QMany Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 "Abortion pills" and the "war on children." At least it's clear where that author's allegiances lie. Link to comment
Moiraine Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 Anecdotal. For every story like this there are a handful of stories that couldn't be told because PP aborted the potential story teller. Only 10% of the people who go to PP go there for abortions. So you have your handful ratio flipped around. Do you really want to pretend that the staggering amount of abortions provided by PP is insignificant? 40% of all abortions in the US. 51% of their income comes from abortions, 330,000 abortions yearly. I don't know about you but I feel safe referring to those types of numbers as a handful compared to the number of stories I've seen like the one Carl posted. Who said I thought it was insignificant? 10% of a lot is a lot. But why is it surprising that an abortion costs more than an annual exam or pre natal care? Like I said, 10% of the people who go to PP go there to get an abortion. That's a handful compared to the 90% that go there for other reasons. You consider the abortion stories as a handful compared to the story carlfense posted only because you hear about abortions more. Not because there are actually more of them. http://www.factcheck.org/2011/04/planned-parenthood/ While we're "fact" checking.....http://www.lifenews.com/2012/09/05/media-hides-fact-planned-parenthood-does-40-of-abortions/ Why is fact in quotes? That site refuted nothing I said. Their # is 11% instead of 10% but it's from a different year. The only thing I see there is they don't count the morning after pill as an abortion. I had trouble finding how many morning after pills are sold per year in the U.S. but in 2007 they made $80 million and it costs between $10 and 70. So through some wild guessing ($8 million/$35 + 70,000 to be safe) I calculated that if Planned Parenthood is the ONLY place that sells it, and you consider it abortion, then 20% of the patients who go to Planned Parenthood get an abortion. Link to comment
carlfense Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 Anecdotal. For every story like this there are a handful of stories that couldn't be told because PP aborted the potential story teller.Care to back that up? With numbers please, unless you're embracing the anecdotal evidence that you just dismissed. Link to comment
carlfense Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 While we're "fact" checking.....http://www.lifenews.com/2012/09/05/media-hides-fact-planned-parenthood-does-40-of-abortions/Did you just cite "Life News" as "fact" checking? Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 While we're "fact" checking.....http://www.lifenews.com/2012/09/05/media-hides-fact-planned-parenthood-does-40-of-abortions/Did you just cite "Life News" as "fact" checking? Is there some information in there that is wrong? And I'm pretty sure I don't need to "back up" the claim that 330,000 potential story tellers yearly are silenced by PP. I guess if some of ya'll want to pretend that is insignificant or that there are a greater number of positive stories generated by the other services PP provides, well to each his own. Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 I've never understood some people's desire to kill innocent unborn babies without even having to justify it. Just because the number one murder errr abortion provider in the country also provides some useful women's services, we're supposed to turn a blind eye towards their primary function of ending innocent life. Seems to me the other women's services could be satisfactorily provided by alternate Healthcare outlets and we could get by just fine without Baby Killers Inc. 2 Link to comment
carlfense Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 I've never understood some people's desire to kill innocent unborn babies without even having to justify it.That's because you don't understand that the basis for your entire premise is an opinion and not a fact. Link to comment
Moiraine Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 While we're "fact" checking.....http://www.lifenews.com/2012/09/05/media-hides-fact-planned-parenthood-does-40-of-abortions/Did you just cite "Life News" as "fact" checking? Is there some information in there that is wrong? And I'm pretty sure I don't need to "back up" the claim that 330,000 potential story tellers yearly are silenced by PP. I guess if some of ya'll want to pretend that is insignificant or that there are a greater number of positive stories generated by the other services PP provides, well to each his own. Nobody said it's insignificant. Just because I'm pro-life doesn't mean I'm going to pretend I forgot how math works. i.e. that 90 people is more than 10 people. Link to comment
Landlord Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 Anecdotal. For every story like this there are a handful of stories that couldn't be told because PP aborted the potential story teller. Only 10% of the people who go to PP go there for abortions. So you have your handful ratio flipped around. But over 90% of pregnant women who go to PP go there for abortions. Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 I've never understood some people's desire to kill innocent unborn babies without even having to justify it.That's because you don't understand that the basis for your entire premise is an opinion and not a fact. PP provides 330,000 abortions annually. 51% of their revenue comes from abortions. PP is by far the largest provider of abortions in the US. Over 90% of pregnant women who go there, go there for an abortion. Those facts are my premise. What "opinion" are you having trouble with? That I feel it is wrong to kill a living being? That there are other suitable Healthcare providers that could provide worthwhile women's services without their primary function being to abort babies? What is so hard to figure out here? Link to comment
carlfense Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 What "opinion" are you having trouble with? That I feel it is wrong to kill a living being?Not so much that you feel that it's wrong but rather that you don't seem to understand that it's an opinion and not a fact that a fetus is a "living being." That's the "fact" that you're building your outrage on. It's certainly your right to believe that . . . but it does not make it a fact. Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 What "opinion" are you having trouble with? That I feel it is wrong to kill a living being?Not so much that you feel that it's wrong but rather that you don't seem to understand that it's an opinion and not a fact that a fetus is a "living being."That's the "fact" that you're building your outrage on. It's certainly your right to believe that . . . but it does not make it a fact. Oh, I see. I guess then that it is also just an opinion that the fetus is not a living being. Out of curiosity, at what developmental point do you feel comfortable referring to it as a living being? Link to comment
carlfense Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 I guess then that it is also just an opinion that the fetus is not a living being.That's correct. Out of curiosity, at what developmental point do you feel comfortable referring to it as a living being?I can't definitively answer that and neither can you. My own opinion is that it's not a "living being" until it could live outside of the human body. That puts it sometime after 22 weeks. That said, even after 22 weeks there is no guarantee that it's a "living being." For example, a fetus with anencephaly is not a "living being" and I think it'd be barbaric (and needlessly risky) to force a woman to give birth to a fetus that didn't develop a brain. Frankly, as a rapidly-approaching-middle-aged male, I'm more than comfortable leaving that decision up to the mother, father, and their doctor. Some might even call it relying on personal responsibility. And while our opinions differ on this issue only one of us is trying to force everyone to adopt their definition. 2 Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 I guess then that it is also just an opinion that the fetus is not a living being.That's correct. Out of curiosity, at what developmental point do you feel comfortable referring to it as a living being?I can't definitively answer that and neither can you.My own opinion is that it's not a "living being" until it could live outside of the human body. That puts it sometime after 22 weeks.That said, even after 22 weeks there is no guarantee that it's a "living being." For example, a fetus with anencephaly is not a "living being" and I think it'd be barbaric (and needlessly risky) to force a woman to give birth to a fetus that didn't develop a brain.Frankly, as a rapidly-approaching-middle-aged male, I'm more than comfortable leaving that decision up to the mother, father, and their doctor. Some might even call it relying on personal responsibility. And while our opinions differ on this issue only one of us is trying to force everyone to adopt their definition. You can't definitively answer when you feel comfortable referring to it as a living being? That's odd. And yes I can definitively answer that question. Not sure why giving ones opinion should be so difficult. I am not trying to force anything on anyone. I was discussing PP and you turned it into an abortion discussion of when life begins. Link to comment
carlfense Posted August 9, 2015 Share Posted August 9, 2015 You can't definitively answer when you feel comfortable referring to it as a living being? That's odd.It's not odd and I tried to explain why above. I'm not sure I can make it any more clear. And yes I can definitively answer that question.Would you do so? Link to comment
Recommended Posts