Planned Parenthood must be defunded: Kudo’s to Mike Pence for leading the effort.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/263454/battling-big-abortion-rep-mike-pence

Troll, You do know Planned Parenthood’s history, don’t you? I find it odd that people such as yourself does not realize an organization founded on genocide when they see it:

http://www.blackgenocide.org/sanger.html

Worthy of our tax dollars?

Planned Parenthood wasn’t founded on genocide. That is the tired chant of the far right.
Study up on Margaret Sangor and see what she was really all about. She wanted to save women’s lives. Her own mother died of disease after having 11 children.

Anyone who seriously wants to limit abortion not only supports but is willing to pay for birth control.

BO – Is it just churches that preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ you have an issue with or is it any church? What about the mega mosque in Sterling?

Hmmph, the mother died of disease after having eleven children? No kidding? How unusual…people dying of disease. Having read many, many death certificates as a genealogist, I can tell you with assurance that almost everybody died of disease, whether they had eleven children or none at all. TB, typhoid, apoplexy, cancer, Bright’s Disease, heart disease. There is one thing which surprised me, however. How many of those woman who had large broods often outlived their husbands, some by as long as 20 years. The staying power of our immigrant women was downright remarkable. That statue of the Madonna of the Prairie in Kansas ought to be a national shrine.

Erin – Ever see a 3D/4D Sonogram. There is an unborn human being inside the womb. Have a peek. http://www.3dand4d.com/

Just the title of Planned PArenthood is laugahable – who leaves an actual parent?

I just heard some disgusting statistics, in 2009 PP performed 332,000 abortions and assisted in 7000 adoptions. If a pregnant woman walked into a PP clinic, she is 41 times more likely to have an abortion than give her child up for adoption, and it has nothing to do with genetic abnormalities. I completely resent the term “women’s health” in conjunction with PP, because if you want to include mental health – the statistics surrounding women suffering from depression and lifelong regret after an abortion is nothing less than tragic.

As for longevity, I do find it interesting that between my husband and I we both have great-grandmothers (immigrants) and grandmothers that had anywhere between 8-11 children and all outlived their husbands, one living to the age of 93. Yes, the early 20th century was a bitch, particularly for immigrants – but they seemed to prosper despite having “all those kids”.

Funny thing about Planned Parenthood. Is it not true that Margaret Sanger herself was opposed to abortion, even at the earliest stages of pregnancy, citing it as the wrongful taking of a life?

The baby-murder supporters neatly turn the conversation to a discussion of the merits of Planned Parenthood. The real point is that the government should not be funding ANY charities with taxpayer dollars.

I hope Dick Black has the guts to make opposition to PP part of his campaign message. I’d like to hear him talk about it a lot.

RWN, I’d go after mega churches. I am certain a definition or thresh hold can be determined for taxes. You could start with preacher salaries. Church jets would be a clue.

I am not sure of the Sterling church. I don’t know enough about them. I have been there, but only once.

Yes

If past behavior is any indication of future, BO will continue on this path. Let’s keep a count from this point on, shall we?

1. PP discussion turned into DB bashing

I’ll keep a running tally so you don’t have to.

Anti PP group has one of the nastiest radio and TV ads I’ve heard.

I know I’m knocking my head against a rock telling people tha PP’s main purpose is NOT abortion. the name is “PLANNED Parenthood”. To me that means that women and couples will be able to decide WHEN they want children. They also provide women with pelvic exams and help steer them to doctors when treatment is needed.

Furthermore, PP does HIV tests. Anecdote: my neighbor met her husband-to-be on the Internet. When they decided to get intimate, she told the man that that would not happen until he had had an HIV test. Where did he get it? Yes, that’s right. At Planned Parenthood.

It would be sooooooo wonderful if all you misogynists would care half as much about the fetus after it’s exposed to the cruel world. And to the mother.

\\

\

BO: Dick Black is running for State Senate, not US Senate. The PP debate is about the Federal funding they receive, nothing a State Senator has control over. MY hope if Dick Black gets elected is to support legislation like that which our great Governor signed recently that makes abortion clinics in Virginia comply with the same standards as any other medical clinic.

Exactly RWN.

Dick Black is brought up at every opportunity, ad nauseum. If someone posted about walking their dog, BO would post that Dick Black hated dogs, and the people of Ashburn love dogs, therefore the dog hating Dick Black would get no votes in Ashburn.

While I enjoyed BO’s rant, he made no observation on Dick Black that was relevant to this story OR Dick Black’s campaign. When people get defensive, there is usually a reason – and in this case it is because BO has been caught yet again making silly, gratuituos attacks on Mr. Black.

I will keep the a seperate log on ‘BO’s irrelevant rants”:

1. BO rant on DB/PP – irrelevant to discussion.

No flattery involved BO, although for some people any attention is good. Children act up for the very same reason.

PP’s main business is not abortions? Could have fooled me. Look at almost any website for a PP clinic and you will find abortion, by referral or in-clinic, at or near the top of their list of advertised services. It is already illegal to use federal funds for abortions. Pretty obvious, however, that, when you add a federal grant to your income, that grant frees up other, non-federal funds for the abortion services. Sort of like a shell game. I wouldn’t really have that much of a problem helping to fund the other services if PP would honestly get out of the abortion racket. But I cannot help envisioning a woman getting legitimate medical assistance in one clinic room, while in the next room a living human fetus is being taken out of the world like it was just a matter of pest control.

A tale to tell. Wolverine does not know his true surname. His paternal great-great-great-grandmother was raped in Europe a long time ago. When the child was born, he was given the maiden name of his mother, and he carried that name to America. There are now more than 1300 descendants of that great-great-great-grandmother — doctors, lawyers, teachers, artists, musicians, ministers, nurses, scientists, businessmen, engineers, more war veterans than you can count. If PP had existed way back then, I doubt that any of these Americans, including myself and my children and grandchildren, would ever have existed. Sort of gives you the feeling of having some skin in this game.

Very happy for you, Wolverine!

If PP had existed when your paternal grandmother x3 or 4 we would not be able to enjoy your wonderful comments (sincerely, most of the time).

BTW – did they all end up as successful professionals, the way you list them? Wasn’t there a single bum, hobo, homeless, cussing knuckle fighter, woman abuser, freeloader, etc. etc. among them?

“Women’s Health” is the buzzword used by the left to defend PP. They don’t perform mammograms, never have. They refer patients, period. Except for abortions, those they perform – approx 330,000 annually.

Lovisa — I’m the reigning family genealogist and historian. Haven’t found too many “bums” yet amidst that lot — mostly, I think, because that family “got religion” seriously even before leaving the old country. In fact, they came here in search of both religious and economic freedom. And most of them have clung to that religion, as a certain POTUS might put it. Pretty stable folk, although not above a bit of straying here and there, I will admit.

BO — The argument is against PP involvement in abortion. As I said, I am not against the other health services they provide. Just that part of it. And that part of it makes me sick. If they had clean hands, I could be supportive even with my own charitable funds. Abortion on demand sickens me. I look at it as a negative reflection of a society so full of self and so devoted to personal convenience that, even when they engage in risky behavior, they seem to search for someone else to pay the tab. In this case, they choose the most helpless of all beings to pay that tab just to ensure that they themselves will not be inconvenienced by their own behavior.

“Does the government have to subsidize her firearms purchases?”

If we can not regulate the weapon industry because it will cause guns to become too expensive than I think the answer is, “yes”. If you consider funding of NON-ABORTION PP services to actually indirectly fund their abortion services, then we can consider the removal of weapons regulation due to the cost of gun manufacturing overhead to be a subsidy of the industry as well.

Wolverine,

If the gift of life was a gift freely given (which was not conveyed in your original post) then your story is touching but not relevant to the issue of whether abortion is a choice that any woman can freely make given that it is her body that is being affected by the decision. Assuming your great-great relative had an actual choice in the matter (which you now report she did) your story is one of “choice” as much as it is “abortion”. This sort of story is NOT, however, justification for laws that some on the right would wish to pass outlawing the choice of abortion in all cases including rape, incest, and the life and health of the mother.

Jack, forcing a woman to carry her father’s child to term is unjustifiable.

Forcing a woman to choose to either begin chemotherapy and severely deform the fetus she is carrying (or worse) or forego the therapy and risk her own life is unjustifiable.

I think that a real problem here, my dear Troll, is that your arguments about rape and incest in defense of your position have been woefully stretched in contemporary society to the extent of a much wider acceptance of abortion on demand for reasons other than those you cite. In other words, a considerable part of contemporary society has decided that personal convenience trumps the life of a living entity, having now been enabled in doing so by a legal fiat which allows you to making someone other than yourself pay the tab for the consequences of your own risky behavior.

This is now at a point in which the self-defensive war cry is: “Keep the government out of my uterus!” So, the resolution to this problem of personal convenience is to allow the abortionist to go into that same uterus and snuff out the life of another being. How utterly convenient. A game in which the gambler thinks one cannot lose, even when the die turn up snake eyes. And how utterly tragic that so many women live a lifetime of regret after having chosen this route, even the original litigant in Roe v. Wade. Well, all I can say is that, if you are so damned interested in keeping others out of your body, maybe you should have addressed that issue the first time that body was about to be penetrated. But , no, we have to have it our way — that old thing about having your cake and eating it too. And thus we get Planned Parenthood, an organization which on one side does some good things for women’s health which I myself can support but on the other is undeniably an abortion mill and an enabler who helps that risk-taking gambler walk away from the table with personal convenience seemingly intact.

I suspect that old clan matriarch of ours would have said something a bit like this: “You are looking to your uterus when you should be looking to your own soul.” That, of course, washes off the back of a non-believer as in the case of the proverbial duck. And for that millions of Americans are denied a chance at life. Sad.

Wolverine,

Your morality judgement is 100% pro-choice. I am completely behind any attempts to persuade a pregnant woman to choose to carry her baby to term. When you cross the line to getting the government involved in forcing her to carry the baby to term is when I have problems with you opinion. If you TRULY believe an embryo is a living child, there are other issues you need to address as well. Getting Social Services involved in ANY alcohol or tobacco intake by the mother-to-be jumps to mind (after all that would be exactly the same as a mother feeding alcohol and nicotine to an infant would it not?) See once the government starts dictating what a mother can and can not do with her own body and the fetus she is carrying – well, things get ugly.

For political reasons no one has admitted to cloning humans but if it works in cows, mice, sheep, etc….

Creating human life requires outside intervention. Even children that are born require outside assistance to survive. A person on life support requires assistance to survive. This is not a helpful definition of what is human life and what is not.

Your definition of life would allow a transplant doctor to be charged with murder. Do you want to follow your logic into a logical black hole?

when someone splices human DNA into a pig to grow replacement heart parts for humans (real research) are you going to say that killing the pig is murder because it is part human?

Wow, I hope EM’s arguments become the pro-choice movement’s standard talking points, and soon!

“In the case of an abortion, it is the outside intervention that ENDS the life.”

So if we take human sperm and ova and mix them in a test tube creating an embryo, and then we provide no outside intervention, will a lving breathing human be created?

Perhaps you need to re-read that book, Troll. You take Paul’s words out of context:

14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.)

Paul doe NOT say that the Law is written on EVERYONE’S heart. Obviously, when what is written on your heart conflicts with the written Law (in the Ten Commandments), the Law is not what is written on your heart.

Right now, for this conversation, I do not even care about political games. What I was hoping for, and what I keep trying to bring the conversation back to — but you people keep getting stuck on the example, not the point — is that the government should not be funding ANY non-profit organizations.

Despite our disagreements on abortion, can you agree with the main point of the post?

“Sorry, Troll, but you started with outside intervention.”

So an embryo created through in vitro fertilization (clearly started with outside interevention) can be aborted, in you opinion?

And I did address your question as well.

“Nope. Any ACTION that one intends to result and that does result in the death of an innocent human being is murder. How that human being came to be is irrelevant.”

So what EM writes above about skins cells being 100% human beings IS true. If they could conceivably become human beings and if how that human being might come into being is irrelevant, then destroying skin cells in also murder in your mind.

Jack do you think before writing?

1) If a teenager is on life support and the parents agree to allow the doctors to harvest the person’s organs for transplant that is murder by your definition. This is the same decision women who choose to abort make…to sacrificing minimalistic life that requires extensive life support at great expense for the greater good of society (i.e. extending someone else’s life.) When the human being has no upper level brain function the decision to pull the plug is a decision for the family. When there is human brain function then society can step in and advocate for preserving life. That’s why we allow women sole discretion on abortion up until fetus brain activity (about 3 months) and then start restricting abortion thereafter. I don’t support late term abortions of viable children but I also seriously doubt that they occur. An abortion of a fetus before brain development and abortion of a brain dead fetus that will die shortly before or after birth is not murder.

2) Intention: If an abortion is murder than so is war, particularily a pre-emptive war like Iraq and Libya. People justify both based on self defense arguments. If you own a gun and train to use it in self defense then you have committed murder in your heart. If it is OK to own a gun for self defense and OK to force others to fund offensive wars you and Congress approve, then you don’t have a moral leg to stand on in demanding that your tax dollars not go to funding PP.

A pro-life position is anti-war, anti-abortion, anti-death penalty, anti-handguns and an environmental conservationist. I confess I’m too pragmatic to be ideologically pro-life but I lean in that direction. You, however, use the pro-life label as a stick to beat your political oponents even though you reject 4 out of 5 of the pro-life moral positions.

Concealed carry handgun has only one purpose…to kill someone else. Do you conceal-carry a taser? Do you practice shooting to wound but not to kill?

Handguns are used to kill people through homicide, suicide and accidents. They are not defensive weapons. If we could eliminated all handguns (impossible) we would have fewer deaths since other forms of violence is less lethal.

For consistency either your pragmatic justification for war and guns should extend to abortion or you should be just as hardline about other pro-life positions as you are about abortion.

Concealed Carry is to protect oneself and others. It does that even without being drawn, because the criminals don’t know who is armed.

Obviously, you have not been informed that the violent crime rates — not just murder, but rape, robbers, occupied home invasions, etc., all went up in the UK, Canada, and Australia when those countries banned handguns. Canada’s violent crime rate is twice as high as ours, and the murder rate, when normalized for race, is right in the same range ours is.

It makes no sense to conclude that we would have fewer deaths without firearms. The evidence from other countries that have done so simply does not support that hypothesis.

If you do change you mind, the Monk and I are both NRA certified instructors, and I have a range right next to my place of employment.

“God made Man and Woman. Samuel Colt made them equal.”

Jack,

I agreed that it may be laudible to do away with federal funding of ALL non-profits (including tax breaks for churches) but I have a problem with being selective in your application.