quote:


I keep asking you - are you referring to "taxpayer funded" abortions?

quote:

I am against Government funding of Planned Parenthood. Period. I am not against PP doing abortions or providing other services. I'm against Government funding them. Use private donations. I could accept if PP split into two self-sufficient entities (one that provided abortions and one that didn't) with the non-abortive side getting Government funding, though I would still not be happy with that. Every government dollar that goes into PP is spent to some degree on abortive services. The only way to prevent that is to make the abortive services side wholly separate from the rest of the whole.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Let's face it kali, DS is against anything that might help women out, or give disadvantaged women (or to use his preferred term "spread-ers") any kind of say in their lives, or any kind of meaningful reproductive choice. While men get a variety of sanctimonious platitudes for their sexual choices, women must be punished for their sexual choices in this view.

It seems this paragon of compassion's views become more hardline the further one goes down the social scale. Or to put that a little more bluntly, the poorer the woman, the more his belief in punitive interventions in the lives of women hardens. Which causes me to wonder whether misogyny or snobbery or, most likely, both is the issue here. Given the socio-economic realities of the US, there are almost certainly racial aspects to these views too.

I'm given to understand that these types of views are not uncommon among the religious and/or looney right in the US. (though any connection between these views and the philosophy propounded by the founder of Christianity is at best tenuous.) Which adds an ideological dimension to the mix.

So, in the end, we are being asked to consider an ideologically driven mix of snobbery and misogyny, with racist overtones. The price of enforcing these archaic views and repulsive attitudes is paid by those women and children who disadvantaged impoverished lives are a direct consequence of the denial of reproductive control to poorer women.

Does it get any uglier?

quote:


I'm against guys and gals that won't be capable of supporting the result of their fucking if their efforts to prevent it fail still going out and fucking. As enjoyable as fucking is, if you can't cover your ass if you "lose," you shouldn't be rolling those dice. And that applies to men and women, not just women.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

I am against Government funding of Planned Parenthood. Period. I am not against PP doing abortions or providing other services. I'm against Government funding them. Use private donations. I could accept if PP split into two self-sufficient entities (one that provided abortions and one that didn't) with the non-abortive side getting Government funding, though I would still not be happy with that. Every government dollar that goes into PP is spent to some degree on abortive services. The only way to prevent that is to make the abortive services side wholly separate from the rest of the whole.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/PPFA/PP_Services.pdf

REVENUE
Health Center Income-------------------------------------------404.9
Government Grants and Contracts------------------------------363.2
Private Contributions and Bequests-----------------------------308.2 [c]
Other Operating Revenue-----------------------------------------24.5
TOTAL REVENUE----------------------------------------------997.3

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/PPFA/PPFA_Annual_Report_08-09-FINAL-12-10-10.pdf

332,278.. The number of abortions performed by PP in 2009

The cost of those abortions at 468 per abortion.... $155,506,104

This number does not include what those women paid PP for the cost of those abortions... not all are free.

You have yet to make you argument that PP uses government funds to provide abortions.

quote:

Okay, tazzygirl, Federal funding more than covered the cost of abortions.

quote:

So, if they were to create two completely separate organizations that never mixed any kind of funding, and government only gave to the one that didn't provide abortive services, is it possible for government money to be funding abortion? That answer is no.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Let's face it kali, DS is against anything that might help women out, or give disadvantaged women (or to use his preferred term "spread-ers") any kind of say in their lives, or any kind of meaningful reproductive choice. While men get a variety of sanctimonious platitudes for their sexual choices, women must be punished for their sexual choices in this view.

It seems this paragon of compassion's views become more hardline the further one goes down the social scale. Or to put that a little more bluntly, the poorer the woman, the more his belief in punitive interventions in the lives of women hardens. Which causes me to wonder whether misogyny or snobbery or, most likely, both is the issue here. Given the socio-economic realities of the US, there are almost certainly racial aspects to these views too.

I'm given to understand that these types of views are not uncommon among the religious and/or looney right in the US. (though any connection between these views and the philosophy propounded by the founder of Christianity is at best tenuous.) Which adds an ideological dimension to the mix.

So, in the end, we are being asked to consider an ideologically driven mix of snobbery and misogyny, with racist overtones. The price of enforcing these archaic views and repulsive attitudes is paid by those women and children who disadvantaged impoverished lives are a direct consequence of the denial of reproductive control to poorer women.

Does it get any uglier?

Holy Fucking Hell Batman. You just fucking eluded to my being a racist. Who the fuck do you think you are? You think you have me pegged, but all you ever do is take the stuff I say about women's responsibilities and drop all the stuff I say about men's responsibilities.

You don't know me. You never will know me. Even if we meet and spend 100 years together, you will never know me. You only read or remember what you want to put me in a box. Guess what. I don't fit in any boxes (okay, I would fit in a refrigerator box, but probably not a range/washer/dryer/dishwasher box).

I would love for you to show me where I give "sanctimonious platitudes" for the men that are impregnating these women. Go for it.

When have I said that I believe abortion should be illegal? When? I guarantee you won't find it. I have no problem stating that I am against abortion. I also have no problem stating that Government has not authority to rule that abortion is legal or illegal. Thus, I'm against abortion being illegal. Ta da! How many more times will I have to state that for you to understand my stance? How many times will it take for you to accept that I am not against women having that choice?

Who said:
quote:


I'm against guys and gals that won't be capable of supporting the result of their fucking if their efforts to prevent it fail still going out and fucking. As enjoyable as fucking is, if you can't cover your ass if you "lose," you shouldn't be rolling those dice. And that applies to men and women, not just women.


Oh, that's right. It was ME. OMG!! Where's the misogyny? Where's the snobbery? Where's the racism? Your assigning racism to my statements only highlights your beliefs that the underprivileged who get PP abortions are minority.

The best man at my wedding? Black. Whoops. There I go again. Rampant racism, right?

Best of luck to you, tweakabelle. From what I've read, you're going to need it.

quote:


Where's the misogyny? Where's the snobbery? Where's the racism?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
Get one thing straight DS, this is not about you personally. The only thing I described you as was “a paragon of compassion”. All the criticisms were aimed directly at your statements and ideas (such as they are). Bleating about imaginary personal attacks is one way of ignoring those criticisms, but it’s certainly not going to make the criticisms go away.

quote:

quote:


Where's the misogyny? Where's the snobbery? Where's the racism?

Snobbery: Your proposals will have far more devastating impacts on poor and marginalised sections of the community than those who are well-off. An extra mouth to feed, clothe and educate will place far more stress on households with limited budgets. Not to mention the extra health costs under the US’s insane private healthcare system. The proposals you make will have minimal impact on those able to afford, or those who obtain company paid healthcare insurance. The effects of these proposals will impact largely on those unable to obtain private insurance - the less well off sections of society. A policy that has minimal impact on the affluent, while severely disadvantaging the already impoverished is clearly a form of snobbery.

quote:


Misognyny: If you can’t see the misogyny inherent in referring to women in disparaging ways such”spread[-ers]” or in ‘solutions’ that penalise women unfairly while letting men evade any for the consequences of their actions such as:
“This issue can easily be solved. Women who get abortions....should pay for their abortions. If places like Planned Parenthood want to provide free abortions, go for it. Gather donations (which does not include gub'mint payola...that isn't a donation) and provide to your heart's content. THAT is what should happen. It's not whether or not gub'mint should pay for all abortions, or only for the poor. Gub'mint should not be paying for them at all. Period.
And, if anyone wants to go down the "women's health" road...can you get pregnant or std's from abstinence? Wouldn't that be a boon to a woman's health? Thought so.”
Then all I can conclude is that you have no idea what the word ‘misogyny’ means.
Women have"to pay" ... not a word about the fathers. And if the father isn't around, then that's just tough. Aww shucks, the 'spreader' should have chosen her partner more carefully. And if all else fails, try abstinence .... but only women are denied sexual pleasure. Your idea of "womens' health" seems limited to STDs and pregnancies. This kind of attitude is Neanderthal.
Racist overtones: Please note that I said the policies you advocate have “racist overtones” and “racial aspects”, not that you were a “racist” as you mistakenly allege. In the US, minority groups are disproportionately represented among the ranks of the disadvantaged. As the policies you advocate will have disproportionate effects on the poorer sections of society, they will clearly have effects that have “racial aspects” and “racist overtones”.
So, your post is" an ideologically driven mix of snobbery and misogyny, with racist overtones". Please feel free to respond to these criticisms of your ideas and proposals as you see fit. It would be nice if you respond to the actual words I have written and the arguments I have outlined rather than some fictitious or distorted interpretation that exists only in your head.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Okay, tazzygirl, Federal funding more than covered the cost of abortions.

Private donations more than covered the cost of abortions, as required by law in order to obtain the federal grants to cover other health care services.
As long as PP follows the rules, they are as entitled as any church based health organization for funding.

quote:

quote:

So, if they were to create two completely separate organizations that never mixed any kind of funding, and government only gave to the one that didn't provide abortive services, is it possible for government money to be funding abortion? That answer is no.

I am truly sorry you cannot have your way in this.
It makes absolutely no sense to hire twice the staff.. one of the abortion organization, one for the other... it simply increases cost.
You do know its federally mandated that none of the governments grants can go towards abortions, yes?
I do believe there is a Congressman who swore what you were saying was true... he has called for all of PP's financial statements, and they have provided them... and still he cannot prove what you claim.
Do let me know if he, or anyone else, ever does.
But are you the decider of what is a viable public health program and what is not? What are your credentials? Health? Finance? Do you have any proof that PP is using federal money to fund abortions?
I would be interested in seeing your responses.

quote:

Since the US Constitution is a pact that gives up some authority from We the People and State government to the Federal government, it if isn't in there, the Federal government is not authorized to do so. Period. End of story

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

quote:

Since the US Constitution is a pact that gives up some authority from We the People and State government to the Federal government, it if isn't in there, the Federal government is not authorized to do so. Period. End of story

THANK YOU!
I needed a laugh this morning.

quote:


ORIGINAL: kalikshama
All right, who has the time to detail the numerous other programs and services the government provides that weren't specifically authorized by the Constitution?

quote:

If private donations cover abortion costs, why do they need Gov't funding?

quote:

Answer: To pay for other things. If they didn't have government funding, would they still have provided all those abortions? If not, then, there you can see how government is funding PP abortions.

quote:

14% of all abortions are paid for with public funds. Even though it comes from State and not Federal Government, it is still being paid for with public funds.

quote:

What church-based health organizations are publicly funded?

quote:

I need no credentials as I am not making any decision on viability of a program. All my comments come from the fact that there is no authority for Government to be funding health care (though I do make exception for government funding the health care of its employees, as an employer) in the US Constitution. Since the US Constitution is a pact that gives up some authority from We the People and State government to the Federal government, it if isn't in there, the Federal government is not authorized to do so. Period. End of story