Planned Parenthood

[tommyjones]

Originally Posted by libby

Clearly, some here are unable to connect the dots. Abortion makes the value of human life subjective, and that is the problem.
The value of the life of a baby is measured only by how much they are "wanted", or "planned" by the mother and/or father.
Every single person is equally and individually precious regardless of how others feel about them.
Black people are not lesser human beings because the law said so prior to 18-something-or-other. Or handicapped people less because (as cited in the original article) Margaret Sanger believes so. Jewish people are not less because of Hitler, and in that same way unborn babies are not less because the mother, or Roe v. Wade, or rape.

you dont have the same feeling when you miscarry when you are say a month pregnant and when you are 8 months. there is a huge difference in how the woman feels wrt the development of the baby.
its not the same thing, current abortion laws are centered around the stage of development making it increasingly difficult to get an abortion as the months add up.

[C6R_Mag]

Originally Posted by This_person

Women choose to kill their babies everyday, too. My question was "is it okay" for that to happen, as in, is it morally, ethically, legally acceptable?

A woman does not have to live with the child they chose to create after bearing it. There are many adoption agencies begging for those babies. There are many family members who may or may not help. The only choice being denied now is the baby's choice to live.

...it doesnt bother me that you keep saying KILL and MURDER. when are babies considered old enough for life? at one month it's body can not sustain life on it's own, neither at a few months.

yeah, there are thousands of families waiting to adopt crack babies and little retards because their mom didn't care to have it so she didn't care to make it healthy.

when someone makes that CHOICE to give up for adoption, good for them.
but why are you CHOOSING for the mother that carries it.

morals and ethics are personal to each person and when they conflict is when people argue. the law is the law...can't argue that.

tell a women that carries a child for 9 months that her body and life will be exactly the same after she bears the child. lol

[C6R_Mag]

im done with this thread. say what you want, i won't be returning.

ill leave with this...

im right your wrong.

PRO-CHOICE!!!

[This_person]

Originally Posted by tommyjones

you dont have the same feeling when you miscarry when you are say a month pregnant and when you are 8 months. there is a huge difference in how the woman feels wrt the development of the baby.
its not the same thing, current abortion laws are centered around the stage of development making it increasingly difficult to get an abortion as the months add up.

This is just an opinion of mine, but I've lost a child due to miscarriage, and it was very early (the complications were how we found out she was pregnant - pregnant to not pregnant all in one day), and due to an abortion I'd found out about years later. Both were devastating. As if I'd lost one of my children that did survive Roe v. Wade.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by C6R_Mag

...it doesnt bother me that you keep saying KILL and MURDER.

It wasn't meant to bother you. It was meant to speak accurately.

when are babies considered old enough for life? at one month it's body can not sustain life on it's own, neither at a few months.

Babies are considered old enough for life when the fertilized egg embeds itself in the womb to grow.

yeah, there are thousands of families waiting to adopt crack babies and little retards because their mom didn't care to have it so she didn't care to make it healthy.

I'm glad you're coming to your senses and realizing that.[quote]when someone makes that CHOICE to give up for adoption, good for them.
but why are you CHOOSING for the mother that carries it.[quote]I'm not. She (and the father) CHOSE to have a baby as a potential consequence of their "relations". After that, it's options for the baby's life, not options on whether the baby gets life.

morals and ethics are personal to each person and when they conflict is when people argue. the law is the law...can't argue that.

It's conflicting law. Kill a pregnant woman, you're charged with two murders - kill a baby, and you're called a Planned Parenthood doctor. It's inconsistent, and will probably be changed one day.

tell a women that carries a child for 9 months that her body and life will be exactly the same after she bears the child. lol

A fact she knew when she had sex (the vast vast vast majority of the time). THAT's when she had her choice, as did the father.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by C6R_Mag

im done with this thread. say what you want, i won't be returning.

ill leave with this...

im right your wrong.

Well, it was good talking to you, and reading your bumper sticker responses on "PRO-CHOICE" with no substance.

[puggymom]

Originally Posted by AndyMarquisLIVE

There are lots and lots of people who want kids, but can't have them.

Forced childbirth should NOT be the answer to other's fertility issues.

[pcjohnnyb (Premo)]

Originally Posted by puggymom

Forced childbirth should NOT be the answer to other's fertility issues.

I'm all for choice.

I would never get an abortion though

This is where the dilemma comes into play though. Should the father have a choice? He isn't the one carrying a kid for 9+ months In my opinion, if you are a father that WOULDN'T want an abortion, and the woman gets an abortion, well then that is just a way of divine intervention showing that she isn't the woman for you.


I'm all about pro-choice. People need to stop getting in the way of other people's choices that don't affect them in the least. If anything, having abortion be a choice rather than a non-option, it causes less welfare recipients, thus, lower taxes

I'm actually all for spaying/neutering people who cannot afford kids. Have it be something reversible and if they prove themselves worthy, they can at that point have the surgery reversed...but then we delve into "what is 'capable of providing for kids'"

Its all a messy situation do deal with.

How many people psoting in this thread realize that Planned Parenthood's main focus is the prevention of unwanted pregnancies, STD education, vaccinations for the HPV virus and gynecological exams/pap smears for those that don't have a regular doctor/insurance?

I am pro-choice, but even if I wasn't I would appreciate the preventative services this organization offers. If they were not there to help prevent ("plan") then there would be more abortions.

Private doctors do abortions as well. They call them D&C's.

[ItalianScallion (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Wenchy

How many people psoting in this thread realize that Planned Parenthood's main focus is the prevention of unwanted pregnancies, STD education, vaccinations for the HPV virus and gynecological exams/pap smears for those that don't have a regular doctor/insurance?
I am pro-choice, but even if I wasn't I would appreciate the preventative services this organization offers. If they were not there to help prevent ("plan") then there would be more abortions.

Take the hair out of your eyes lady and read the truth:
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A new annual report from Planned Parenthood shows the nation's largest abortion business has made over $1 billion in profit for the first time in its history. The non-profit pro-abortion group shows the historical gain in its new annual report covering 2006-2007.
While Planned Parenthood made $972 milion in its 2005-2006 annual report, last fiscal year it brought in $1.017 billion.

On its web site posting of the annual document, Planned Parenthood says it "highlights our advancements in providing and protecting trusted health care services and medically accurate sexuality education."
Instead, the report finds Planned Parenthood doing more abortions than ever before.
The report shows an increase in the number of provided abortions from 264,943 in 2005 to 289,650 in 2006.
Of concern to pro-life groups, Planned Parenthood acknowledges the receipt of over $336 million in government grants and contracts from both state and federal governments.

The revelations from the annual report upset Tony Perkins, the head of the Family Research Council.
"A majority of Americans oppose taxpayer funding of abortion -- however, still Planned Parenthood receives more than $300 million in taxpayer funding each year for 'family planning' projects that help bolster their abortion trade," he told LifeNews.com.
He said Planned Parenthood was not a "wise investment" of public money because of its history.
"Would you invest in a company whose affiliates are complicit in sexual crimes against children?" he asked, pointing to numerous instances of its centers doing abortions on victims of statutory rape and sexual abuse.

"Would you take your hard-earned money and pile it into a company whose fundraisers "get excited" when someone wishes to target African-American babies for extinction?" he asked.

Perkins said the ultimate slap in the face to the majority of Americans who are pro-life is the fact that Planned Parenthood plans still receives government funds despite the fact its political action committee will spend $10 million this year election[ing] pro-abortion candidates.
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor