Abortion

[LongGone]

In 2014 the number of abortions performed in a year dropped below one million for the first time since 1975. I remember in 2008 a then forum member berated me for voting for Obama because the number of abortions would sky rocket under his administration. I did not predict or have any inkling that the lows would be the outcome but I do think Republicans need to be careful about not funding Planned Parenthood. As this shows us the cause and effect do not always work the way that one would think.

 

[wtyson]

My prayer is that we end the vast majority of abortions in America in my lifetime! This is a barbaric practice!

 

[Ransom]

I do think Republicans need to be careful about not funding Planned Parenthood. As this shows us the cause and effect do not always work the way that one would think.

I'm fairly sure the "cause and effect" does not go "increased Planned Parenthood funding leads to fewer abortions." That may be correlation, but it's not causation.

 

[Recovering IFB]

Abortions need to be made illegal. Mothers and doctors who plan and perform such murders should be tried as murderers. There shouldn't be any inkling of comprimise on this issue.

endabortionnow.com

 

[prophet]

Abortions need to be made illegal. Mothers and doctors who plan and perform such murders should be tried as murderers. There shouldn't be any inkling of comprimise on this issue.

endabortionnow.com

On a case by case basis, if premeditation can be established, then they should be executed.



earnestly contend

 

[LongGone]

I do think Republicans need to be careful about not funding Planned Parenthood. As this shows us the cause and effect do not always work the way that one would think.

I'm fairly sure the "cause and effect" does not go "increased Planned Parenthood funding leads to fewer abortions." That may be correlation, but it's not causation.

Preventing unwanted pregnancies could realistically reduce the number of abortions. 

 

[T-Bone]

I do think Republicans need to be careful about not funding Planned Parenthood. As this shows us the cause and effect do not always work the way that one would think.

I'm fairly sure the "cause and effect" does not go "increased Planned Parenthood funding leads to fewer abortions." That may be correlation, but it's not causation.

Preventing unwanted pregnancies could realistically reduce the number of abortions.

I am hoping you are not inferring that abortion is a legitimate form of birth control...but let me add, that stopping the government both promoting and paying for abortions would definitely reduce the number of abortions.

 

[Recovering IFB]

Abortions need to be made illegal. Mothers and doctors who plan and perform such murders should be tried as murderers. There shouldn't be any inkling of comprimise on this issue.

endabortionnow.com

On a case by case basis, if premeditation can be established, then they should be executed.



earnestly contend

Let's see...... a woman finds out she's pregnant and arranges for an abortion.....doctor willing to perform procedure.
A woman finds out hubby is cheating and arranges his demise... hitman/thug willing to perform execution.

Do you see the similarity?

 

[Ransom]

Preventing unwanted pregnancies could realistically reduce the number of abortions.

PP makes no small coin from abortions, and its head is an outspoken advocate for abortion. What makes you think they have the slightest interest in preventing unwanted pregnancies?

 

[LongGone]

I do think Republicans need to be careful about not funding Planned Parenthood. As this shows us the cause and effect do not always work the way that one would think.

I'm fairly sure the "cause and effect" does not go "increased Planned Parenthood funding leads to fewer abortions." That may be correlation, but it's not causation.

Preventing unwanted pregnancies could realistically reduce the number of abortions.

I am hoping you are not inferring that abortion is a legitimate form of birth control...but let me add, that stopping the government both promoting and paying for abortions would definitely reduce the number of abortions.

I am not sure how you thought I was inferring that abortion if a legitimate form of birth control. How is government paying or even promoting abortions since they are not a covered service under Medicaid?

 

[subllibrm]

What they aren't counting is the morning after pill abortions.

 

[Smellin Coffee]

What they aren't counting is the morning after pill abortions.

One cannot make a salad if the lettuce is removed from the plate first.

 

[Smellin Coffee]

Abortion rate declines to historic low, with Obamacare a likely contributor, study says

 

[T-Bone]

I do think Republicans need to be careful about not funding Planned Parenthood. As this shows us the cause and effect do not always work the way that one would think.

I'm fairly sure the "cause and effect" does not go "increased Planned Parenthood funding leads to fewer abortions." That may be correlation, but it's not causation.

Preventing unwanted pregnancies could realistically reduce the number of abortions.

I am hoping you are not inferring that abortion is a legitimate form of birth control...but let me add, that stopping the government both promoting and paying for abortions would definitely reduce the number of abortions.

I am not sure how you thought I was inferring that abortion if a legitimate form of birth control. How is government paying or even promoting abortions since they are not a covered service under Medicaid?

You are not that na?ve...when they fund PP and other abortion providers, they are funding abortion. 

 

[Smellin Coffee]

I do think Republicans need to be careful about not funding Planned Parenthood. As this shows us the cause and effect do not always work the way that one would think.

I'm fairly sure the "cause and effect" does not go "increased Planned Parenthood funding leads to fewer abortions." That may be correlation, but it's not causation.

Preventing unwanted pregnancies could realistically reduce the number of abortions.

I am hoping you are not inferring that abortion is a legitimate form of birth control...but let me add, that stopping the government both promoting and paying for abortions would definitely reduce the number of abortions.

I am not sure how you thought I was inferring that abortion if a legitimate form of birth control. How is government paying or even promoting abortions since they are not a covered service under Medicaid?

You are not that na?ve...when they fund PP and other abortion providers, they are funding abortion.

The issue isn't the funding of PP shouldn't be allowed but rather the Hyde Amendment should be better enforced. To get rid of PP altogether will increase abortion rates as well as restrict health care to women and infants, particularly the poorest. Just like repealing the ACA which offers coverage for infants (or should offer), these things actually reduce abortions, knowing that infants of poor mothers can be medically taken care of. I'm absolutely for other alternatives that will decrease the abortion rate and be a medical provider for other women's services for cheap/free so don't think this is about defending PP itself.

If you can get rid of PP and provide care and coverage for poor mothers and children without abortion services, we need to do it. But don't get rid of PP without such a service in place or the abortion rates will begin to rise again. Crisis pregnancy centers are a great alternative but they aren't adequately funded to handle the volume of services that need to be rendered.

 

[T-Bone]

I do think Republicans need to be careful about not funding Planned Parenthood. As this shows us the cause and effect do not always work the way that one would think.

I'm fairly sure the "cause and effect" does not go "increased Planned Parenthood funding leads to fewer abortions." That may be correlation, but it's not causation.

Preventing unwanted pregnancies could realistically reduce the number of abortions.

I am hoping you are not inferring that abortion is a legitimate form of birth control...but let me add, that stopping the government both promoting and paying for abortions would definitely reduce the number of abortions.

I am not sure how you thought I was inferring that abortion if a legitimate form of birth control. How is government paying or even promoting abortions since they are not a covered service under Medicaid?

You are not that na?ve...when they fund PP and other abortion providers, they are funding abortion.

The issue isn't the funding of PP shouldn't be allowed but rather the Hyde Amendment should be better enforced. To get rid of PP altogether will increase abortion rates as well as restrict health care to women and infants, particularly the poorest. Just like repealing the ACA which offers coverage for infants (or should offer), these things actually reduce abortions, knowing that infants of poor mothers can be medically taken care of. I'm absolutely for other alternatives that will decrease the abortion rate and be a medical provider for other women's services for cheap/free so don't think this is about defending PP itself.

If you can get rid of PP and provide care and coverage for poor mothers and children without abortion services, we need to do it. But don't get rid of PP without such a service in place or the abortion rates will begin to rise again. Crisis pregnancy centers are a great alternative but they aren't adequately funded to handle the volume of services that need to be rendered.

Actually, there are plenty of providers for women's health...it is a misnomer to say that PP is necessary or women cannot get help.  There is an agenda of death that will never allow PP to be defunded. We don't have to promote the killing of the innocent to provide care for people.

 

[Smellin Coffee]

I do think Republicans need to be careful about not funding Planned Parenthood. As this shows us the cause and effect do not always work the way that one would think.

I'm fairly sure the "cause and effect" does not go "increased Planned Parenthood funding leads to fewer abortions." That may be correlation, but it's not causation.

Preventing unwanted pregnancies could realistically reduce the number of abortions.

I am hoping you are not inferring that abortion is a legitimate form of birth control...but let me add, that stopping the government both promoting and paying for abortions would definitely reduce the number of abortions.

I am not sure how you thought I was inferring that abortion if a legitimate form of birth control. How is government paying or even promoting abortions since they are not a covered service under Medicaid?

You are not that na?ve...when they fund PP and other abortion providers, they are funding abortion.

The issue isn't the funding of PP shouldn't be allowed but rather the Hyde Amendment should be better enforced. To get rid of PP altogether will increase abortion rates as well as restrict health care to women and infants, particularly the poorest. Just like repealing the ACA which offers coverage for infants (or should offer), these things actually reduce abortions, knowing that infants of poor mothers can be medically taken care of. I'm absolutely for other alternatives that will decrease the abortion rate and be a medical provider for other women's services for cheap/free so don't think this is about defending PP itself.

If you can get rid of PP and provide care and coverage for poor mothers and children without abortion services, we need to do it. But don't get rid of PP without such a service in place or the abortion rates will begin to rise again. Crisis pregnancy centers are a great alternative but they aren't adequately funded to handle the volume of services that need to be rendered.

Actually, there are plenty of providers for women's health...it is a misnomer to say that PP is necessary or women cannot get help.  There is an agenda of death that will never allow PP to be defunded. We don't have to promote the killing of the innocent to provide care for people.

Being a "provider" and an "affordable provider" are two different things. Take away PP and ACA and you will see abortions start rising again.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I do think Republicans need to be careful about not funding Planned Parenthood. As this shows us the cause and effect do not always work the way that one would think.

I'm fairly sure the "cause and effect" does not go "increased Planned Parenthood funding leads to fewer abortions." That may be correlation, but it's not causation.

Preventing unwanted pregnancies could realistically reduce the number of abortions.

I am hoping you are not inferring that abortion is a legitimate form of birth control...but let me add, that stopping the government both promoting and paying for abortions would definitely reduce the number of abortions.

I am not sure how you thought I was inferring that abortion if a legitimate form of birth control. How is government paying or even promoting abortions since they are not a covered service under Medicaid?

You are not that na?ve...when they fund PP and other abortion providers, they are funding abortion.

The issue isn't the funding of PP shouldn't be allowed but rather the Hyde Amendment should be better enforced. To get rid of PP altogether will increase abortion rates as well as restrict health care to women and infants, particularly the poorest. Just like repealing the ACA which offers coverage for infants (or should offer), these things actually reduce abortions, knowing that infants of poor mothers can be medically taken care of. I'm absolutely for other alternatives that will decrease the abortion rate and be a medical provider for other women's services for cheap/free so don't think this is about defending PP itself.

If you can get rid of PP and provide care and coverage for poor mothers and children without abortion services, we need to do it. But don't get rid of PP without such a service in place or the abortion rates will begin to rise again. Crisis pregnancy centers are a great alternative but they aren't adequately funded to handle the volume of services that need to be rendered.

Actually, there are plenty of providers for women's health...it is a misnomer to say that PP is necessary or women cannot get help.  There is an agenda of death that will never allow PP to be defunded. We don't have to promote the killing of the innocent to provide care for people.

Being a "provider" and an "affordable provider" are two different things. Take away PP and ACA and you will see abortions start rising again.

And if you break a mirror, you will have 7 years of bad luck.
Be very afraid...... :

 

[Smellin Coffee]

I do think Republicans need to be careful about not funding Planned Parenthood. As this shows us the cause and effect do not always work the way that one would think.

I'm fairly sure the "cause and effect" does not go "increased Planned Parenthood funding leads to fewer abortions." That may be correlation, but it's not causation.

Preventing unwanted pregnancies could realistically reduce the number of abortions.

I am hoping you are not inferring that abortion is a legitimate form of birth control...but let me add, that stopping the government both promoting and paying for abortions would definitely reduce the number of abortions.

I am not sure how you thought I was inferring that abortion if a legitimate form of birth control. How is government paying or even promoting abortions since they are not a covered service under Medicaid?

You are not that na?ve...when they fund PP and other abortion providers, they are funding abortion.

The issue isn't the funding of PP shouldn't be allowed but rather the Hyde Amendment should be better enforced. To get rid of PP altogether will increase abortion rates as well as restrict health care to women and infants, particularly the poorest. Just like repealing the ACA which offers coverage for infants (or should offer), these things actually reduce abortions, knowing that infants of poor mothers can be medically taken care of. I'm absolutely for other alternatives that will decrease the abortion rate and be a medical provider for other women's services for cheap/free so don't think this is about defending PP itself.

If you can get rid of PP and provide care and coverage for poor mothers and children without abortion services, we need to do it. But don't get rid of PP without such a service in place or the abortion rates will begin to rise again. Crisis pregnancy centers are a great alternative but they aren't adequately funded to handle the volume of services that need to be rendered.

Actually, there are plenty of providers for women's health...it is a misnomer to say that PP is necessary or women cannot get help.  There is an agenda of death that will never allow PP to be defunded. We don't have to promote the killing of the innocent to provide care for people.

Being a "provider" and an "affordable provider" are two different things. Take away PP and ACA and you will see abortions start rising again.

And if you break a mirror, you will have 7 years of bad luck.
Be very afraid...... :

Maybe in the next four years, we might have some statistics to see one way or the other. Maybe...

 

[subllibrm]

The local grocery store regularly sells milk for less than cost. This is called a "loss leader" in marketing. The idea is to get you into the store so that you will buy the items that have a profitable markup.

Planned parenthood is using "women's health care" as their loss leader. Get them in the door with free inoculations (which are also available at the county health department), free exams (which are also available at the county health department),  free wellness checks (which are also available at the county health department), free pregnancy tests (which are also available at the county health department) but can't come up with the resources for free abortions. Those you have to pay for missy.

PP is the ultimate bait & switch scam.