Archive for Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Kansas House wants to block funding to Planned Parenthood clinics, even though funds don’t pay for abortion

Opponents say effort will hurt women and is misguided because tax dollars don’t pay for abortions

April 13, 2011

Advertisement

— The battle over funding of Planned Parenthood, which was recently waged in the federal government shutdown debate, is also being fought at the state level.

The Kansas House and Senate have approved two different budget plans for the fiscal year that starts July 1. The House plan includes a provision that eliminates the pass-through of federal family planning funding to Planned Parenthood clinics.

The Senate budget plan doesn’t have such a proposal. Legislators return from their break to reconvene the session on April 27.

Abortion opponents succeeded in putting the proposal in the House plan because they say taxpayer funds shouldn’t go toward paying for abortions.

“Americans don’t want their taxes to help an immoral business,” said Kathy Ostrowski, of Kansans for Life. Opponents of Planned Parenthood say the funds should go to other local health clinics.

Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri say taxpayer funds are not used to fund abortions. It has long been illegal to use what are called Title 10 funds for abortions.

Planned Parenthood officials say the funds at stake -- approximately $335,000 -- go toward getting low-income women needed health care services, such as breast exams, Pap smears, cancer screenings, tests for sexually transmitted diseases, and birth control.

These services help women avoid unintended pregnancies, they say. “It makes absolutely no sense to eliminate access to preventive Title 10 health services that reduce the need for abortion in Kansas,” said Peter Brownlie, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri.

Planned Parenthood says the funding is crucial to support Planned Parenthood health centers in Wichita and Hays, which according to a recent study serve nearly 9,000 women per year. No abortions are conducted at either one of those clinics. Planned Parenthood also points out that the Hays clinic is the only one for low-income women in Ellis County.

The rider diverting the funds from Planned Parenthood has been approved by the Legislature several times in recent years, but has been vetoed by former governors Kathleen Sebelius and Mark Parkinson, both Democrats who supported a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion.

Gov. Sam Brownback, an abortion opponent who recently signed into law two bills restricting access to the procedure, said he wasn’t familiar with the provision in the House bill, but added that he has never been in favor of federal funding going toward Planned Parenthood.

Comments

ksjayhawk74 4 years ago

So the GOP attack on women lost a battle with the Federal Government, but the Kansas GOP is ready to attack women locally. Yea, not big Government.

somedude20 4 years ago

It is amazing to me just how fast this "leadership" is making the state go down hill and this is a flat state. Funny how alot of these "Christians" are acting very Unchristlike.

Epic epic epic fail!!!!!!! maybe if they put a religious quote on the prophylactics (can I at least use that word LJW?) and on the birth control pills

somedude20 4 years ago

Well Con, religion does not scare me but really scares me are the zealots who go to the extreme on every issue and use religion to make public policy. There is NO PROOF that any "God" is real so why use that to control people. Do you like to control people with lies? From what I have seen of your work, it seems to me that you do! oh, be·smirch Damage the reputation of (someone or something) in the opinion of others - he had besmirched the good name of his family Make (something) dirty or discolored - the ground was besmirched with blood

admireed 4 years ago

Oh sure, they do not pay for abor.

Alyosha 4 years ago

Are you attempting to say that yes, despite it being against the law, and despite saying they don't, Planned Parenthood uses federal dollars to help citizens to pay for abortions?

What is your specific knowledge and experience about their finances to claim that they do pay for them?

If you have evidence of crimes being committed (using federal money in the way you're implying they do), have you taken this evidence to the legal authorities?

If you have no evidence, why would you make a statement that's not based on facts?

William Cormode 4 years ago

John Kyl from Arizona said 90% of Planned Parenthood is abortions and when questioned about it his office said the statement was "not meant to be factual".

So apparently anyone can say anything they want as long as it is not meant to be factual.

Wendy magillicutty 4 years ago

I believe Wyatt Cynac on the Daily Show had a brilliant analysis of the use of lies.

ivalueamerica 4 years ago

Put up or shut up.

They are a nonprofit, their books are open and it is a factual statement that no federal monies are used for abortion services.

If you want to suggest otherwise, you are just a dirty liar.

fuel_for_the_fire 4 years ago

I heard this on NPR this morning and it caused me to spray coffee all over my dashboard because I was laughing so hard:

Republican Sen. John Kyl of Arizona said on the Senate floor that "if you want an abortion, you go to Planned Parenthood. And that's well over 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does."

In fact, just the opposite is true; well over 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does is NOT abortion. Kyl's office later said his speech "wasn't intended to be a factual statement".

verity 4 years ago

"wasn't intended to be a factual statement".

Shakes head and sighs.

Crazy_Larry 4 years ago

“Jon Kyl thinks no one can see him when he puts a paper bag on his head”
“Jon Kyl bought a SodaStream so he could drink carbonated tears of the poor” "Jon Kyl throws babies at the elderly"

--not intended to be a factual statement--

http://www.collegenews.com/index.php?/article/jon_kyl_stephen_colbert_12367/

4 years ago

No kidding. Around here, we call that a lie.

jonas_opines 4 years ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

whats_going_on 4 years ago

google Stephen Colbert's segment on this, I think it's called "Colbert's defense of planned parenthood". It's HILARIOUS

verity 4 years ago

Even if taxes were being used for abortions, which of course they are not, that is a really weak argument. Taxes are being used for a lot of things I see as being immoral.

Paying politicians while they try to insert their religion into politics is just one of them.

Liberty275 4 years ago

"Even if taxes were being used for abortions, which of course they are not, that is a really weak argument. Taxes are being used for a lot of things I see as being immoral."

Sounds like a good reason to defund programs en mass and cut everyone's taxes.

Steve Bunch 4 years ago

We live in a moronocracy: The moronic led by the mean and mendacious.

ksjayhawk74 4 years ago

You've seen the movie "Idiocracy", right?

somedude20 4 years ago

if Gatorade is good for people and people eat plants shouldn't Gatorade be good for tplants as well? It has electrolytes in it, would you rather use toilet water?

emceelean 4 years ago

Water? You mean like out the toilet?

Great satire.

Keith 4 years ago

It's a documentary, not a satire.

somedude20 4 years ago

Just like the documentary "Caveman" that proves that man and dinsaur walked on the earth at the same time

notanota 4 years ago

I'd much rather pay higher costs to treat women for cervical cancer that could have been prevented if detected early. Wouldn't you?

verity 4 years ago

I'd rather make an ideological point than care about the real costs.

Liberty275 4 years ago

I already pay for insurance to cover the costs of detecting and treating cervical cancer in my wife. Why should my money also be taken so cervical cancer can be treated if detected early in humans I don't know or care about?

"Wouldn't you?"

I'd rather have an Imprezza STI.

notanota 4 years ago

I was thinking more along the lines of Un...

Liberty275 4 years ago

I won't disagree only because nihilism can be ugly to people that don't embrace it. Go pick some pretty flowers and everything will be OK.

Katara 4 years ago

You may pay for insurance but that is no guarantee that it covers the costs of treatment. Some treatments (not just experimental ones) are not covered by most insurance companies and you must buy supplemental insurance for them.

verity 4 years ago

One thing you can say---these people are dancing with the ones who brung them.

Kyle Reed 4 years ago

Why aren't my tax dollars also going toward getting low-income men needed health care services, such as cancer screenings, tests for sexually transmitted diseases, and birth control? The whole thing seems a bit sexist to me.

Alia Ahmed 4 years ago

As a matter of fact, Planned Parenthood does provide services for men as well. http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/men-4285.htm

Kyle Reed 4 years ago

So somehow these funds were specific to just the women's programs? That seems a bit odd.

DeMontfort 4 years ago

Not odd at all...just part and parcel of the newest war going on...the war on women.

SWJayhawk13 4 years ago

The republican party is becoming more and more hateful and misogynistic towards women.

The majority of Kansans voted for them. I hope they're happy.

Steve Bunch 4 years ago

The majority of voters voted for them, not the majority of Kansans.

oldvet 4 years ago

Well, to paraphrase your fearless leader, and many are becoming frustrated with his lack of doing anything about the real problems in this country... you lost!

booyalab 4 years ago

Don't you think it's a bit hateful towards women to equate the whole gender with people seeking abortions? It's not exactly a proud position to be in, regardless of your moral stance towards it.

Cait McKnelly 4 years ago

Don't you think it's a bit hateful towards women to place those who have had or are seeking abortions in the same class as Jeffrey Dahmer? I think you know where you can place your "morals".

LTownBaby 4 years ago

Who put them in that position? Other than rape, these women willfully opened on up and welcomed someone in. Did they not know the consequences?

jafs 4 years ago

What about the men? Didn't they know the (possible) consequences?

And, most birth control methods aren't 100% effective, you know.

Crazy_Larry 4 years ago

“Americans don’t want their taxes to help an immoral business,” said Kathy Ostrowski...

My dearest Kathy! Hows about you just sit down and STFU! You don't speak for me and you have no idea how I feel about Planned Parenthood. I have no problem with tax dollars funding Planned Parenthood. Now you know what a REAL American thinks and feels.

Instead of thumping your do-gooder bible at people in need, why don't you try to pull funding from something that's really immoral like WAR....the War on Drugs is immoral....the War on Terrorism is immoral as well. These two wars have caused more pain and suffering in the world than mamograms, papsmears and abortions ever will.

Kathy! Next time, think a minute before you speak on behalf of everyone in the country!

As for the Republicrats and Sam Brownstreak.....Go bite a richard you freaks and stay the hell out of my life.

Mary Alexander 4 years ago

Crazu_Larry I agree with you totally. GOOD JOB!!!! I didn't vote for Brownback due to the fact I knew he would do this I just wish he would go away!!!

pace 4 years ago

agreed, I want my tax money to go to health access, education and infrastructure. Planned parenthood is worthy of support. Kathy and so many cranks feel the need to speak for others and even god. Bad business to inflate, cloak and lie your views.

Cait McKnelly 4 years ago

So? It's been statistically proven that "abstinence only" sex education doesn't work. Not to mention the most spectacular and public failure evar by the daughter of the former VP candidate. You want to throw tax money away on something that's an epic fail? Grow up and get a life, Tom.

notanota 4 years ago

They want to cut an program shown to be ineffective in its mission and thereby eliminate government waste? Say it ain't so!

kristyj 4 years ago

If all Republicans everywhere agreed to stop having unprotected sex & instead revel in the sanctity of their own marriages until the coming of Christ, then I might consider....wait, no.

I'm not Catholic, but definitely enjoyed this blog piece on the Republican/Planned Parenthood relationship- http://www.ncregister.com/blog/we-need-more-sex-education

tomatogrower 4 years ago

And you can't have sex anymore, unless it's to produce children, so guys, once your wife can't have children anymore, you don't get any. Every sperm is sacred.

Kim Murphree 4 years ago

War on women...all you gals that voted for this misogynists...what were you thinkin? Let's have a recall!

booyalab 4 years ago

This is not just an abortion issue, it's a democracy issue. If the majority of Americans don't want to help pay for something then they shouldn't be forced to pay for it. It doesn't matter what it is.

Beth Bird 4 years ago

No. It is about the interference of basic rights about one's body. What if a majority of Americans were Muslims? Would you then agree that all Americans should be Muslims? It doesn't work both ways. You want freedom of religion. I want my choice. We are the land of the free, or so we were told......Your rights, as well as the rights of everyone else, are at risk.

Terry Jacobsen 4 years ago

You do have the right to get an abortion within the guidelines if the law, but it is not a right that the government should pay for it. It is not a right that planned parenthood should get funding. Those are not basic rights.

frankwiles 4 years ago

And taxes don't, by federal law, go to paying for abortions. We like to call little statements like that "basic facts".

Liberty275 4 years ago

"It is about the interference of basic rights about one's body."

Where do you draw the line concerning the "interference of basic rights about one's body"? If you have any line, regarding consenting adults, wouldn't that make you a little bit of a hypocrite? How about polygamy? Prostitution? Legally using any drug you want? Suicide? How about a man that refuses to press charges against his wife that slapped him during an argument?

Where does your personal definition of freedom flip-flop into tyranny?

tomatogrower 4 years ago

The majority of Americans are against birth control? I don't think so.

Kim Murphree 4 years ago

The majority of Americans? Which majority? Based on what measurement? You really don't have any way of knowing what the majority of Americans think from the few people who are polled....moreoever, the founding fathers didn't trust the majority of Americans which is why they created the representative form of government that we have today with a House and a Senate. This argument carries no weight.

speak_up 4 years ago

So can I stop paying taxes so that my money won't go towards Brownback's salary? Come on, that is simply not the way it works. Come up with an argument that makes sense or be quiet.

William Weissbeck 4 years ago

Not exactly. In our Constitutional representative democracy, the majority cannot pass laws that impair fundamental rights of the minority. In somewhat the same view, our tax dollars are collected and we expect our elected representatives to determine how the money is spent, not based solely on what a majority would agree to. Otherwise, there would only be dirt roads west of Salina and local schools would still be operating out of log cabins. Planned Parenthood provides targeted medical services that no woman in her right mind would ever say are unnecessary. If you don't want to fund an efficient, well recognized provider, then you can fund the more inefficient Medicaid system to provide these services, and just ignore the uninsured woman who can't otherwise obtain these services. When I lived in Kansas it was for the clean air, wide horizons and a tolerant people. I don't know what some of you have been smokin' since I left, but you have become a very ignorant, intolerant lot. By the way - you can't just smoke any weed that grows along the side of the road - it will rot your brain.

Orwell 4 years ago

It's not an abortion issue at all. It's about whether a majority of Americans (or in this case, Kansans) want women to have access to health care services. No one asked me that question, but I would have said yes. I'd bet a majority would have said yes.

And are you suggesting a majority of Americans want to pay crop subsidies to millionaires? Or pay for mercenaries in Afghanistan? Nobody asked me about those, either.

LoveThsLife 4 years ago

In the meantime GE avoids paying corporate taxes until there is an uproar over it. We still pay subsidies on sugar, corn and soy to already wealthy businesses. Our defense spending is completely out of control. Social Security is basically bankrupt, Medicaid and Medicare are as dysfunctional as ever. So glad we are focusing our time and attention on things that barely make a dent in our budget crisis. Way to go representatives at putting first thing first.

Scott Morgan 4 years ago

We do back flips and belch a burning desire to honor other religions, yet Christian taxes pay for abortions very much against many denominations basic core beliefs.

You bird brains who wish to demonize Christians might wish to look at who really really really medically treat the poor, who treat women without means, which religious group puts outstanding surgeons and staff on our most pathetic sad cases.

Pull up the yellow pages of any cities hospitals and you might be surprised how many are Christian organizations.

Or as we in Lawrence often do and stick our liberal heads up ..............

deec 4 years ago

No your holy taxes do not pay for abortions. Did you miss the part about how it is illegal to use federal funds for abortions? I am sooo sick of whiny so-called christians with their persecution complexes.

Terry Jacobsen 4 years ago

Christians are not the only ones who don't want their taxes paying for abortion, and although planned parenthood may nit be performing abortion they are referring to abortion clinics.

deec 4 years ago

So? I don't want my tax dollars funding wars of aggression, agricultural subsidies, torture, trouser assistance drugs for randy old goats, or corporate bailouts.

Terry Jacobsen 4 years ago

None of those things is a 100% kill shot to a defenseless child. So your likes and dislikes are not in question here. This is about killing children and oiling the industry that does it.

deec 4 years ago

Your moral outrage is no more valid than mine. If you want the ability to dictate federal policy based on your feelings and beliefs, then so do I. No more bucks for Conagra, ADM, Exxon, et. al.

pocket_of_sunshine 4 years ago

TJ-Why do you continuously skip over the fact that your tax dollars ARE NOT FUNDING ABORTION?

Kim Murphree 4 years ago

As a Christian, I don't want my tax money paying for the war in Iraq. I don't believe that was a moral use of my tax dollars. Take back the Trillions of dollars spent on that and fund Planned Parenthood.

blogme 4 years ago

And I'm so sick of the self righteous know it all libs that think that only their point of view should be the law of the land. What happened to all this diversity? Oh, diversity only of liberal ideas.

tomatogrower 4 years ago

I have no problem if you don't want to practice birth control or get an abortion. Yet, you are trying to tell others what to do. I have a big problem with that.

blogme 4 years ago

Another classic broadstroke by a lib. I'm not against birth control, rather, people should practice a lot more of it. But one way or another ( consulting expectant mothers into getting an abortion, etc ) tax dollars are being spent on people seeking abortions. It might not be on the line item of "abortion" in the accounting journal, but it is still costing tax payers. Besides, if it wasn't, why were Harry Reed and the rest of the loons in Washington cyring about how the GOP was going to kill women with budget cuts to Planned Parenthood? REALLY??? Hyperbolic hogwash.

For living in such an enlightened age, we have more people acting less enlightened than ever before. Used to be if you didn't want to have children, you didn't have sex, or practiced Bill Clinton sex where no one was getting pregnant. The crux of this issue is the irresponsibility of the people getting pregnant and acting surprised, then consuming our tax dollars ( I'm assuming you're not getting a welfare check ) whether it be for abortion services, or wic, welfare, etc.

 If you consume tax dollars, everyone has a right to tell you how you should behave.  It's in the fine print when you suck at the government teet.  Get over it!  And if somehow, a women or man can't afford a rubber, then you should be fixed permanently.

deec 4 years ago

So everyone gets to tell ADM. Conagra,GE, EXXon et. al. how to run their business? How about a few of the local developers who get ag. subsidies? Can I dictate to them what projects they'll be allowed to build? Can I encumber them for decades with debt and expenses? Shall we dictate to medicare recipients which benefits we feel they deserve?

speak_up 4 years ago

Just because the hospital is a religious organization does not mean that all of the people who work there are religious, or that hospitals would not exist without religious funding. Another weak argument. Can't you conservatives do better? Oh wait.. no you can't because none of your arguments are based on logic.

Orwell 4 years ago

OK, once again, your premise is false. Taxes don't pay for abortions, and you can't make that true just by saying it over and over.

pace 4 years ago

They know they are lying. what they are saying is if any one or any person stands up to us and helps a woman be able to choose, we will do what it takes,if it is lie, lie and lie. If anyone stand up to the GOP line they will use any excuse and any amount of tax money to personally crush them. Their gloves are off and they have no sense of respecting other people's right or the truth. They are out to crush opposition and they are using tax money and governor power to do it. They will crush poor women, they will crush women's health, they will crush any organization, church or group who they think opposes their will.

beatrice 4 years ago

I guess many conservatives prefer the Bristol Palin type of Unplanned Parenthood.

Scott Morgan 4 years ago

Libs just like to bark to hear the noise. Argue the following.

really medically treat the poor, who treat women without means, which religious group puts outstanding surgeons and staff on our most pathetic sad cases.

Katara 4 years ago

So I guess they will be good with treating all the low income woman with late stage breast/ovarian/cervical & uterine cancer since the Legislature is wanting to pretty much shut down the organization that provides the early screening tests for them.

The religious group that works on "our most pathetic sad cases" are not the ones providing the early detection methods so more don't end up as "our most pathetic sad cases".

Plus that religious group can always fall back on the lame excuse of it "being God's will" if they are unable to keep "our most pathetic sad cases" alive.

Crazy_Larry 4 years ago

And that is the inherent danger of religion...justifying the unjustifiable as "god's will."

Women shouldn't wear pants! There would be less sex and, therefore, less abortions.

“In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel...” —1st Timothy 2:9

Hey Sam! We need a new law! It would even create jobs...you could hire the Pants Police!

Scott Morgan 4 years ago

All I am arguing is we can't toss all religion is the same boat. Again, the nation is full of Christian and Jewish hospitals, many non profit.

Of all the years, all the patients, all the bad, all the good, I;ve never ever felt a Judea/Christian affiliated hospital push anything except the patient getting well. I'm including Shrine hospitals as well.

Never, does anybody ever give honest examples on this site?

Crazy_Larry 4 years ago

You just did give honest examples; thank you.

Katara 4 years ago

However, that is not what you actually said in your last 2 posts. How about being honest about what you really said instead of trying to change it?

How about being honest about taxes and abortion? No taxes (Christian or otherwise) go to fund abortions but you repeated the lie that they do.

Hospitals are not where one usually goes for early detection/or screening. It is the clinics that usually do that. Planned Parenthood is one of the ones that low-income women and men can go to for those services.

The Kansas House is wanting to eliminate even the funding that goes to those services just because it is Planned Parenthood that is providing them. That is foolish and it will cost us more in the long run for medical care.

Kim Murphree 4 years ago

"most pathetic and sad cases" What you don't realize is that YOU are just one medical crises away from being pathetic and sad and very very poor.

tomatogrower 4 years ago

Family planning does not equal abortion, unless you are a radical Christian who thinks that sex is only for procreation, and a woman should not be protected against pregnancy. You have no right to tell a woman she can't get advice on birth control. You have no right to tell a woman that she can't decide when she wants to have a baby. And you certainly have no right to tell people when they can or cannot have sex. If you only want to have sex to have babies, fine. If you want to have 10 babies, fine. But don't tell me I have to do that. To the conservative, radical Christian extremists, I should not be having sex at all, since I can't have children anymore.

Stay out of my bedroom, and quit sprouting your stupid lies about wanting smaller government. So far, Brownback has expanded the government more than any governor. He has created new departments and given his cronies high paying jobs. He has created extra regulations for abortion clinics that don't apply to other medical clinics. He has required people to have id's to vote, which means people who can't find their birth certificates are going to have to send off for a copy, and those who don't drive will have to get a state ID. His goal to end public education is moving along really nicely. His cronies should be able to make a profit from private schools real soon. You think your taxes were high, wait until your paying your taxes to pay Brownback's overpaid cronies, and paying for private school. What's next? Permits to have sex?

tomatogrower 4 years ago

This isn't about abortion. This is about birth control. Read the article. They want to take away birth control. So they must want women to stop having sex, unless it's for having babies. And we aren't talking just unmarried women. These so called "abortion opponents" want to take away a married couples ability to decide how many children they will have. So you complain about the poor who have children they can't support, but you would do nothing to help them to keep from getting pregnant? Is every ovum that has been kept from fertilizing a dead person to you? Sure hope you just stop having sex with your wife, if you don't want children. The new Brownback sex police might come after you.

Mary Alexander 4 years ago

I agree well said! I do believe you hit it on the head.

Bob Forer 4 years ago

Wish christ would come and take all the christians to heaven so we can have the good earth to ourselves.

Corey Williams 4 years ago

and I'll give you a super loud "AMEN" on that, brother

Come the rapture, things will be a hell of a lot easier around here..

Terry Jacobsen 4 years ago

Don't worry. Your wish will come true someday. I hope you remember your words then. I think you'll be in quite a different mood on that day.

Crazy_Larry 4 years ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

Kevin Randell 4 years ago

True "Christians" do not want you to still be here when that rapture happens.

Look, I usually stay quiet and stay out of this issue, but I have decided to stand for what I believe and take whatever flack you all want to give. I stand for a God that loves you no matter what, even if you hate him, or don't even believe in him. I stand for a Jesus that gave his life to save you.

Now with saying this, I will give you my word. If you don't agree with my beliefs, think I am a fool, want to make fun of me, attack me, or whatever I will take it. I will respect your right to choose, and will not retaliate with hateful words.

I will leave this post saying something I rarely see on here. I love each and everyone of you and wish you all nothing but the best!

Crazy_Larry 4 years ago

I love you too, OklahomaJayhawk! Sorry that my (now deleted) comment offends you. I respect you and I will stand up and fight for your right to religion. But, I have a right to religion too (and freedom from it); and when a religious person, i.e. TJ, uses their religion in an attempt to threaten or intimidate me. Well, then I take exception to that and will speak my mind--vigorously.

Do us all a favor and keep it too yourself (and by it, i think you know what i mean). The world will be a better place; promise. 3 Cheers!

blogme 4 years ago

You are Crazy Larry! Freedom of religion somehow to you means freedom FROM religion? Only way to have freedom from religion is to outlaw religion completely. That's a violation of the constitution. You absolutely have a right to speak your mind, but to think that freedom of religion = freedom from religion is false.

Corey Williams 4 years ago

Yes, I will. Well, I would. But it's never going to happen, so why bother? What will you need a physical body for in a metaphysical realm such as heaven?

Liberty275 4 years ago

I could change four words in that sentence and you would call it bigoted and hateful. Not that I begrudge you exercising your right to hate or be a bigot, I'm just not sure you appreciate your own words as much as you should. Tell me though, do you often wish the people you don't like would die?

Richard Heckler 4 years ago

Of course birth control allows us to PREVENT ABORTIONS, pregnancy and plan the timing of pregnancy. http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/birth-control-4211.htm

There are many health issues that only affect women. This section focuses on women's health issues http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/womens-health-4284.htm

What do you know about sex? What do you know about sexuality? We hear about sex and sexuality almost every day, but much of what we hear is inaccurate and can be confusing. A basic understanding of sex and sexuality can help us sort out myth from fact and help us all enjoy our lives more. http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/sexuality-4323.htm

There are many health issues that only affect men. This section focuses on men's sexual health issues. http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/men-4285.htm

Ezra Klein http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/what-planned-parenthood-actually-does/2011/04/06/AFhBPa2C_blog.html

Flap Doodle 4 years ago

You know what? I'd swear I saw all these links on another thread this morning. Doing some recycling, planet-killer?

Getaroom 4 years ago

You are doing some recycling for sure. Can it grabby!

Jeanne Cunningham 4 years ago

Women are STILL in the majority in the population. Women NEED to become the majority in voting population. Then, when they are legitimately represented, I believe this sort of repressive legislation will never succeed.

I am NOT in favor of abortion. I ALSO do NOT believe anyone has the right to make medical decisions for anyone else - male OR female.

For a political party that in public repeatedly harps on limiting government control, they have an unhealthy preoccupation with trying to control women's private lives.

Corey Williams 4 years ago

As long as they can speak up and say so.

Mike Ford 4 years ago

congrats tom, your party is doing it's best to work with half truths and deception. congrats bible grippers (winning#)

daisyjay 4 years ago

I'm not an expert here but doesn't slashing the funding to Planned Parenthood (where many low-income women get their birth control) actually raise the potential rate of abortions?

And with the cuts in things like Early Childhood Programs, low-income housing programs, Supplemental Nutrition programs, Afterschool programs, and Community Health Centers, we are already struggling to support the children that their parents planned on having.

It just doesn't make sense to stand on your soapbox about taking away the options for birth control, taking away the options for abortion,and then taking away any assistance or financial support for that child after they're born.

jafs 4 years ago

No it doesn't.

Except that it seems to be more about righteous indignation rather than compassion, or any desire to actually help people.

Mary Alexander 4 years ago

That is what I have been saying along. You can not have it both ways. When will these people wake up!!!

whats_going_on 4 years ago

exactly!!!! I've been trying to say this forever...no one ever has a good answer.

Kevin Millikan 4 years ago

Educate yourself people, no funds are used for abortion, they are blowing smoke...think for yourselves and let your representatives know you are smarter than that!

jayhawklawrence 4 years ago

Issues like this are so obviously stupid you begin to wonder if it is a way to turn our focus away from more relevant issues such as corporate welfare and health and retirement issues affecting all of us.

The Republicans have done well by launching vitriol shock and awe rhetoric that has managed to scare a lot of Americans.

You wonder if they are starting to run out of ammunition while they struggle to find leadership in their party that anybody can respect.

It has become obvious to Americans that we need BOTH spending cuts AND reasonable tax reform and in some cases increases to get out of debt.

Over spending and tax cuts for the wealthy got us into this debt crisis.

The Obama response to the Republican plan looks like checkmate to me.

jhawkinsf 4 years ago

Just asking, If Planned Parenthood provides a variety of services and that only 3% of those services are abortions, therefore 97% of the services provided are non-abortions, given that, what percentage of abortions conducted in the United States are done by Planned Parenthood? What percentage of abortions not done by Planned Parenthood are done with a referral by Planned Parenthood? Again, just asking.

Kirk Larson 4 years ago

Conservatives think with their guts. Liberals think with their brains. Conservatives get squeemish about abortion so they shut down Planned Parenthood. Less access to contraception = more unplanned pregnancy = more abortions. Conservatives make the spending argument to cut funding to planned Parenthood. Less STD testing, less prenatal care, less Pap smears = more STD's, more at risk births, more late term cervical cancer = more need for public health spending. Use your brains!

mloburgio 4 years ago

Top 10 Shocking Attacks from the GOP's War on Women 1) Republicans not only want to reduce women's access to abortion care, they're actually trying to redefine rape. After a major backlash, they promised to stop. But they haven't yet. Shocker.

2) A state legislator in Georgia wants to change the legal term for victims of rape, stalking, and domestic violence to "accuser." But victims of other less gendered crimes, like burglary, would remain "victims."

3) In South Dakota, Republicans proposed a bill that could make it legal to murder a doctor who provides abortion care. (Yep, for real.)

4) Republicans want to cut nearly a billion dollars of food and other aid to low-income pregnant women, mothers, babies, and kids.

5) In Congress, Republicans have a bill that would let hospitals allow a woman to die rather than perform an abortion necessary to save her life.

6) Maryland Republicans ended all county money for a low-income kids' preschool program. Why? No need, they said. Women should really be home with the kids, not out working.

7) And at the federal level, Republicans want to cut that same program, Head Start, by $1 billion. That means over 200,000 kids could lose their spots in preschool.

8) Two-thirds of the elderly poor are women, and Republicans are taking aim at them too. A spending bill would cut funding for employment services, meals, and housing for senior citizens.

9) Congress just voted for a Republican amendment to cut all federal funding from Planned Parenthood health centers, one of the most trusted providers of basic health care and family planning in our country.

10) And if that wasn't enough, Republicans are pushing to eliminate all funds for the only federal family planning program. (For humans. But Republican Dan Burton has a bill to provide contraception for wild horses. You can't make this stuff up). http://pol.moveon.org/waronwomen/?rc=fb

deec 4 years ago

Actually since 1973, it is a right, and has always been a remedy for unwanted pregnancy. Legalizing abortion didn't cause abortions to start happening. It just made them safer.

mloburgio 4 years ago

you can't make this stuff up!
Indiana GOP Rep Says Women Will Pretend To Be Raped To Get Free Abortions I just want you to think about this, in my view, giant loophole that could be created where someone who could — now i want to be careful, I don’t want to disparage in any way someone who has gone through the experience of a rape or incest — but someone who is desirous of an abortion could simply say that they’ve been raped or there’s incest. http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/30/indiana-women-fake-rape/

Ken Lewis 4 years ago

Are any free health services available to low income men out of this program? If not, then this gender based program is not Constitutional and should not be proviced with govt money.

newmath 4 years ago

What the hell ever happened to JOBS JOBS JOBS!

Lawrence_Pilot 4 years ago

Ha, ha, you get exactly what you voted for. Keep it up, right wingers, until every last person you disagree with has left the state.

evilpenguin 4 years ago

War and abortion both end in death, why support a war but not an abortion?

ferrislives 4 years ago

What needs to happen is that women in Kansas need to rise up against these big government officials in favor of health services for all. And if they pass the budget with this change, it needs to be challenged in court as unconstitutional.

What gets me is that these are the same people that constantly act as if they are anti big-government, while they stick their hands in everyone else's lives. If they could prove that this money was going towards providing abortions, that would be one thing. But to stir up this nonsense with no proof makes them look not only ignorant, but they can easily be compared with the extremist Muslims that we are fighting today. Neither respect women's rights, which is a downright shame! We should be going forwards, not backwards!

ferrislives 4 years ago

...these big government officials not in favor of health services for all. There, I fixed it!

kelku688 4 years ago

Hence why.... I did not vote for Brownback based on the fact that I prefer bills to not be blindly passed because of so called "conservative beliefs" when these "conservative beliefs" have nothing to do with the actual bill.

2002 4 years ago

To much hyperbole on both sides. If abortion is so little of what the group does then why is such a big deal that funding is cut? If abortion is the main thing that goes on, do people really think cutting a little funding will stop abortions?

I see two main issues: 1) what is the justification for funding this specific organization? Many other options are available for women's health; and 2) the idea that you can fund an organization and they can't use the funds to fund one thing they do is a naive one.

daisyjay 4 years ago

What are the "many other options available for women's health"?

madameX 4 years ago

Healthcare access is in Lawrence. According to the article, this would have the biggest impact on clinics in Wichita and Hays, and that those are the only clinics serving that area. So what are low-income folks supposed to do, drive to Lawrence? Not to mention that Healthcare Access might not have the resources to serve that many extra people, or the resources to provide the specific gynecological services that PP does.

blogme 4 years ago

Don't forget all your other hypotheticals there MadameX. I know Hays is remote, but really, no one there knows anything about women's health outside of Planned Parenthood? Are the women out there all being held against their collective will? LOL! Seriously? Dr's in Hays don't know anything about women's reproductive health? The hospital in Hays knows nothing about women's reproductive health nor employs health care professionals that know anything about womens reproductive health? Or are you simply saying that because abortions can't be done in Hays anymore, that it's too much to ask someone with that condition to have to drive 2-3 hours to a place where they can? Seriously? If that's the case, maybe we should just establish a Planned Parenthood at every county seat so people seeking an abortion won't be inconvenienced and can get serviced when they renew the car tags. Probably makes sense to you huh MadameX?

jafs 4 years ago

Because the funding won't be available for the vast majority of things they provide, which aren't abortions.

Why is that naive? I'm sure there's an easy way to keep the federal funding money separate, and that in order to qualify for it, that's a requirement.

Alyosha 4 years ago

Perhaps you can state your point more clearly, but your claim that "the idea that you can fund an organization and they can't use the funds to fund one thing they do is a naive one" seems to be saying that the one thing PP does is provide abortions, when in fact that's not the one thing they do, nor even anywhere near most of what they do.

Do you believe that the "one thing they do" is provide medical abortion services? If so, what are you basing that misconception on?

It's such a big deal if funding is cut because PP provides low cost affordable preventative health services for women that are not easily or affordably available elsewhere. They exist to serve, not to make a profit by declining coverage as insurance companies do.

This is all quite easily discoverable with just a little bit of research — and an open mind not benighted by ideology and misinformation.

It does no one any good to maintain and spread misconceptions.

bluedawg79 4 years ago

This is what doesn't make sense to me, Kansas Government and Republicans. You would like to make abortion illegal, which would then lead to more and more children being born to families some who may not be able to afford them, which means the tax payers will foot the bill for those who cannot afford to take care of those children. Or, the child is put up for adoption, but its so difficult to qualify for and even afford to adopt children. So then you have an increase in children raised by no family other than the employees of orphanages. How is this increasing your moral view of family values and decreasing government assistance needs?

Joe Hyde 4 years ago

As I understand it, three important aims of Planned Parenthood are: 1) health care screening for detecting medical problems early enough to fix them easily and cheaply; 2) testing to curb the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, and; 3) low-cost contraception that lets women especially gain a more accurate control over their reproductive lives.

If we look at Planned Parenthood as a socio-political experiment, it is one that has proven itself a most useful conservative experiment, not a liberal or libertarian experiment. Planned Parenthood allows its clients to pursue a more conservative and safe sexual and reproductive lifestyle.

Many Republican legislators in the Kansas House seem at the moment incapable of connecting the dots that create a picture of the social benefits being delivered by Planned Parenthood clinics. How can these legislators call themselves "conservatives" when here they're working against fellow citizens in need who are following exactly what the conservative concept of defensive medicine stands for?

tomatogrower 4 years ago

They can connect the dots. More people, mean more competition to get jobs, which means the employers, the Republican's cronies, have to pay less. So what if a few of them end up on the streets and starve to death. They could care less, as long as their supporters will get to make more money by not being forced to pay workers a living wage. They are eliminating unions now. Now they just need to outlaw birth control. Eventually they will get to start hiring children again. Of course, the plan will backfire in the end, just like it did before. Right now they have the lower classes convinced that the big bad unions and Planned Parenthood are out to get them, but eventually they will get wise. History, especially our history has proven it so. Now if we can just keep them from completely rewriting history. Is it time to start hiding our books?

heygary 4 years ago

According to a recent WorldMag.com article, American history books frequently mention the lynching of African-Americans; one count from 1882 to the 1960s records 3,445 blacks dying that way. Other facts, though, go generally unrecorded: Since 1973 the number of aborted African-American babies totals 12 million, and every day in the United States some 1,500 die through abortion.

African-Americans comprise about 13% of the US populations, in a given year they account for over 33% of the 1.2M abortions performed in the US.

It literally sickens me to see the recognized leaders of the African-American community side with "redistribution of wealth" in the face of what can only be described as sactioned genocide.

With two in five African-American pregnancies ending in abortion, one would think that black voters might beginning to look beyond blind loyalty to Democrats and vote pro-life?

tomatogrower 4 years ago

Then why are you against these women getting family planning education through Planned Parenthood? I can assure you that those of us who support family planning would much rather help prevent the pregnancy from happening, than help a woman get an abortion. Yet, people like Brownback, who is a conservative Catholic, are against anything but abstinence, even though there are plenty of ways to keep from getting pregnant in the first place. We don't all have mommies who can get us a lucrative job learning to dance on TV. And if they want women to keep those babies why don't they start creating jobs and providing day care, so the mothers can support their babies?

ferrislives 4 years ago

According to their own site's tagline, WORLD Magazine: Today's News, Christian views

Boy that sounds like an unbiased magazine (sarcasm).

heygary 4 years ago

Christian views? Does that negate the atrosity? Amazing how liberals crap thier collective pants because we don't step in to stop genocide of hundreds or thousands in the 3rd world but blow right past the carnage on our doorstep! Shame on you.

ferrislives 4 years ago

Wow, heygary, did you drink too much caffeine? First, I'm not a liberal; nice assumption of yours.

Second, the government has no business in the personal lives of American women.

Third, as was already stated, these funds don't go for abortions. Quite the contrary. Among other things, PP uses these funds to help prevent women from getting pregnant in the first place! Which would of course lead to LESS abortions. So maybe you should think about this a little harder, and stop jumping to your Faux News talking points...I mean conclusions.

strongarmcrunch 4 years ago

I would rather see the total end to faith-based initiatives. All of them. If they are faith-based, end them.

beatrice 4 years ago

Heygary, they aren't babies, they are fetuses (feti?).

Most pregancies end in miscarriages, many without the woman even knowing she was even pregnant. If you consider them "babies" at and beyond inception, then clearly God is the biggest killer of babies. If God is the biggest killer of babies, why then do we give tax exemption status to churches, especially to churches that tell their flock not to use birth control? It only adds to God's killing of more and more babies!

We need to cut tax exemptions for churches because God kills babies.

Or we can recognize that they aren't babies until they are born (or at least viable). Geez.

evilpenguin 4 years ago

"Most pregnancies end in miscarriages". Is that intended to be a factual statement?

strongarmcrunch 4 years ago

I don't what she intended, but it is a fact.

Cait McKnelly 4 years ago

It is indeed a fact. Statistically, 80% (and change) of all conceptions are, by nature, not by medical intervention, never carried to term. In the vast majority of them, the woman never even knows she had conceived.

LoveThsLife 4 years ago

Cait that is not true-it's more like 40%.

notaubermime 4 years ago

Cait's statement is correct.

http://publish.uwo.ca/~kennedyt/t108.pdf

Up to 70% fail to implant and 25% of those that do implant fail to come to term. That adds up to more than 80% of conceptions.

LoveThsLife 4 years ago

No, nota re-read it says, "In humans, it has been ESTIMATED that between 30% and 70% of conceptuses are lost before or at the time of implantation, without women being aware that they were pregnant."

Nowhere does it say 80% of all pregnancies end in miscarriage and just adding two different percentages together from different statistical surveys doesn't really work.

And the whole point of that article is speculation that the low implantation rate with in vitro procedures could possibly be linked to low implantation rates in humans. None of this has actually been proven. So to sit there and make the kind of claim that is being made is pretty disingenuous.

notaubermime 4 years ago

You're twisting words and making excuses. Studies on implantation suggest up to 70% of fertilized zygotes implant. Studies on post-implantation survival suggest up to 25% fail to come to term. Do the math correctly and it comes out at about 80%.

So the claim Cait made is justifiable using the information available. That is the bottom line whether you like that conclusion or not.

LoveThsLife 4 years ago

No, nota I'm not. Re-read it says between 30-70%, that's a huge range and picking the highest percentage in that range and adding it to another statistic shows a complete lack of understanding of basic statistics.

Please, if your going to argue a pro-choice argument use a better one than THAT. It's bad form and shows a complete lack of understanding of statistics and research.

Quite frankly, I'm done because you have no idea what you are talking about.

LoveThsLife 4 years ago

Bea...give me some hard data to back up that fact. "Most pregnancies end in miscarriages" is a sweeping claim and I don't believe it.

Yes, miscarriage is the most common type of pregnancy loss and yes, chemical pregnancies make up 50%-75% of all miscarriages. But from what I have read only 10%-25% of recognized pregnancies will result in miscarriage. No where have I ever read that "most pregnancies end in miscarriages".

How is God responsible for how a woman's body reacts to pregnancy? Give me a freaking break. It's called life on earth..things happen.

I call BS on this argument.

notaubermime 4 years ago

It depends on what you define as "miscarriage" and "pregnancy". The numbers you are using reference "pregnancy" as happening after the blastocyst implants in the uterus.

That said, 30-70% of zygotes do not make it to that stage and fail to implant. As such, at least 50% of all zygotes naturally fail to come to term. Thus, it simply depends on what one defines "miscarriage" as being. If one views a pregnancy as the time between the fertilization of the ovum and birth of the child, and a miscarriage as being a natural termination of a pregnancy, Beatrice's comments hold true.

Katara 4 years ago

"But from what I have read only 10%-25% of recognized pregnancies will result in miscarriage." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The key word in your statement is "recognized" which means 10%-25% is under the category of women who knew they were pregnant.

Many miscarriages happen before a woman knows she is pregnant. Most will just assume they are having a heavy period at that time.

LoveThsLife 4 years ago

Nice cherry picking Katara..read the stats before that dealing with chemical pregnancies.

Your trying to explaining a concept I already understand..which does nothing to prove Bea's claim that "most pregnancies end in miscarriage".

Katara 4 years ago

There is no cherry picking. You said, "But from what I have read only 10%-25% of recognized pregnancies will result in miscarriage."

What you said about chemical pregnancies is, "Yes, miscarriage is the most common type of pregnancy loss and yes, chemical pregnancies make up 50%-75% of all miscarriages."

Do you understand the key difference in those 2 statements? And how they don't prove Bea wrong?

LoveThsLife 4 years ago

Actually, none of those statements prove Bea's assertion.

You see 50%-75% is not about the relationship to chemical pregnancies and conception in general. The percentage I listed describes the percentage of miscarriages due to lack of implantation. So within the overall percentage of miscarriage between 50%-75% of those miscarriages are chemical pregnancies or a failed implantation. So if Bea's assertion that the majority of miscarriages may be overlooked or not recognized...she would be correct. The other percentage discussed recognized pregnancy. None of those proves Bea's assertion that "most pregnancies end in miscarriage"

To get that you would have to figure the overall relationship between miscarriage and conception. No one has yet given that statistic and from what I could find that rate is roughly estimated at 40% which means miscarriage is a common occurrence, but does not mean that the "majority of pregnancies end in miscarriage"

So yeah, I think my questioning of Bea's statement was not out of line.

strongarmcrunch 4 years ago

I also suggest, instead of harming the health of the people in this country by altering funding for Planned Parenthood, that we stop getting involved in wars, leave the ones we are in, and never do it again, unless we are attacked on our own soil.

strongarmcrunch 4 years ago

9-11 Quesetions remain unanswered. It is highly likely this was a false-flag issue.

Corey Williams 4 years ago

If everyone knows it, how about non partisan proof?

jafs 4 years ago

Any reasonable sources for that?

By the way, if it's true, then why did the politician say he didn't mean to be "factual"? He should have defended the statement as true instead.

emceelean 4 years ago

Diatribes born of and developed within bombastic contexts, beyond being incoherent and insubstantial, invariably contain the seed of their own undoing.

Cait McKnelly 4 years ago

There is no denying that Colbert rocks.

Cait McKnelly 4 years ago

Give it a rest, tange. You're starting to sound like (and be just as annoying) as artichokeheart. You aren't convincing anybody, just being irritating.

Liberty275 4 years ago

He's a cheap knock-off of Jon Stewart and not nearly as witty.

CHKNLTL 4 years ago

This a republican ploy to stimulate the economy. Here are the main reasons: 1. Women are forced to have their own abortion and get really sick and have to resort to hospital care and pharmaceuticals to recover. (Good for Healthcare and Big Pharma) 2. The babies will be in poverty and draw welfare and go to school. (Good for Social Services, USDA School Lunch Program, and Dept of Agriculture) 3. Women won't have contraception and will bar all men from having sex with them, becoming completely celibate. (Good for Alcohol sales.....nothin' to do but drink) 4. Men will turn gay to have sex and will spend lots of money on hair products and stylish clothing. (Sales Tax, Hotels, etc.)

(obviously, this is not meant to be taken seriously, just like government propaganda)

BigPrune 4 years ago

Planned non-Parenthood does breast exams? - seriously? since when?

Corey Williams 4 years ago

You've obviously never been.

"Planned non-Parenthood" Pretty witty. What radio host said that? But wouldn't "Planned non-Parenthood" involve some sort of sex education or readily available contraception?

Commenting has been disabled for this item.