ns/politics-more_politics/

0

Katara 4 years, 5 months ago

You do realize that these "discoveries" from this fine investigative reporting have been spun over and over again? That the fact that many PP offices were called & that few responded in that manner? That the recordings were edited quite a bit?

James O'Keefe is the name you are looking for. He claims to be an investigative journalist. But I guess you can claim all sorts of things if you edit your material to look that way.

Someone interested in the truth does not engage in editing and shows the full footage of their "investigation".

0

mr_right_wing 4 years, 5 months ago

Sorry...anything that comes from wikipedia is questionable at best. It's kind of like horoscopes; for entertainment purposes only. Anyone can submit 'their own' facts and little to no 'fact checking' is done. Very unreliable source Katara. I've worked in radio myself, so catching edits is second nature These calls are far from 'professional quality' so edits should be blatantly evident.

0

Katara 4 years, 5 months ago

LOL! Because YouTube is the most reliable source, right?

Did you happen to notice the little numbers next to things in the articles, mr_right_wing? Those are source cites. If you click on the little number or scroll down to the bottom, you can look up the source & see for yourself where the facts come from.

Worked in radio, eh? So you know that a 4 clip is not the full conversation right? And you understand what selective edited it, right?

0

mr_right_wing 4 years, 5 months ago

How about I post on wikipedia that Hitler had a dog named snoopy? Would that prove to you the inaccuracy allowed on wikipedia? It's akin to putting an "encyclopedia" at 9th and mass and letting anyone write what they want in it.

In my opinion the clips themselves were not edited; (they are clips and not the complete conversation) and what was said in each clip, long or short was inexcusable and condemning. Were I a minority I'd be far beyond furious. Each of those folks was free to sue Mr. O'keefe for how they were portrayed due to any alleged editing (or at least publicly dispute it). Nevertheless, I've decided for myself and of course you do the same. America (despite abortion) is a great place.

0

Katara 4 years, 5 months ago

Oooo... do that! And I'll put up some YouTube videos that have the video with one thing & the audio saying something else.

I am sorry that you do not understand source cites and your ability to click on them to check the facts for yourself.

Were you aware that clips are editing themselves? Someone in radio surely would have understood that. Don't you think it is strange that Mr. O'Keefe has never released the full footage of any audio or video recordings he has done? It works both ways - if he is interested in clearing his name against selective and biased editing charges, he is free to release all footage for everyone to see and hear and decide for themselves as to what it means.

It is entirely possible that lawsuits are in progress against Mr. O'Keefe. He is already in legal trouble for his questionable methods in regards to attempted phone tapping in a Senator's office.

It is great that you have decided for yourself. it would be even better if those decisions were based on actual facts and solid evidence rather than selective editing.

0

mr_right_wing 4 years, 5 months ago

I think this conversation has become pointless. So if you wish, you get the last word.......(I'm sure you can't pass up that one!)

0

Truthspeaker 4 years, 5 months ago

Says the guy who says that "tea baggers" are racist because of claims the "founders" are racist.

Your hypocrisy is amazing.

0

ivalueamerica 4 years, 5 months ago

No, unlike you, I have values and morals.

I do not hold sanger as a hero nor do I hold the teabaggers as patriots for the very same reason.

You are ok if it i one side of the coin, against it if it i the other side, so you have no morals or values.

0

Truthspeaker 4 years, 5 months ago

Yeah, you want to try that again but use english instead of gibberish?

Oh what am I saying, on the rare occasions you ARE coherent you are still typing nonsense.

As far as you having "values" and "morals", the minute you start demonstrating that you MIGHT have a point.

0

ivalueamerica 4 years, 5 months ago

you have shown yourself to be dishonest, disloyal, a liar and an unpatriotic American without values, honors or morals.

You are consistent only in that aspect.

You take ides based on right v. left, not on fact, not on morals, not on values, not on honesty.

It makes you nothing more than a treasonous liar.

Good for nothing, in other words

0

Truthspeaker 4 years, 5 months ago

Aww see, now you are just spewing nonsense for the sake of getting a reaction because you are desperate for attention. It's be kinda of funny if it wasn't so pathetic.

So go ahead, call me whatever you like, you've got nothing to back it up.

0

ivalueamerica 4 years, 5 months ago

it is an observation based on your actions, nothing more, nothing less.

0

Truthspeaker 4 years, 5 months ago

My actions? Really?

Oh, pray tell, what actions of mine have you witnessed? Have you been following me around?

0

SettingTheRecordStraight 4 years, 5 months ago

You should see the Maafa 21 documentary. Margaret Sanger didn't merely write "something" racist and vile. She was the mother of the eugenics movement, and Planned Parenthood was berthed by the American Eugenics Society.

0

bmfriend3 4 years, 5 months ago

I agree with you. Planned Parenthood is in the business to murder the most innocent of lives just to make a buck. They force legislation through that states they don't need to notify the parents of children that are pregnant and want an abortion. This is surgery #1, and as everyone knows ANY surgical procedure done by a professional is required by law to get signed consent from the parent in order to do it. For #2, if a woman or child is raped and becomes pregnant why should PP be the only ones not required to report the rape or incest? They need help, love, and understanding. And #3, if parents started talking to their kids very early on about sex, and babies then maybe there wouldn't be a problem. It's the parents responsibility and not the school systems job to teach our kids right from wrong. Abortion has gotten out of hand, I'm against it but I do understand about the rape, and incest issue. Abortion is more deadly than following through with any pregnancy. We have methods of birth control that are very effective, and they don't require murder. Go to your doctor for the birth control or to Walmart, anywhere that has respect for life. I hate the fact that my tax dollars go to fund abortions without being asked. Why should our tax dollars even go to abortions? If you choose to donate money to PP then that's your choice, but with the tax dollars automatically funding them they do whatever, whenever they choose. Maybe if they lost all the tax dollars and had to go and raise money themselves things would be a whole lot different.

0

Richard Heckler 4 years, 5 months ago

Without sperm there is no pregnancy. So where does sperm come from?

If Kansans for Life and Jeanne Gawdun were sincere about reducing abortions they would get out of the way and allow birth control plus education go to work.

From Planned Parenthood:

Birth control allows us to prevent pregnancy and plan the timing of pregnancy:

Choices: * My Method * Birth Control Effectiveness Chart * ABSTINENCE * Birth Control Implant (Implanon) * Birth Control Patch (Ortho Evra) * Birth Control Pill * Birth Control Vaginal Ring (NuvaRing) * Birth Control Shot (Depo-Provera) * Birth Control Sponge (Today Sponge) * Breastfeeding * Cervical Cap (FemCap) * Condom * Diaphragm * Emergency Contraception (Morning After Pill) * Female Condom * Fertility Awareness-Based Methods (FAMs) * IUD * Outercourse * Spermicide * Sterilization for Women * Vasectomy * Withdrawal (Pull Out Method)

People have used birth control methods for thousands of years. Today, we have many safe and effective birth control methods available to us.

All of us who need birth control want to find the method that is best for us. And each of us has different needs when choosing a method. If you are trying to choose, learning about each method may help you make your decision. Use the list of birth control methods above to read about the methods.

Only you can decide what is best for you. And we are here to help. A staff member at your local Planned Parenthood health center can discuss all of your birth control options with you and help you get the birth control you need.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/birth-control-4211.htm

0

mr_right_wing 4 years, 5 months ago

.....so don't worry; even though daddy raped you, we won't tell anyone. We'll give you your abortion and then set you up with birth control so when daddy does it again, or if it's your brother next time, hopefully you won't get pregnant. If that doesn't work, come back and we can give you another abortion. Now shhhhh...don't tell anyone! Your secret is safe with us here at Planned Parenthood!

0

madameX 4 years, 5 months ago

You're right. Because a scared girl in that situation wouldn't have enough to deal with without worrying what daddy's going to do to her when he finds out she told. Or that mom might blame her for the whole thing and do something awful to her. Or that the police might not belive her.

Your comment is ridiculous. Confidentiality policies are in place becuase of a belief that horrible things should be covered up, but because victims who need medical care (and yes, abortions) shouldn't have that care be conditional on whether or not they're ready to go through the ordeal of coming forward.

0

mr_right_wing 4 years, 5 months ago

I guess it really is too bad that schools and medical personnel are required by law to report it then isn't it? Pedophiles across the country applaud Planned Parenthood I'm sure. (Like you do.) You've illustrated there is indeed a downside to protecting children.

0

madameX 4 years, 5 months ago

Do you think it should be conditional then? Maybe I'm not familiar enough with PP's policies, but I thought they were for encouraging someone in that situation to come forwared but not forcing them because knowing that they won't be forced makes them more likely to at least seek medical help. I don't think anyone arguing against the protection of children, just about what the best way to go about it is.

0

mr_right_wing 4 years, 5 months ago

To me, there should be no "conditions" about saving a child that has been raped or molested; as I tried to illustrate, not reporting the guilty party leaves them open to doing it again, and again. Ideally (and maybe this is not always what happens, but it should) that child should be removed from the dangerous situation (the home) and/or the guilty party should be arrested immediately, before he/she even sees that child again. Most children don't necessarily have the mental capacity to actually say "They raped/molested me, I want them arrested." They may very well be confused and/or even think it is their own fault. The thing that is an outrage is that a teacher or doctor could go to jail if they don't report something like that immediately. Why does that not apply to PP?! I'm married to an elementary school teacher, and her hands are tied; if she even suspects abuse or anything like that she has to immediately go report it to the principal, if she does not she is fired, teaching license revoked and prosecuted. I'm fairly sure the same applies (just as strictly) to doctors.

0

Zachary Stoltenberg 4 years, 5 months ago

I saw a PP bumper sticker that read "my body my choice"... OK, I can accept that. As long as they can accept" my disagreement, my tax dollars." Federal funds have no place on either side of the abortion argument, for or against. Offer whatever services you can live with but don't force someone to agree/disagree with you. I don't have a problem funding the educative side of things but PP has been unable to differentiate their use of funds. If you want an abortion and believe it's your "right" then you pay for it. I believe it's "wrong" and don't want my money used to allow this continued abomination.

0

ivalueamerica 4 years, 5 months ago

Tax dollars go to Planned Parenthood for family planning and certain pre-natal screenings. Not one red cent goes for abortion services or information. Witholding funding hurts babies.

0

oldvet 4 years, 5 months ago

A nice thought, but wrong in real application...
You have $5 in your pocket and want to buy liquor... but you also need to buy your child food. Decisions, decisions... Then I give you $5 but tell you that you can't use that money to buy liquor, only to buy your child food... Does that mean that the child will have food and you will do without the liquor, using your original $5 to buy the child more food? Of course not... you might buy $5 worth of food for the child with the money I gave you, but you will also buy the liquor, to the detriment of the child... Give PP more money and they will divert their current funds to support their mission of abortion...

0

SettingTheRecordStraight 4 years, 5 months ago

Money is fungible, as oldvet describes. The same tax dollars that pay for the PP receptionist to tell you where to go for a cancer screening also pay for that receptionist to tell you where to go for your abortion.

And the same switchboard operator that tells you where to report for prenatal exams is the same operator that tells you where to report for an abortion.

Shame, shame, shame on all of us for allowing this to happen.

0

yourworstnightmare 4 years, 5 months ago

"my disagreement, my tax dollars."

Uh, this is a terrible argument. Many in the USA disagree with how the government spends money, including for things such as funding war, for medicare, for corporate welfare, for welfare, for giving churches tax exemption.

Sorry, Z, but aside from the voting booth, you do not get to decide how your tax dollars are spent. I am amazed you need to be reminded of this.

If you do not want taxes spent on PP, then you should vote accordingly (as I am sure you already do).

But to say you don't want "your" tax money spent on this or that is just silly.

0

Zachary Stoltenberg 4 years, 5 months ago

As I stated, this particular institution has been unable to provide records differentiating their use of state and federal funds for education vs. abortion. As was stated by prior posters, they "shift" funds to many accounts. I don't have a problem with education for family planning but this particular organization is deeply faulted. Your reply is typical of the liberal left. After all, no one want's to hurt babies, but they also like to stand up for what they believe is right. For example, I believe it's a good thing to support your church. Does that mean I'm sending checks to the Phelps clan? Heck NO! Does that mean my church is anything like that? Of course not! Your statement is one no one would argue against, however, it doesn't correlate to the situation. Because I believe abortion is wrong I chose not to support organizations that condone it or facilitate it. If you accept federal funds then (by law) you cannot use it to fund abortions.

0

Katara 4 years, 5 months ago

The statement about Planned Parenthood's funding was interesting to me so I did some searching. The only information out there alleging this are pro-life websites. Can you show some proof for that assertion regarding their funding by an unbiased source?

You do realize that even if tax dollars are used to fund abortions (and they are not - prohibited by law) that it is part of the price you pay for living in this country. I did not approve of the Iraq war but my tax dollars go to pay for that. I want my FICA taxes to be used for me when I retire but they are funding current retirees and it is likely I will not see the same benefits (or perhaps no benefits at all). There are some congresspeople in other states that I cannot vote for that I disagree with (such as Michelle Bachman) but my tax dollars go toward their salaries.

0

Richard Heckler 4 years, 5 months ago

Actually abortion numbers are falling so I read.

Neither Kansans for Life, Jeanne Gawdun,the church,law enforcement nor Planned Parenthood can stop incest and/or rape.

However education and birth control can play a role in the prevention aspect of pregnancy under otherwise "normal" situations.

The focus on pregnancy should be equally directed at males and females. Too bad society seems to lean on the women.

0

yourworstnightmare 4 years, 5 months ago

"my disagreement, my tax dollars."

Uh, this is a terrible argument. Many in the USA disagree with how the government spends money, including for things such as funding war, for medicare, for corporate welfare, for welfare, for giving churches tax exemption.

Sorry, Z, but aside from the voting booth, you do not get to decide how your tax dollars are spent. I am amazed you need to be reminded of this.

If you do not want taxes spent on PP, then you should vote accordingly (as I am sure you already do).

But to say you don't want "your" tax money spent on this or that is just silly.

0

deec 4 years, 5 months ago

Maybe all the males opposed to abortion should get vasectomies. That should take care of a whole bunch of potential abortions right there. Don't like abortion? Don't cause the need for one.

0

denak 4 years, 5 months ago

We are in a budget crisis in this state. There are all kinds of agencies getting cuts to their programs. Planned Parenthood is not exempt from these cuts either.

Why should one organization/ one program get 230,000 dollars when that money can be divided up between numerous organizations ( ie hospitals, health departments and safety net clinics) that will serve the population over a much wider area.

The money should go where it does the most good. And if that means that Planned Parenthood loses 230,000 dollars but a bunch of rural health departments/clinics get it, then that it where it should go.

Dena

0

seriouscat 4 years, 5 months ago

Thank you Dena, for your on-point and relevant post. Rural health clinics in this state do a lot with the little they get and they serve the largest demographic.

0

Brent Garner 4 years, 5 months ago

We are out of money. Something has to give.

0

texburgh 4 years, 5 months ago

Sorry, Brent. The action saves no money. It just spends it somewhere else.

0

Tex 4 years, 5 months ago

Ivalueamerica said: "Yes, Margaret Sanger, about 75 years ago wrote something racist and vile as part of her opinion about abortion. That has nothing to do do with Planned Parenthood and you know it. Quit acting the fool and stick with the facts, man or you just come across as stupid."

Since you mentioned sticking with the facts, I had read so much about Margaret Sanger that I finally decided to go to the source. You should try reading "The Pivot of Civilization." The KU library has it, or you may be able to download it. Though she may have had some twisted sort of noble intentions, she was a eugenicist, simple and plain. Her views regarding what she believed to be the social importance of eliminating the "unfit" via artificial birth control and sterilization were apparently not uncommon among the "intelligentsia" of her day, and in our times they are carried on by people like Peter Singer, and, disturbingly enough, Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg: (from an interview with the NY Times last year) Q: Are you talking about the distances women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable, because there are so few doctors and clinics that do the procedure? And also, the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women?

JUSTICE GINSBURG: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae—in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion...."

If you support Justice Ginsburg's opinion, I'd be vigilant for the day when you or one of your loved ones may fall into the class of "populations that we don't want to have too many of."

Interestingly enough, Sanger was apparently not an advocate of abortion on demand. For those who claim that PP has disavowed Sanger's views, please explain why the annual award PP bestows is called the Margaret Sanger Award (Hillary Clinton was a recent recipient).

0

rtwngr 4 years, 5 months ago

Unlike Merrill, I am not going to cut and paste a bunch of links that you probably would discount as propaganda, in order to bolster my argument but PP is disingenuous with its overall intentions. Time and time again people that have fled that organization have stated that the only "planning" that takes place is how to increase their abortion business because that is the cash cow. All of this "women's healthcare" garbage is not about helping anybody but themselves to our wallets.

Leroy Carhartt, the Nebraska abortionist, testified one time about feeling the heartbeat in his hand before inserting the suction tube at the base of the infant's neck before extracting the contents of its skull to complete the partial birth abortion. This heartbeat started somewhere around the second or third week of the pregnancy. Humans are dismembered, in the womb, daily in Planned Parenthood clinics all across our country. Has it occurred to any of you that support abortion, that if the autonomic nervous system is operational, and a heart is beating, the ability to feel pain also exists? Do you know how an abortion is performed?

0

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 5 months ago

I have some questions and would like to know the source of the statement re: Leroy Carhart. I also want to know how/why you feel a beating heart is synonymous with "life". Beating hearts are harvested from brain dead corpses on a daily basis (with family permission). These people don't just feel the heart through skin, muscle and bone but actually hold the still beating heart in their hands as it's moved to the cooler for transport to the site where it will be transplanted. And yes I do know how third trimester abortion procedures are done. As "feeling the heartbeat" is a physical impossibility during such a procedure my guess is that what Carhart was talking about was feeling a carotid pulse prior to initiating the procedure, something that is routinely done as part of the procedure and done by any physician performing it. Last I'd like to clear up some misconceptions regarding pain and a beating heart. The heart beat is controlled by the brain stem along with breathing and blood pressure (the so called "involuntary functions"). All nervous system functions that go to the brain go through the brain stem to the brain but other than that the brain stem has nothing to do with pain. The perception of pain begins at the site and then gets transported through nerves to the spinal cord where it is then processed up to the brain through the brain stem. It has nothing to do with the autonomic nervous system. The peripheral nervous system (which controls pain perception) in a fetus and new born is crude at best and doesn't fully finish developing until the end of the first year. Part of this is actually a life saving move by nature for the fetus/newborn. The truth is without that life saving layer of protection from pain a fetus could never withstand the sheer pain it would feel in the process of childbirth. I suggest you read up on a first year anatomy and physiology text.

0

BigPrune 4 years, 5 months ago

Planned Parenthood is false advertising in their name. It should be Planned Non-Parenthood. Someone should sue them to correct their misleading name thus false advertising.

0

Glenn Reed 4 years, 5 months ago

Why is it that every discussion on contraception methods or services always degenerates into the "pro-life/pro-choice" argument?

Info from a simple glance at their website would suggest that abortion is only a small part of what Planned Parenthood does. The other activities they engage in, contraceptive services and eduction, seem to reduce the need for abortion. Which tends to reduce the rationale behind having the "pro-life/pro-choice" argument. Yeah, I know, this has already been pointed out by some folks...

I get why some folks would have an issue with abortion. Since it is prohibited to spend federal funds on abortions, though, the only reason that providing federal funding to Planned Parenthood might be morally questionable is if ALL forms of contraception is immoral.

Before you praise this action as a good "moral" decision, ask yourself the following questions:

Is the use of condoms an immoral act? Is using birth control pills an immoral act? Is choosing surgical sterilization an immoral act? Is educating people about STD's an immoral act?

If you said "no" to any of those, but still have an issue with Planned Parenthood, then I suggest you rethink your position.

0

aa469285 4 years, 5 months ago

re: cait48 "I also want to know how/why you feel a beating heart is synonymous with "life". "

beating heart = life
no beating heart = no life

How can you be arguing this?

Are you sure you read those anatomy and physiology books? Pretty sure those things would be on page 1.

0

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 5 months ago

Yes I did read those A & P books and you would be very wrong. The actual definition of "no life" is no brain activity and is even codified into law as the definition of death in this state. Failure of a heart to beat can cause death by starving the brain of oxygen but the heart can still beat with life support after a brain has died. You therefore have a dead person with a beating heart. I again suggest you read a first year A&P text.

0

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 5 months ago

And by the way, a beating heart =/= life. See above.

0

aa469285 4 years, 5 months ago

Amazing. Tell me how many people (or animals for that matter) are walking around right now alive without a beating heart (naturally now, no cheating with artificial hearts, pacemakers, etc)?

0

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 5 months ago

Are you deliberately debating this for the fun of it or are you really that obtuse? I don't think you've read a word I've typed.

0

Amy Heeter 4 years, 5 months ago

Planned Parenthood should focus on family planning and stay out of the abortion market.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.