Current Events > teen abortions surge in texas after defunding Planned parenthood

(+) Yeah! (+)

JohnLennon6 posted...

OpheliaAdenade posted...

darkjedilink posted...

I don't care how many abortions are done, so long as my tax money doesn't pay for them.

I shouldn't have to pay for someone else's birth control. You want to have sex? Take some fuckin' responsibility and pay for your own birth control.

you pay for worse things with your tax money. Stop worrying about it.

Maybe I want the government to stop wasting my money?

Then you should probably fight for them to re-fund Planned Parenthood.
---

JohnLennon6 posted...

OpheliaAdenade posted...

darkjedilink posted...

I don't care how many abortions are done, so long as my tax money doesn't pay for them.

I shouldn't have to pay for someone else's birth control. You want to have sex? Take some fuckin' responsibility and pay for your own birth control.

you pay for worse things with your tax money. Stop worrying about it.

Maybe I want the government to stop wasting my money?

But this is one of the few things the government does absolutely right and greatly benefits society.

I'm sorry Republicans want more abortions, more teen pregnancy, more dead/injured/sick women, etc.
---

Trust me, you guys are going to be paying for those babies one way or another. Either the abortion itself, or welfare to take care of it. One of these costs a lot more than the other though. :u
---

hockeybub89 posted...

JohnLennon6 posted...

OpheliaAdenade posted...

darkjedilink posted...

I don't care how many abortions are done, so long as my tax money doesn't pay for them.

I shouldn't have to pay for someone else's birth control. You want to have sex? Take some fuckin' responsibility and pay for your own birth control.

you pay for worse things with your tax money. Stop worrying about it.

Maybe I want the government to stop wasting my money?

But this is one of the few things the government does absolutely right and greatly benefits society.

I'm sorry Republicans want more abortions, more teen pregnancy, more dead/injured/sick women, etc.

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.

There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.
---

darkjedilink posted...

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.

They're not paying for people to have sex.
---

darkjedilink posted...

hockeybub89 posted...

JohnLennon6 posted...

OpheliaAdenade posted...

darkjedilink posted...

I don't care how many abortions are done, so long as my tax money doesn't pay for them.

I shouldn't have to pay for someone else's birth control. You want to have sex? Take some fuckin' responsibility and pay for your own birth control.

you pay for worse things with your tax money. Stop worrying about it.

Maybe I want the government to stop wasting my money?

But this is one of the few things the government does absolutely right and greatly benefits society.

I'm sorry Republicans want more abortions, more teen pregnancy, more dead/injured/sick women, etc.

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.

There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.

Zero reason if you hate women and love abortions, sure.
---

https://www.yahoo.com/news/insane-texas-bill-attacks-abortion-175052728.html

Texas also wants to ban private insurance companies from covering abortions.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.

There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.

You are misinformed. No one, outside of prostitution is paying people to have sex.

Then PP doesn't need taxpayer money, does it?
---

darkjedilink posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.

There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.

You are misinformed. No one, outside of prostitution is paying people to have sex.

Then PP doesn't need taxpayer money, does it?

How is PP paying people for sex when teen pregnancies rise without it?
---

shockthemonkey posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.

There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.

You are misinformed. No one, outside of prostitution is paying people to have sex.

Then PP doesn't need taxpayer money, does it?

PP gets taxpayer money the same way any other health provider gets it - through Medicaid and other programs that are already in place to help low income people have access to healthcare.

Your argument makes absolutely no sense. No one other than trolls are still trying to be anti-PP in this topic, and your troll logic sucks.

Again, there is no reason it needs to. PP can and should operate purely on private donations.

Why must the government provide abortions and pregnancy services?
---

darkjedilink posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.

There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.

You are misinformed. No one, outside of prostitution is paying people to have sex.

Then PP doesn't need taxpayer money, does it?

Imagine being this daft.
---

I find it pretty interesting that Planned Parenthood has become a darling of the left when its founder supported eugenics and originally wanted it to be used for abortions in black neighborhoods to control growing populations that she thought threatened the "good breeding" of society. It's actually quite disgusting.

But that historical point aside, I've never heard a good reason for why PP needs to be a federally-funded program. I don't understand why an Asian man in California needs to be paying for the abortion of a white girl in Mississippi, for example. If this is a such a valuable service, allow it to function as a qualified non-profit and let taxpayers fund it charitably as desired.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.

There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.

You are misinformed. No one, outside of prostitution is paying people to have sex.

Then PP doesn't need taxpayer money, does it?

They aren't paying for people to have sex.

You do not make sense.

If the person who is having sex isn't paying for their own birth control, but are receiving birth control from the government, they are being paid so they may have sex.

Did I dumb it down enough for you yet?
---

darkjedilink posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.

There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.

You are misinformed. No one, outside of prostitution is paying people to have sex.

Then PP doesn't need taxpayer money, does it?

PP gets taxpayer money the same way any other health provider gets it - through Medicaid and other programs that are already in place to help low income people have access to healthcare.

Your argument makes absolutely no sense. No one other than trolls are still trying to be anti-PP in this topic, and your troll logic sucks.

Again, there is no reason it needs to. PP can and should operate purely on private donations.

Why must the government provide abortions and pregnancy services?

Probably because government providing healthcare services to the public is a net good for society.
---

It is such a valuable service that it absolutely should be one of the things the government provides
---

darkjedilink posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.

There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.

You are misinformed. No one, outside of prostitution is paying people to have sex.

Then PP doesn't need taxpayer money, does it?

They aren't paying for people to have sex.

You do not make sense.

If the person who is having sex isn't paying for their own birth control, but are receiving birth control from the government, they are being paid so they may have sex.

Did I dumb it down enough for you yet?

They will have more sex without Planned Parenthood
---

"ugh...why do MY tax dollars aid in building safe roads for OTHER PEOPLE to drive on..now I'M paying people to DRIVE!?"

TheVipaGTS posted...

"ugh...why do MY tax dollars aid in building safe roads for OTHER PEOPLE to drive on..now I'M paying people to DRIVE!?"

Your tax dollars don't pay for that, and you missed the point on top of that.

There is a reason certain programs are handled at the federal level -- namely because it's not possible for them to be handled at the local, state, or private level. PP does not fall into that category.
---

hockeybub89 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.

There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.

You are misinformed. No one, outside of prostitution is paying people to have sex.

Then PP doesn't need taxpayer money, does it?

They aren't paying for people to have sex.

You do not make sense.

If the person who is having sex isn't paying for their own birth control, but are receiving birth control from the government, they are being paid so they may have sex.

Did I dumb it down enough for you yet?

They will have more sex without Planned Parenthood

Idk if that would be true, but really whether or not the government is paying for birth control doesn't change that people will likely have sex regardless. Without government paid birth control, many people will likely just have sex without birth control leading to unwanted pregnancies. As what we see with Texas and their defunding of PP.
---

Tmaster148 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.

There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.

You are misinformed. No one, outside of prostitution is paying people to have sex.

Then PP doesn't need taxpayer money, does it?

PP gets taxpayer money the same way any other health provider gets it - through Medicaid and other programs that are already in place to help low income people have access to healthcare.

Your argument makes absolutely no sense. No one other than trolls are still trying to be anti-PP in this topic, and your troll logic sucks.

Again, there is no reason it needs to. PP can and should operate purely on private donations.

Why must the government provide abortions and pregnancy services?

Probably because government providing healthcare services to the public is a net good for society.

You ever hear of Cuba, Mexico, Venezuela, Greece, China, or India?

No, it is not.
---

The Admiral posted...

But that historical point aside, I've never heard a good reason for why PP needs to be a federally-funded program.

Its clinics receive funds from Medicaid. When we talk about "federal funding" for PP, what's really being discussed is "people on Medicaid are using its services and the clinics are being reimbursed by the federal government as a result." It's not singled out; it operates the same way many other doctors and medical facilities do with Medicaid.
---

darkjedilink posted...

You ever hear of Cuba, Mexico, Venezuela, Greece, China, or India?No, it is not.

Have you ever heard about the countries that are working well with it? :u Like the one to the north of us?
---

darkjedilink posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.

There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.

You are misinformed. No one, outside of prostitution is paying people to have sex.

Then PP doesn't need taxpayer money, does it?

PP gets taxpayer money the same way any other health provider gets it - through Medicaid and other programs that are already in place to help low income people have access to healthcare.

Your argument makes absolutely no sense. No one other than trolls are still trying to be anti-PP in this topic, and your troll logic sucks.

Again, there is no reason it needs to. PP can and should operate purely on private donations.

Why must the government provide abortions and pregnancy services?

Probably because government providing healthcare services to the public is a net good for society.

You ever hear of Cuba, Mexico, Venezuela, Greece, China, or India?

No, it is not.

Canada, UK, Sweden, Norway, Germany, France.
---

darkjedilink posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.

There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.

You are misinformed. No one, outside of prostitution is paying people to have sex.

Then PP doesn't need taxpayer money, does it?

PP gets taxpayer money the same way any other health provider gets it - through Medicaid and other programs that are already in place to help low income people have access to healthcare.

Your argument makes absolutely no sense. No one other than trolls are still trying to be anti-PP in this topic, and your troll logic sucks.

Again, there is no reason it needs to. PP can and should operate purely on private donations.

Why must the government provide abortions and pregnancy services?

Probably because government providing healthcare services to the public is a net good for society.

You ever hear of Cuba, Mexico, Venezuela, Greece, China, or India?

No, it is not.

I heard of Canada and Scandanvian countries too.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

Idk if that would be true, but really whether or not the government is paying for birth control doesn't change that people will likely have sex regardless. Without government paid birth control, many people will likely just have sex without birth control leading to unwanted pregnancies. As what we see with Texas and their defunding of PP.

It is true. See the sources I posted.

Having low socioeconomic classes gain access to contraceptives does lower the numbers of unwanted pregnancies. End of story. People are going to have sex regardless and there is nothing wrong with sex.

But that wasn't what I replying to.

Hockey said people would have more sex without PP and I just don't know if you can correlate more pregnancies with people having more sex.
---

darkjedilink posted...

You ever hear of Cuba,

Yes I have

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/11/cuba-health/508859/

Many consider it more than decent. After a visit to Havana in 2014, the director-general of the World Health Organization Margaret Chan called for other countries to follow Cuba’s example in health care. Years before, the World Health Organization’s ranking of countries with “the fairest mechanism for health-system finance” put Cuba first among Latin American and Caribbean countries (and far ahead of the United States).

Cuba has long had a nearly identical life expectancy to the United States, despite widespread poverty. The humanitarian-physician Paul Farmer notes in his book Pathologies of Power that there’s a saying in Cuba: “We live like poor people, but we die like rich people.” Farmer also notes that the rate of infant mortality in Cuba has been lower than in the Boston neighborhood of his own prestigious hospital, Harvard’s Brigham and Women’s.

All of this despite Cuba spending just $813 per person annually on health care compared with America’s $9,403.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jan/31/tom-harkin/sen-tom-harkin-says-cuba-has-lower-child-mortality/

On child mortality, we found a few data sources that are generally considered credible. According to the CIA Factbook, Cuba infant mortality rate is indeed lower -- an estimated 4.76 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2013, compared to 5.90 for the United States.

And more precisely given the phrase Harkin chose, Cuba also has a better child mortality rate -- that is, the likelihood of death under 5 years of age. According to the World Health Organization, Cuba had 6 deaths under age 5 per 1,000 live births between 2005 and 2010, compared to 8 deaths for the United States.

---

Tmaster148 posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

Idk if that would be true, but really whether or not the government is paying for birth control doesn't change that people will likely have sex regardless. Without government paid birth control, many people will likely just have sex without birth control leading to unwanted pregnancies. As what we see with Texas and their defunding of PP.

It is true. See the sources I posted.

Having low socioeconomic classes gain access to contraceptives does lower the numbers of unwanted pregnancies. End of story. People are going to have sex regardless and there is nothing wrong with sex.

But that wasn't what I replying to.

Hockey said people would have more sex without PP and I just don't know if you can correlate more pregnancies with people having more sex.

My statement was a tad too speculative I admit. Let's just stick to the sure things of increased abortions, Unsafe sex, and unwanted pregnancy.
---

shockthemonkey posted...

darkjedilink posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.

There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.

You are misinformed. No one, outside of prostitution is paying people to have sex.

Then PP doesn't need taxpayer money, does it?

PP gets taxpayer money the same way any other health provider gets it - through Medicaid and other programs that are already in place to help low income people have access to healthcare.

Your argument makes absolutely no sense. No one other than trolls are still trying to be anti-PP in this topic, and your troll logic sucks.

Again, there is no reason it needs to. PP can and should operate purely on private donations.

Why must the government provide abortions and pregnancy services?

So you want Medicaid completely dismantled or do you just not understand the concept of healthcare?

Considering the fact that the government is America's largest insurance provider, but we bitch about health care, yeah - kill Medicaid.
---

Antifar posted...

darkjedilink posted...

You ever hear of Cuba,

Yes I have

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/11/cuba-health/508859/

Many consider it more than decent. After a visit to Havana in 2014, the director-general of the World Health Organization Margaret Chan called for other countries to follow Cuba’s example in health care. Years before, the World Health Organization’s ranking of countries with “the fairest mechanism for health-system finance” put Cuba first among Latin American and Caribbean countries (and far ahead of the United States).

Cuba has long had a nearly identical life expectancy to the United States, despite widespread poverty. The humanitarian-physician Paul Farmer notes in his book Pathologies of Power that there’s a saying in Cuba: “We live like poor people, but we die like rich people.” Farmer also notes that the rate of infant mortality in Cuba has been lower than in the Boston neighborhood of his own prestigious hospital, Harvard’s Brigham and Women’s.

All of this despite Cuba spending just $813 per person annually on health care compared with America’s $9,403.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jan/31/tom-harkin/sen-tom-harkin-says-cuba-has-lower-child-mortality/

On child mortality, we found a few data sources that are generally considered credible. According to the CIA Factbook, Cuba infant mortality rate is indeed lower -- an estimated 4.76 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2013, compared to 5.90 for the United States.

And more precisely given the phrase Harkin chose, Cuba also has a better child mortality rate -- that is, the likelihood of death under 5 years of age. According to the World Health Organization, Cuba had 6 deaths under age 5 per 1,000 live births between 2005 and 2010, compared to 8 deaths for the United States.

So, all those homeless and impoverished people, all those political dissenters murdered, all that's a sign of a good society?

GTFOH.
---

shockthemonkey posted...

Ok so you're a completely lost cause who isn't even using real logic

I called it from the start tbh. He's a nutcake. :u
---

darkjedilink posted...

So, all those homeless and impoverished people, all those political dissenters murdered, all that's a sign of a good society?

I think it's a stretch to suggest that their healthcare system is the cause of the massive problems in Cuba, given that similar systems exist without such repression in countries like the UK, Sweden, Finland, etc.
---

Antifar posted...

darkjedilink posted...

So, all those homeless and impoverished people, all those political dissenters murdered, all that's a sign of a good society?

I think it's a stretch to suggest that their healthcare system is the cause of the massive problems in Cuba, given that similar systems exist without such repression in countries like the UK, Sweden, Finland, etc.

I never said it was. I'm merely countering the argument that government-provided healthcare makes society better.
---

darkjedilink posted...

I never said it was. I'm merely countering the argument that government-provided healthcare makes society better.

is this seriously your argument? better for society....you can't be that dense...

darkjedilink posted...

So, all those homeless and impoverished people, all those political dissenters murdered, all that's a sign of a good society?

It's a sign of being fucked by the trade embargo.
---

TheVipaGTS posted...

darkjedilink posted...

I never said it was. I'm merely countering the argument that government-provided healthcare makes society better.

is this seriously your argument? better for society....you can't be that dense...

He's a Hoth alt probably like JohnLennon. Antifar's post proved that universal healthcare was a positive for the people of Cuba. The problem it has are from other sources.

They're inventing vaccines for fuck sake.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/cuba-medical-innovations_us_56ddfacfe4b03a4056799015
---

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Paying for people to have sex is not something the government should be doing.

There is zero reason for PP to not operate on private donation.

You are misinformed. No one, outside of prostitution is paying people to have sex.

Then PP doesn't need taxpayer money, does it?

They aren't paying for people to have sex.

You do not make sense.

He's trolling you dude
---