Comments on: Speaking of court decisions. . .

By: LifeSteward

LifeSteward — Mon, 24 Jan 2005 13:48:25 +0000

Jim,
You seem like a reasonably intelligent fellow, so you can’t possibly think I’ll rise to some childish bait about kids bombing an abortion clinic. Your side, my side, our side, their side: the only side worthy of debate is the side of the unborn. They cannot fight for themselves, it’s unfortunate and a little unbelievable that we have to defend them against these forces.
I’m not against contraception. I do not advocate violence. I am against abortion and any who practice it, without reservation. So you must understand, it does not matter that the “over-whelming majority” of the work done in the particular clinic you did computer stuff for was non-abortion. That’s like saying “An over-whelming majority of the time Tim McVeigh was a stand-up guy”. The question is did abortion occur? Does it still occur there today? Do they receive any government funds at all?
I applaud your efforts to provide services to “needy” women. If you can offer contraceptives, conception counseling, or even abstinence education, so that the unplanned pregnancy never occurs then you are all right by me. However, the minute you turn on the vaccuum we have a problem.

By: Eric Seymour

Eric Seymour — Mon, 24 Jan 2005 13:32:23 +0000

The difference, Eric, is that there is absolutely no secular basis for what they do.
Who is “they”? If you mean CPCs, I just said that they provide many of the same non-abortion health services that PP does. So from a public funding perspective, both organizations provide both unobjectionable and objectionable services (and in roughly the same proportions).

By: Jim S

Jim S — Sun, 23 Jan 2005 23:13:03 +0000

“Dollar$ are fungible. Planned Parenthood makes tons of money off their contraceptive business even to the “poor” who cannot afford “market” prices.”
The previous quote is an outright falsehood. PP charges the needy women less than they pay for contraceptive supplies. They do NOT make tons of money off of them. I worked directly for the CFO of PPGKC. I was the data processing department which included helping with the budget spreadsheets and accounting software. A number of budget discussions were about how little we could get away with charging and how much could be done for free for those who had nothing to spend. I’ve always been disgusted by those who know nothing spreading falsehoods.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 23 Jan 2005 16:57:23 +0000

Dollar$ are fungible. Planned Parenthood makes tons of money off their contraceptive business even to the “poor” who cannot afford “market” prices. The dollars they get from governments allow them to use taxpayer monies for their killing side. Remove the public monies and their killing side would diminish greatly.

By: Jim S

Jim S — Sun, 23 Jan 2005 00:16:33 +0000

“But how would you feel if the government began funding Christian crisis pregnancy centers?” The difference, Eric, is that there is absolutely no secular basis for what they do.

By: Jim S

Jim S — Sun, 23 Jan 2005 00:14:58 +0000

lifesteward,
Many of your side of this debate also think that the state should have the right to outlaw all contraceptives. They had that right and argued that they should be able to keep it as recently as the early ’60s. Where are YOU willing to draw the line or do you believe in a line at all?
Remember that I said that I worked at Planned Parenthood? The overwhelming majority of what was done had nothing to do with abortion. There were 8 clinics running 6 days a week. At one of those for less than half a day twice a week abortions were available. A couple of high school kids decided that the pro-life side was right when assigned the subject as a debate. They felt so strongly about it that they firebombed a clinic that had nothing to do with abortion. Well, they certainly had an effect on the operations of PP. They forced them to raise the amount charged to poor women for non-abortion care. Wow.

By: lifesteward

lifesteward — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 23:08:08 +0000

Why are the “undoubtedly” the things they spend their government money on? And yes, I certainly agree that 244,000 abortions is 244,000 too many. I think that as long as they perform any abortions, they should receive no government funds. It doesn’t matter if that is the majority of their “clients” or not. As for receiving contraception, there are many of us who consider “emergency contraception” as an equivelant of abortion.

By: Eric Seymour

Eric Seymour — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 22:24:00 +0000

Yes, PP does more than fund abortions. But how would you feel if the government began funding Christian crisis pregnancy centers? CPCs provide all sorts of health services for their clients in addition to sharing the Christian faith and promoting the pro-life agenda.

By: wahoofive

wahoofive — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:12:21 +0000

Of course your intent is to imply that government money is funding abortions, but according to PP’s annual report, of their 2.8 million clients, they only performed 244,000 abortions. You’re of course welcome to think that’s 244,000 too many, but that means the majority of their clients receive contraception, HIV tests, pregnancy tests, breast exams, sterilization procedures, and the like, which are undoubtedly the activities funded by the government. Is it legitimate to say that if an organization receives a government grant for a specific activity, every other activity the organization engages in must meet with your approval? That would be the end of university research support.

By: ProLifeBlogs

ProLifeBlogs — Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:09:27 +0000

Let Us Mourn – 32 years of Death

In the United States, over 45 million pre-born boys and girls have been killed since the Jan. 22, 1973 Supreme Court Decision that legalized abortion. Each year, nearly 20,000 abortions are performed after the 21st week of pregnancy. Our most…