I can't have a discussion with liars our the willfully ignorant.

Enjoy your weekend.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

You're right. They also fund the gangs in Chicago and all of the murders there because a bunch of those kids come from welfare households.

They also fund opioids including heroin because disabled people use their SSDI checks to buy it.

The State of Massachusetts funded terrorism because the DBags that blew up the Boston marathon were getting state assistance.

The intellectually dishonest position is that the federal government funds abortions. You think that makes me a liar, I think your statements make you purposefully dishonest.

All you're doing is making a good argument to stop welfare, SSDI and state asssistance payments.

And I'd agree with you on that....

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

Did you ignore the link from the ACLU? Or do you just not want to admit your
are wrong?

Just an observation, a whole lot of threads here seem to indicate a growing level of self-hate.

This is why we can't have a real debate in the country people can't even conceptualize small details like this. So instead of debating the actual issue pro-life vs pro-choice were debating how money works in an organization.

I mean seriously we're actually trying to convince someone that an increase in funding to one bucket of planned parenthoods spending means they can push the money they were going to use in that bucket to a different one.

Duffy s example was a good one. It's also like giving a donation to a charity and saying you can only use it for X, they'll just go okay that's great now we can move the money we were using for X and put it towards Y instead.

I'm in the middle for prolife and pro choice depending on the circumstances. But it's also something that will go back and forth for as long as time since there is really no right answer.

quote windywave]

Did you ignore the link from the ACLU? Or do you just not want to admit your wrong?[/quote]
Read the article - it supports CW's claim . . . unless you are being disingenuous re "mandates abortion funding in cases of rape or incest, as well as when a pregnant woman's life is endangered by a physical disorder, illness, or injury."

Congrats on the most asinine post of the day. Both dishonest and disingenuous! Sad!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/...m_term=.e9ddba9c0aa5

---

===============
Proud member of the MSF (Maple Syrup Mafia)

Read the article - it supports CW's claim . . . unless you are being disingenuous re "mandates abortion funding in cases of rape or incest, as well as when a pregnant woman's life is endangered by a physical disorder, illness, or injury."[/quote]
His original statement was the government does not pay for abortion, and that is patently false. He then made the absolute statement the Federal government does not fund abortions. This is facially false as well. It is much tighter requirement, but about 5-10% of abortions are Federally funded, just not the elective ones.

I'm not debating funding of an organization, I am pointing out falsehoods and certain folks don't like that because their narrative is destroyed.

Get off my lawn!

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

I wouldn't align myself with either the pro-life or pro-choice camp. I'd like to see a world without abortion & address the reasons we have abortion instead of simply legislating against it and not addressing the reasons it happens, knowing it will still need to happen in cases. Abortion rates have been tumbling in the US before Trump ascended.

The REAL life issue in my opinion is the issue of cradle to grave life rather than the "pro birth" movement disguised as "pro life". I.E. What conditions can we create to make life better for impoverished children so they're prepared to contribute productively to society when they grow up rather than continuing generational poverty and value all of society equally in that regard? Just being alive isn't the answer the pro-birth crowd touts it as.

Now abortion internationally -- that's another topic, as it's growing in huge rates internationally. But that's not what we're talking about here.

Come one man, that is not their business.

http://lmgtfy.com/...parenthood+functions

Do they provide abortions, sure, but that is not their main focus. And I am certain you know that.

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/...enthood_Services.pdf

If anything, their main business is vasectomies and birth control(more than 10:1 over abortions) and STD tests/treatments (more than 13:1 over abortions).

Edited for ctrl v/v problem re: vasectomies and birth control

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

In your world the welfare budget would probably double...

---

___________________________________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/...eoesophageal_fistula
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebral_palsy
2020 National Masters Champion - M40-44 - 400m IM
Canadian Record Holder 35-39M & 40-44M - 200 m Butterfly (LCM)

I don't even know what you mean by this statement...in your world is a person only valuable based on their utility? So using your logic (if I understand what you saying) shouldn't we start putting people down when the age, aren't all people on SSI/Medicare a waste?

Here is my bottom-line, and its a Christian worldview and I realize many here in the LR don't have these beliefs...all life is an expression of God's creation and its all valuable. I try not to look at a person and say they only have value because they can produce...for the most part we allow abortion because these babies would be an inconvenience...

The biggest problem right now is societal. Giving up your baby for adoption now has a bigger stigma than killing your baby.

And that's just fucked up.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Another bullshit statement.

---

===============
Proud member of the MSF (Maple Syrup Mafia)

I don't think that's true.

I think that, in the cases of simply unwanted or inconvenient pregnancies (not instances of rape, incest, or where there are birth defects/complications, etc) the reason many choose abortion over carrying to term and then giving up for adoption is because the later would be much more difficult, emotionally and physically, to the mother (not including the effects of the stigma of either choice).

I know quite a few women who have had an abortion. I know nobody who has given a baby up for adoption, of their own free will at least.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

And I know several women that have had an abortion too - there are emotional consequences to this decision as well as physical ones. And the pro-choice people never talk about this impact.

So after 54 million abortions we have cheapened life for our convenience, this will lead to other "interesting" choices down the line once the money to take care of those can't take care of themselves gets the majority uncomfortable.

Sorry for jumping in, I know I am in the minority here in the LR.

There definitely are emotional, and sometimes physical, consequences to having an abortion. However, I would disagree with you that pro-choice people never talk about that. None of the women I know who have had one said they didn't know what to expect in the aftermath of an abortion. I think, at the time, they saw it as the least painful option (mentally and physically), and even though there were pretty thoroughly councilled on what to expect after an abortion, how can one really be prepared for that until they actually experience it.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

Of course they talk about that. It's just not talked about in the public debate, because it isn't in any way pertinent to what's being debated.

Every woman who finds themselves in an unwanted pregnancy will have some degree of emotional and physical consequences. It goes without saying. Some people don't suffer as much as others, and some live with lifelong guilt with any of the three outcomes (abortion, adoption, raising a child wholly unprepared).

I had a patient last week, who miscarried and hemorrhaged at 16 weeks. It was a desired pregnancy, would have been her first childbirth. She had six prior elective abortions. You could have measured the sympathy for her among the ICU staff in a thimble. The vast majority of the staff with whom I spoke are pro-choice.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

Not to take away from your inaccurate argument in regards to the feds paying for abortion, but I have to ask; which religious organization are you or the feds funding?

I used to attend that rally every year as a kid, bussed in from NJ with my Pentecostal church/school, so I tend to follow this rally with some interest. It was a major event for them to have the Vice President speak, and it's a little curious that it hasn't happened before.

As a pro-choice with conditions advocate, a health care provider, and a pragmatist, I was disappointed with his action on the Global Gag Rule, and with the administration's characterization of what it would accomplish. People who support these policies don't need feel-good fluff; they need to be told precisely what they accomplish, and what the net results look like, historically, when they're enacted.

Pro-lifers what to end abortion. Logic would follow that they want to reduce the number of abortions as long as they remain legal. Policies that produce a net increase in abortion, and human suffering, need to be fleshed out and debated honestly, and it does a disservice to everyone who cares about the issue to mislead people as to what the policy actually accomplishes.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

learn to spell yourself........ its argument.

Maybe the governments should put a focus on personal responsibility instead of saying ok, you made a mistake, just kill him/ her.