Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
76 Posts
1 , 2 , 3 , 4  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Dealing with Planned Parenthood rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: Caniblism_for_Fun_and_proffit [+] [View All]
J
United States
Lexington
Kentucky
flag msg tools
admin
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
As far as I can tell, the current issues with PP fall into the following categories:

1. Profiting from fetal tissue sales

2. Changing medical protocols when fetal tissue is extracted

3. Using language in private conversations that could be seen as crude or objectionable

4. Performing abortions

Hopefully we can just discount #3 altogether.

If neither #1 or #2 are found to be correct, would the people that are wanting to defund PP then be ok with it being funded? If not, then the real issue is and always has been #4.

Alternately if either #1 or #2 are found to be true, would the defenders be fine with PP being fined and having new procedures put in place to ensure that it doesn't happen again and the funding continuing?
19 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jeremy cobert
United States
cedar rapids
Iowa
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jmilum wrote:
Alternately if either #1 or #2 are found to be true, would the defenders be fine with PP being fined and having new procedures put in place to ensure that it doesn't happen again and the funding continuing?


Why do they get corporate welfare in the first place. Why do people keep talking about all of their other "services" when we now have obamacare providing those same services.

I don't want any taxpayer money funding abortions. Its abhorrent and one day will be looked back on as a barbaric time in our history.

Lastly, if abortion services are such a minor part of their service, why don't you leftists just agree to stop using tax payer money for it and start raising private money for it. You could end the debate in one fell swoop.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
casey r lowe
United States
butte
Montana
flag msg tools
mb
jeremycobert wrote:
I don't want any taxpayer money funding abortions. Its abhorrent and one day will be looked back on as a barbaric time in our history.

just how i feel about my taxes funding all those wars~
37 
 Thumb up
5.08
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jmilum wrote:
As far as I can tell, the current issues with PP fall into the following categories:

1. Profiting from fetal tissue sales

2. Changing medical protocols when fetal tissue is extracted

3. Using language in private conversations that could be seen as crude or objectionable

4. Performing abortions

Hopefully we can just discount #3 altogether.

If neither #1 or #2 are found to be correct, would the people that are wanting to defund PP then be ok with it being funded? If not, then the real issue is and always has been #4.

Alternately if either #1 or #2 are found to be true, would the defenders be fine with PP being fined and having new procedures put in place to ensure that it doesn't happen again and the funding continuing?


Sounds reasonable.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
MGK
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Drew1365 wrote:
Another pyromaniac in a field of straw men.


Jer presented what he perceives to be the objections to Planned Parenthood. If you disagree with that list, then why don't you come up with your own list, instead of being a whiny little toad?
20 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Fox
United States
Richardson
Texas
flag msg tools
Question everything
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Drew1365 wrote:
Another pyromaniac in a field of straw men.


You are trying to say that J is burning down all your straw men, or what exactly?
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jeremy cobert
United States
cedar rapids
Iowa
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
single sentences wrote:
jeremycobert wrote:
I don't want any taxpayer money funding abortions. Its abhorrent and one day will be looked back on as a barbaric time in our history.

just how i feel about my taxes funding all those wars~


me too ! end all god damn foreign wars as well as corporate welfare ! It does not mean we cant defund PP now.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ed Bradley
United Kingdom
Haverhill
Suffolk
flag msg tools
badge
The best things in life aren't things.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mightygodking wrote:
Drew1365 wrote:
Another pyromaniac in a field of straw men.


Jer presented what he perceives to be the objections to Planned Parenthood. If you disagree with that list, then why don't you come up with your own list, instead of being a whiny little toad?


Are you new here?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J
United States
Lexington
Kentucky
flag msg tools
admin
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jeremycobert wrote:
Why do they get corporate welfare in the first place. Why do people keep talking about all of their other "services" when we now have obamacare providing those same services.

I don't want any taxpayer money funding abortions. Its abhorrent and one day will be looked back on as a barbaric time in our history.

PP gets money via two main Govt programs: Meficaid and Title X. Title X funds cannot be used for abortion, but Medicaid money can (although restricted by the Hyde amendment to cases of rose, incest, or life of the mother). States can relax those restrictions on Medicaid funds if they want (it's a joint State/Fed) program.

As PP is a non-profit, I wouldn't agree that those funds are corporate welfare. They are used to provide reproductive health services, not to profit the organization.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J
United States
Lexington
Kentucky
flag msg tools
admin
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Drew1365 wrote:
Another pyromaniac in a field of straw men.

How so?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad
United States
Denver
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
We will bury you
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jmilum wrote:
As far as I can tell, the current issues with PP fall into the following categories:

1. Profiting from fetal tissue sales

2. Changing medical protocols when fetal tissue is extracted

3. Using language in private conversations that could be seen as crude or objectionable

4. Performing abortions

Hopefully we can just discount #3 altogether.

If neither #1 or #2 are found to be correct, would the people that are wanting to defund PP then be ok with it being funded? If not, then the real issue is and always has been #4.

Alternately if either #1 or #2 are found to be true, would the defenders be fine with PP being fined and having new procedures put in place to ensure that it doesn't happen again and the funding continuing?


Why does PP need to be funded? As has been shown, there are multiple other funded ares where individuals can get the same services as PP (which are currently funded).

As far as your questions

Question #1 - Sure, if you they can explain why their funding is needed instead of the other redundant funding. Further, I would like to see them be more honest about how they portray themselves. They are currently not a women's health provider who performs abortions (which is how they portray themselves with their 3% BS) - but rather an Abortion Center that also provides Women's health care.

Question #2 - Same answer as #1 - along with a change in charter and leadership.

Further, I would also like to see a "truce" in this particular culture war where the pro-choice folks accept a strict limitation on Abortion to only when the mothers life is in danger after the first 18-20 weeks because more than one entity is affected by the choice.

On the flip side, the pro-life folks accept up until a certain point of development (again 18-20 weeks), the fetus really is just a lump of cells and a woman's choice really does only affect 1 person.

But hey, I might as well wish for Unicorns and Rockies World Series win.

edit - changed months to weeks (oops)
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sam I am
United States
Portage
Michigan
flag msg tools
designer
What did I tell you...
badge
NO PICKLE!
Avatar
mb
Having an 18 year old I'd been happy with years.
Just kidding laugh... maybe angry
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J
United States
Lexington
Kentucky
flag msg tools
admin
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I could accept that truce as long as all the other tricks and traps for stopping abortions before 20 weeks were also stopped.

I've read that in many areas, PP is the only provider for those services. Is that not true?
3 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Utrecht wrote:
jmilum wrote:
As far as I can tell, the current issues with PP fall into the following categories:

1. Profiting from fetal tissue sales

2. Changing medical protocols when fetal tissue is extracted

3. Using language in private conversations that could be seen as crude or objectionable

4. Performing abortions

Hopefully we can just discount #3 altogether.

If neither #1 or #2 are found to be correct, would the people that are wanting to defund PP then be ok with it being funded? If not, then the real issue is and always has been #4.

Alternately if either #1 or #2 are found to be true, would the defenders be fine with PP being fined and having new procedures put in place to ensure that it doesn't happen again and the funding continuing?


Why does PP need to be funded? As has been shown, there are multiple other funded ares where individuals can get the same services as PP (which are currently funded).

As far as your questions

Question #1 - Sure, if you they can explain why their funding is needed instead of the other redundant funding. Further, I would like to see them be more honest about how they portray themselves. They are currently not a women's health provider who performs abortions (which is how they portray themselves with their 3% BS) - but rather an Abortion Center that also provides Women's health care.

Question #2 - Same answer as #1 - along with a change in charter and leadership.

Further, I would also like to see a "truce" in this particular culture war where the pro-choice folks accept a strict limitation on Abortion to only when the mothers life is in danger after the first 18-20 weeks because more than one entity is affected by the choice.

On the flip side, the pro-life folks accept up until a certain point of development (again 18-20 weeks), the fetus really is just a lump of cells and a woman's choice really does only affect 1 person.

But hey, I might as well wish for Unicorns and Rockies World Series win.

edit - changed months to weeks (oops)


The answer to #1 is coverage I believe. You don't need *planned parenthood(tm) in place but you need something, or rwther *want* sething. It's access over effeciency. Sometimes that priority is better. Often times it is when health is concerned.

In all honesty, knowing how corporate shenanigans work from a layman's pov if PP was doing something wrong they'd fold, restructure, and reopen as 'parenthood planning' or something and carry on.

I think all but the smallest portion of pro-choice advocates would settle for a hard limit except fpr health...rather they *have* accepted it time and again only to have the anti-choice folks redraw the line over and over.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad
United States
Denver
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
We will bury you
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jmilum wrote:
I could accept that truce as long as all the other tricks and traps for stopping abortions before 20 weeks were also stopped.


Agree - and the threshold keeps up with science. i.e. if say, 50% of the fetus could survive outside the womb at 18 weeks with the current level of technology, the date moves - but there needs to be CLEAR standards around this.

Quote:

I've read that in many areas, PP is the only provider for those services. Is that not true?


I don't believe that it is the case - with the notable exception of Abortions....

Most of the redundancy is with County health care clinics - the issue is that PP has better marketing - which then begs the obvious need that these county clinics could take that $527 million annually and ensure the public is aware that they provide the services.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Reid
United States
Brooklyn
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jmilum wrote:
Alternately if either #1 or #2 are found to be true, would the defenders be fine with PP being fined and having new procedures put in place to ensure that it doesn't happen again and the funding continuing?


As a PP supporter, if the law was broken then of course I'm fine with fines commensurate with the specific infractions.

If it hasn't been proven that the law was broken, then I don't care about #1 or #2.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Reid
United States
Brooklyn
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Utrecht wrote:
Most of the redundancy is with County health care clinics - the issue is that PP has better marketing - which then begs the obvious need that these county clinics could take that $527 million annually and ensure the public is aware that they provide the services.


If PP has better marketing, then they'd more efficient spenders of the cash.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad
United States
Denver
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
We will bury you
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shadrach wrote:
The answer to #1 is coverage I believe. You don't need *planned parenthood(tm) in place but you need something, or rwther *want* sething. It's access over effeciency. Sometimes that priority is better. Often times it is when health is concerned.


Actually, I think the issue is more around awareness - PP has built a very successful brand around "women's care". In fact, PP's reach is pretty limited to just major cities. If you live in Gunnison, Colorado, you aren't going to PP (unless it is to get an abortion) - it just does not make sense)

Quote:
In all honesty, knowing how corporate shenanigans work from a layman's pov if PP was doing something wrong they'd fold, restructure, and reopen as 'parenthood planning' or something and carry on.


Honestly, this does not bother me. Hell PP could split into 2 with the Abortion and Women's Care going on as separate entities - again my beef with PP is that they are not what they portray themselves to be - they are driven by abortions. Again, this is not to say, the other stuff is not valuable - but it is a side focus for them.

Quote:
I think all but the smallest portion of pro-choice advocates would settle for a hard limit except fpr health...rather they *have* accepted it time and again only to have the anti-choice folks redraw the line over and over.


Agree and all but the smallest portion of pro-life folks accept that abortion is the law of the land. Where is issue comes in - where is that line (plus it is not helped when you have Debbie Wasserman-Schultz advocated for unrestricted access to Abortion for any reason - so lets not pretend that the "crazies" are limited to just the pro-life side and are not in positions of influence). Currently, 24 weeks (which made sense when Roe was decided makes less sense now - and should be moved) is to late - I think that 20 is a good measure for now and as technology inproves would expect the line to shift - but again based on strictly defined measures as I explained to J above.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad
United States
Denver
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
We will bury you
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jasonwocky wrote:
Utrecht wrote:
Most of the redundancy is with County health care clinics - the issue is that PP has better marketing - which then begs the obvious need that these county clinics could take that $527 million annually and ensure the public is aware that they provide the services.


If PP has better marketing, then they'd more efficient spenders of the cash.


Which I would be fine with give the following caveats

1) Can they guarantee better reach than the county clinics that they are redundant with (they can't)

2) They split their Abortion efforts into a separate Non-Profit

Hell, I would be Ok with just number 2 (after all government is full of redundancy)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric "Shippy McShipperson" Mowrer
United States
Vancouver
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Ami. Geek.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The videos are shining a light on what abortions really are and how PP thinks about them and converses about them. They are clearly hoping to dissect and sell baby parts. They are clearly pushing their patients to consent to that. That are clearly not doing it out of altruism. They are clearly very casual about it.

Nothing else matters. It doesn't matter if they broke the law. It doesn't matter whether they are profiting from it, though clearly they are trying to maximize their fees for this service for whatever reason.

PP has been dishonest about this and about what proportion of their business abortions are and about the availability of other services from other providers.

People who are on the fence about how abortion is handled in this country needed to see that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Michealson
United States
Maple Grove
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sfox wrote:
Drew1365 wrote:
Another pyromaniac in a field of straw men.


You are trying to say that J is burning down all your straw men, or what exactly?


Yeah, Drew's analogy seemed odd to me as well. If Jer is the pyromaniac that is burning down straw man arguments... that's a good thing. It also begs the question as to who is making all those straw man fields.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lynette
United States
Richland
Washington
flag msg tools
Yep, I am a girl Scientist. Come for the breasts; Stay for the brains!
badge
For as long as I shall live I will testify to love; I'll be a witness in the silences when words are not enough.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Utrecht wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
The answer to #1 is coverage I believe. You don't need *planned parenthood(tm) in place but you need something, or rwther *want* sething. It's access over effeciency. Sometimes that priority is better. Often times it is when health is concerned.


Actually, I think the issue is more around awareness - PP has built a very successful brand around "women's care". In fact, PP's reach is pretty limited to just major cities. If you live in Gunnison, Colorado, you aren't going to PP (unless it is to get an abortion) - it just does not make sense)


Ok this isn't true unless your definition of a major city is different than mine.

I used PP for all my "Women's Health" issues until I was in my late 30s for several reasons and I never EVER got an abortion. I consider abortion personally to be a form of infanticide and therefore highly immoral except under the most extreme of circumstances.

However here is what Planned Parenthood does better than anybody else IMO.

1) There is nobody better IMO at education in terms of Women's Issues. They consistently had some of the most up to date information on breast cancer, uterine cancer, other women's health concerns etc distilled down into pamphlets and usually talked to me about anything newly being distributed throughout the medical community at my yearly check-up.

2) There is nobody better IMO at general education about contraception and Sexually Transmitted Diseases, for women AND men. It is their primary mission to prevent unwanted conception. Aka PLANNED parenthood.

Again, walk into most PP waiting rooms and there will be a WALL full of pamphlets on myriad topics relating to STDs and various forms of contraception AND a basket full of free condoms on the counter, no questions ask, just take some if you need them.

This makes it the place that anybody, even teenagers can come and get clear honest information easily and without even having to talk to anybody if they are too embarrassed.

And when I was using PP, every year I filled out a questionnaire and then had a talk with a women's health councilor BEFORE I got my yearly exam. Where they talked with me in detail about the latest information in women's care, sexual health issues and birth control news. I have never gotten that kind of detailed overview on a routine basis from a standard yearly exam once I stopped using PP.

3) They work on a sliding fee scale so MONEY is not a barrier to women's health and/or affordable contraception. For whatever reason the best contraception for some women is STILL often ridiculously expensive. PP makes the RIGHT contraception for almost any women affordable to her wherever she is financially.

Most state run health clinics help the desperately poor, aka on welfare, and insurance covers a good chunk of the middle class. But as usual the working poor would be up shit creek without a paddle without Planned Parenthood.

When I was in my prime sexually active but still young (not making a lot of money) years, Planned Parenthood was very important to me. I had insurance but my co-pay for the formulary that was best for me was ridiculous. PP not only did my yearly exam for a reasonable co-pay, they also provided my birth control pills at a reasonable rate. They billed my insurance for what it would cover, but based on my income and expenses STILL partially subsidized my Woman's Care needs so it would be affordable for me to get the care they thought was BEST for ME. Not just what some insurance company was willing to cover.

4) Via the national network, medical records/care for women's health issues can remain consistent whenever one moves from one place to another. When I was on travel for work and via lost luggage needed a replacement pack of birth control pills, it was no problem to get them even 2000 miles from home.

5) And while this might be minor to some people, for others it is very important. PP ALWAYS has a female provider option for routine care for girls/women who are uncomfortable getting naked with unknown men. While I think I would do ok with a male provider, the reality of having females as an easy consistent option when I was young was very comforting.

Quote:


Quote:
In all honesty, knowing how corporate shenanigans work from a layman's pov if PP was doing something wrong they'd fold, restructure, and reopen as 'parenthood planning' or something and carry on.


Honestly, this does not bother me. Hell PP could split into 2 with the Abortion and Women's Care going on as separate entities - again my beef with PP is that they are not what they portray themselves to be - they are driven by abortions. Again, this is not to say, the other stuff is not valuable - but it is a side focus for them.



I am not Chad Ellis, but for a moment I will jump in here and play him on RSP to note... this just isn't true. PP is NOT driven by abortions in terms of practice or services provided. Really it isn't.

In terms of POLITICS abortion is the issue they consistently get linked with, but in terms of what they actually do, abortions are NOT their main mission on a day to day basis, not even close.

No longer playing Chad... on to my personal opinions:

MY major beef with PP is that they are far too enmeshed with the POLITICS of abortion and take that stance to extremes. If a 14 year old cannot get a cavity filled without any adult co-consent, the idea that they should be allowed to make a decision about abortions, no questions asked is ludicrous. That potentially dangerous drugs should be over the counter just because they touch on "sex" is also unwise. Plan B should at least need a "counseling" conversation with a Pharmacist, and in reality one with a women's health PROFESSIONAL would be better. It carries very real risks with use, especially IMPROPER use. And yet PP seems to repeatedly push for unfettered access to things like that because at times they let ideology override common sense IMO.

My other major concern with PP is that they can at times promote a culture of death that I do strenuously object too as part of their Political Agenda offshoot. In their effort to keep abortion legal, they all to often tend to minimize or even dismiss the idea that abortion IS a big deal and should be the option of absolute last resort. It ISN'T or should it be presented as an OK thing to do. It should be ALWAYS presented as the thing that is a legal option that should be used only when between a rock and a hard place. That one should be AVOIDED at almost any cost, and therefore responsible CONTRACEPTION is a MANDATORY expectation for being sexually active, not just a good idea, but EXPECTED. Planned Parenthood should be on board with sending the message that abortions are NOT a just fine Choice. That they are sometimes a necessary evil that PP provides because sometimes there is no Good choice is a different message than the one they currently assert.

Still as pissed off as those stances make me, I would not even underfund, very well defund them because they are the BEST in the nation at providing the real needed services of education and AFFORDABLE women's health care under a well known "Brandname". In short after all these years of operation most people, EVEN teens and young adults know that that this is the place to go for information AND services if you are becoming or have become sexually active. And that even if you have no money, they will help people with, education, contraception and STD avoidance and/or treatment.

The Good PP does far outweighs the bad in day to day operation IMO.

28 
 Thumb up
1.75
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J
United States
Lexington
Kentucky
flag msg tools
admin
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ejmowrer wrote:
They are clearly hoping to dissect and sell baby parts. They are clearly pushing their patients to consent to that. That are clearly not doing it out of altruism. They are clearly very casual about it.

Doctors, when discussing matters of medicine with colleagues usually are casual.

They facilitate donating the fetal tissue because their patients want to donate it and because it is useful for medical research.


Quote:
Nothing else matters. It doesn't matter if they broke the law. It doesn't matter whether they are profiting from it, though clearly they are trying to maximize their fees for this service for whatever reason.

So if they decided to incinerate all fetal remains going forward, you would be fine with them?
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Morris
United States
Raytown
Missouri
flag msg tools
2nd, 6th and 7th Wisconsin, 19th Indiana, 24th Michigan
badge
24th Michigan Monument Gettysburg Pa
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Meerkat wrote:


The Good PP does far outweighs the bad in day to day operation IMO.



I agree but at the same time they shouldn't get a pass on the bad simply because of how people view them from a political viewpoint.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Reid
United States
Brooklyn
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Drew1365 wrote:
Meerkat wrote:
The Good PP does far outweighs the bad in day to day operation IMO.


No.

All great Neptune's ocean will not wash the blood clean from their hands.

We do not need Planned Parenthood. All the non-abortion things they do can be had from other health service organizations, which are more plentiful anyway. Why insist that taxpayer money fund butchery?


It doesn't, dude. That would be illegal. My donations fund that.
8 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3 , 4  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.