Abortion or Shutdown

How do you feel about the pending Government Shut Down?

  • I Agree with Anti Abortion efforts.

    Votes: 4 16.0%

  • I Disagree with Anti Abortion efforts.

    Votes: 10 40.0%

  • I Agree with Shutting Down the Government.

    Votes: 9 36.0%

  • I Disagree with Shutting Down the Government.

    Votes: 9 36.0%

  • Do nothing God is in charge

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • None of the above.

    Votes: 3 12.0%
  • Total voters
    25
Johnnyorganic

Johnnyorganic

Well-Known Member
mame said:
Cutting Planned Parenthoods funding amounts to essentially a 1/3rd cut in their budget. Abortions account for less than 2% of what Planned Parenthood does.

So tell me, how is it that "women's health/reproductive rights argument is just a red herring"? It seems quite clear that cutting funding will only result in less PP health centers, and less money for contraceptives, promoting safe sex, STD screenings, etc.

How can you justify this? 5 million poor women rely on these services every year.
Click to expand...
It ain't in the Constitution.

Justified.
 
Ernst

Ernst

Well-Known Member
Well should your Mother get health care if she was too poor and needed care?

It should be in our Moral fibre to cry loudly yes!

Gezeeus folks these women birth our children!

Get the head out of the elephants ass.
 
mame

mame

Well-Known Member
Johnnyorganic said:
It ain't in the Constitution.

Justified.
Click to expand...
The cons of removing funding outweigh the pros and you can save plenty of money elsewhere without hurting the already worse off group of Americans(cutting oil subsidies would be much more appropriate for example).

See, these kinds of cuts are exactly why the Democrats are likening the Republican approach to a 'chainsaw'. The cuts that they want, at the pace that they want is destructive to our nations economy.
View attachment 1543532
 
Johnnyorganic

Johnnyorganic

Well-Known Member
If PP only spends 2% of it's funding on abortion, then this debate is not REALLY on abortion.

And poor women might not be so poor if they would choose to keep their knees together until they are in a steady enough financial position to actually afford children.

If a state wants to shoulder the responsibility, fine and dandy. You won't hear a peep out of me if it's not my state.
 
Johnnyorganic

Johnnyorganic

Well-Known Member
mame said:
The cons of removing funding outweigh the pros and you can save plenty of money elsewhere without hurting the already worse off group of Americans(cutting oil subsidies would be much more appropriate for example).

See, these kinds of cuts are exactly why the Democrats are likening the Republican approach to a 'chainsaw'. The cuts that they want, at the pace that they want is destructive to our nations economy.
View attachment 1543532
Click to expand...
Based on your chart the most daunting threat to the economy, according to the eggheads, is high petroleum prices.

I agree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top