August 5, 200818 yr IMHO comparing cells that will develop into a fully functional human as synonimous to a cancer is immoral.
August 5, 200818 yr IMHO comparing cells that will develop into a fully functional human as synonimous to a cancer is immoral. I do not believe so...I believe it is immoral and ludicrous to think that those cells have the same value as a fully born human being. I have said before that I would have no problem banning abortions outside the second and third trimester. I would even be willing to compromise and put a 1-2 abortion limit on a person.
August 5, 200818 yr I do not believe so...I believe it is immoral and ludicrous to think that those cells have the same value as a fully born human being. I have said before that I would have no problem banning abortions outside the second and third trimester. I would even be willing to compromise and put a 1-2 abortion limit on a person. Why differentiate? According to you neither is a fully born human being, what gives? Cells are cells.
August 5, 200818 yr Why differentiate? According to you neither is a fully born human being, what gives? Cells are cells. I believe that by banning abortions outside the 2nd and 3rd trimesters we could possibly reach some sort of a compromise. I am seeking a compromise that will not completely curtail a woman's reproductive rights.
August 5, 200818 yr I believe that by banning abortions outside the 2nd and 3rd trimesters we could possibly reach some sort of a compromise. I am seeking a compromise that will not completely curtail a woman's reproductive rights.Saying "no" to reproductive activity is a right. Abstaining from sex outside of marriage is a right. Choosing to take measures that prevent a pregnancy from occuring in the first place is a right. Killing innocent human beings in what used to be the safest place in the world for them to develop just because they're not convenient is not a right in my book. Planned Parenthood's "mission" is population control plain and simple, and it might be argued that this is more so among certain cultures than others.
August 5, 200818 yr Saying "no" to reproductive activity is a right. Abstaining from sex outside of marriage is a right. Choosing to take measures that prevent a pregnancy from occuring in the first place is a right. Killing innocent human beings in what used to be the safest place in the world for them to develop just because they're not convenient is not a right in my book. Planned Parenthood's "mission" is population control plain and simple, and it might be argued that this is more so among certain cultures than others. I assume that you are refering to racism. Maybe that's where Hitler went wrong. He should have just focused on killing Jewish cells within the womb, and nobody would have been offended.
August 5, 200818 yr Comparing PPFA to Hitler is a stretch you cant even pull off..... Planned Parenthood isn't invading the Sudetenland! Exactly! I believe that you are beginning to see the light. Even an unarmed young adult male had a better chance of surviving the onslaught of Hitler's war machine than an innocent unborn child stands of surviving an encounter with an abortionist. Planned Parenthood isn't trying to wipe out a race of people...Planned Parenthood's founder might beg to disagree if she had not descended to depths of Hades. Many things started off with a shady past,referring to the eugenics and racist past of planned parenthood, that have come to do good in society.Planned Parenthood is not one of them. The organization is still butchering innocent unborn human children. IMHO, a fully functioning human being is more important than cells in a womb....Undoubtedly the few people who survive abortion attempts would disagree with you. Have you ever asked one of them?
August 5, 200818 yr I can absolutely understand being upset about abortion. But, if R v. W were oveturned, and every state made abortion illegal, then Planned Parenthood would have no involvement at all with abortions. But, do you not agree that the other services they provide, especially for the low income women are needed?
August 5, 200818 yr I can absolutely understand being upset about abortion. But, if R v. W were oveturned, and every state made abortion illegal, then Planned Parenthood would have no involvement at all with abortions. But, do you not agree that the other services they provide, especially for the low income women are needed? I agree with that. Not to mention that the funding for such would be a fraction of what it has ballooned to today. But will you concede that the majority of the funding and cost goes to abortion as it is today with R v. W in tact?
August 5, 200818 yr I agree with that. Not to mention that the funding for such would be a fraction of what it has ballooned to today. But will you concede that the majority of the funding and cost goes to abortion as it is today with R v. W in tact? Actually, unless I was able to see the breakdown of the expeditures of the funding PP receives, I wouldn't. To my knowledge, women seeking abortions pay that cost themselves. I'm not aware of any funding that provides abortions at no cost, or low cost, or subsidizes abortion in any way.
August 5, 200818 yr Actually, unless I was able to see the breakdown of the expeditures of the funding PP receives, I wouldn't. To my knowledge, women seeking abortions pay that cost themselves. I'm not aware of any funding that provides abortions at no cost, or low cost, or subsidizes abortion in any way. I figured that would be your response.
August 5, 200818 yr Here's a link to a breakdown of income. If anyone would deny that the overwhelming majority of "clinical income" is anything but $ from abortions, well, they are either naive or perhaps were injured during delivery. http://www.all.org/stopp/04gpie.pdf
August 5, 200818 yr I figured that would be your response. I don't understand. Why would I concede something that I don't know? :confused: I assume you meant your comment about what you figured my response to be to be derisive? If so, do you somehow assume that I approve of abortion? You couldn't be more wrong, if so.
August 5, 200818 yr Here's a link to a breakdown of income. If anyone would deny that the overwhelming majority of "clinical income" is anything but $ from abortions, well, they are either naive or perhaps were injured during delivery. http://www.all.org/stopp/04gpie.pdf That in no way indicates that the majority of clinical income is from abortions. Basic, regular gynocological services are provided, as well as birthcontrol pills, and other birth control methods are sold as well. STD tests, STD treatments, GYN treatment, all are sources of revenue.
August 5, 200818 yr From the 2006/2007 Annual Report http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/AR_2007_vFinal.pdf
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.