Defunding Planned Parenthood and Sex education


#1

**Members of the Arkansas Senate voted Tuesday to defund Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers that receive federal and state grants to fund sex education programs.

**
Senate Bill 818 was introduced by Rep. Gary Stubblefield (R-Branch), who aims to end the subsidization of Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers that receive federal and state tax dollars to fund their sex education programs, because it violates the state’s constitution.

Read more at [Arkansas Senate Moves to Defund Planned Parenthood](http://www.christianpost.com/news/arkansas-senate-moves-to-defund-planned-parenthood-93675/#mHz3ShTCT1dgVeTd.99<br /><br />A)
A step in the right direction, more states should implement similar bills to stop the bastardization of morals and responsibility


#2

I’m all for defunding Plan Parenthood. I do not wish to live in a society where someone is forced to do something against their will. Such as ban abortions or force others (especially those who disagree with it) to pay for it.


#3

Im not sure how that applies to abortion unless you are talking about a society without laws, nearly every person understands the limits on freedom when your choices fatally harm others


#4

My greatest concern here is that abortions are something like 2-3% of Planned Parenthood’s budget, I have no idea how much the dabble in sex ed. What of the rest of what Plan. Parent. does? I hope they aren’t de-funding everything.


#5

The essence of the statement was to assure that I have no interest in banning abortions but I do not want anyone else besides the people involved to pay for it.


#6

If unPlanned Parenthood had anything to offer of real value, they could fund themselves.
Yeah, I’ve read the so-called charts that claim that 97% of their budget goes toward sex ed and TREATMENT of STD’s. If the sex-ed was so good, why DOES 35% of their budget go toward treating the diseases that COME from STD’s. Besides, anybody in 5th grade has had sex ed, and if they were paying attention, they wouldn’t need the contraceptives nor the treatments.
Or is the claim that Public Education isn’t so hot, afterall?

And, cold hearted as it may seam, I rose my children not to need those types of treatments, but even IF they hadn’t listened and needed such care, it wouldn’t occur to me to have a complete stranger attend to it, much less PAY for it. What kind of mother is THAT devoid of her love and responsibility to her children?

Maybe if more parents thought of their children as their own concern, the general public wouldn’t need to depend on children going to strangers for something as personal as intimate relationships between a man and a woman.
And don’t give me that, “But some parents won’t,” argument 'cuz we’ve been hearing that cry for over fifty years now, and it’s not gotten better; it’s gotten worse. What’s so terrible about asking parents to tend to their own children?

Yes, there are extremes, so please don’t go there, either. I’m okay with helping kids out of extreme situations. However, extreme situations should not be all that common.

{Why does Roger F. Gay keep coming to mind?}


#7

Way to straddle that fence


#8

They all should be defunded by GOV’T both Fed and STATE.
Let those who SUPPORT what they do…SUPPORT them.
I personally SUPPORT much of what they do…but government should have no role in this CHARITY.
Ditto NPR & PBS and a whole bunch of other stuff. This ain’t about sex…it is about the size and role of GOV’T in our lives AND a $17trillion dollar deficit.
It’s all gotta go.


#9

Outside of supporting MUCH of what they do, (because it’s over-lapping funding of what’s already taught in middle school), ya got my full support on that one.


#10

Indeed, I am Pro-Choice (in the true definition of it). Democrats and Liberals are not in fact Pro-Choice, they are Pro-Death. They back only abortions, only funding for planned parenthood, and push for looser laws in regards to it. That is counter intuitive to describe it as choice, because no thought or support are given by the Liberals towards alternatives such as adoption programs and other pro-life opportunities. Therefore they are Pro-Death. I am Pro-Choice. I do not want to ban abortions, though I do have a problem with having abortions where the baby is prematurely born alive and suffering a horrible death. At the same time, I see no reason why the government should be involved AT ALL other than to regulate the hell out of them. Because this is God Awful

‘House of horrors’ alleged at abortion clinic - US news - Crime & courts | NBC News

So, that is correct, I am Pro-Choice. Leave the rest of us out of it.

And by the way, I am moving ever further away from this concept of having only 2 choices. A Republican Pie, or a Democrat Cake. Well, I prefer to make my own cake and eat it too. I will base my opinions on my own logic not on my party identity (which is still Republican). So if I believe that “sitting on the fence” and keeping this truly between a woman and her doctor, than thats what I believe.

Besides, there is absolutely no reason why ANYONE ELSE should have to pay a cent for her “medical bills”. No one will pay for my prostate examination, which I am not looking forward to at all.


#11

Thats why libertarians starve to death

I will base my opinions on my own logic not on my party identity (which is still Republican). So if I believe that “sitting on the fence” and keeping this truly between a woman and her doctor, than thats what I believe.

Totally ignoring the father and the baby, great strategy.


#12

Actually I was more concerned about the parts having to with ultrasounds and family planning, making sure the baby-to-be has a good shot at life…I wasn’t aware that much of their budget went toward STDs. That said I’m not surprised my school is doing a bunch of free STD tests right now. :confused:


#13

Also Roger F. Gay?


#14

Oh…I wasn’t talking about their educational school involvment…totally against that even privately. I was referring to their birth control and womens health issues activities in their clinics and outreach activities.


#15

I’ve heard that too. And I don’t buy it for a second.

I think it’s been pretty well established that PP doesn’t do or rarely does ultrasounds; they do REFERRALS for ultrasounds. But not for abortion candidates. I say flush PP down the toilet.


#16

They starve to death? I know your using figurative language but what did you mean by that? That we prefer to leave people their own problems? That is a crime? And I am a bad Republican because I think the government has bigger fish to fry than to either support or ban abortions? Let’s look at your side of the argument. Banning of abortions. What happens next? Well first, many women will become pregnant who will not want the child. They will be faced with some dilemmas. They can have it, be that Christian martyr you think all people should aspire to be, becoming an unwanted child born to mother who begins motherhood resentful of her newborn. In addition, since most abortions are financially based (they can’t afford a child) than that child becomes yet another welfare baby, prompting the Democrats to not only raise taxes, but have yet another vote slave. They can give it up for adoption, which is definitely a great alternative that I support. Do you think there are 33 million families that want an adopted child? They would end up in orphanages, again being a financial burden to the state. Or, they will find another means by which to terminate the pregnancy . Throwing themselves down stairs, shoving wire coat hangers up into inappropriate areas, slamming themselves in the stomach, etc. Then, you, being the SMALL GOVERNMENT TYPE, would arrest her for it, and she would spend the rest of her life in jail for murder. And you know I say this as a means to deter your thoughts, but you actually believe that would be just. A double tragedy to replace a single one. Great choice.

No, they should be a part of the decision, forgive me for not mentioning them. I thought I implied the father when I said all those participating in the situation. I am of the opinion that, unless I am directly responsible for the conception of that child, than I hold no connection to it at all. I will pay for an abortion only when it is my kid. And since I believe that life begins at conception morally, than I would do everything I could to protect the baby from abortion. The father should be part of the issue.

As for the baby, see the above narrative. It’s tragic. You wish you live in a society that doesn’t have to resort that behavior. But, the alternative is FAR WORSE.

Finally, the only other nations who ban abortions are Saudi Arabia and Iran, don’t much care being in the same group as those two nations.


#17

What I mean is that, Libertarians currently hold 0 of 100 senate seats, 0 of 435 house seats, 0 of 50 governorships, 0 of 1921 state senate seats, and 0 of 5410 state house seats. If you dont pick a side your political positions dont matter much because you will have no chance to implement them.

Let’s look at your side of the argument. Banning of abortions. What happens next? Well first, many women will become pregnant who will not want the child. They will be faced with some dilemmas. They can have it, be that Christian martyr you think all people should aspire to be, becoming an unwanted child born to mother who begins motherhood resentful of her newborn. In addition, since most abortions are financially based (they can’t afford a child) than that child becomes yet another welfare baby, prompting the Democrats to not only raise taxes, but have yet another vote slave. They can give it up for adoption, which is definitely a great alternative that I support. Do you think there are 33 million families that want an adopted child? They would end up in orphanages, again being a financial burden to the state. Or, they will find another means by which to terminate the pregnancy . Throwing themselves down stairs, shoving wire coat hangers up into inappropriate areas, slamming themselves in the stomach, etc. Then, you, being the SMALL GOVERNMENT TYPE, would arrest her for it, and she would spend the rest of her life in jail for murder. And you know I say this as a means to deter your thoughts, but you actually believe that would be just. A double tragedy to replace a single one. Great choice.

You have no clue about my side of the argument and the strawmaning isnt helping your argument either

No, they should be a part of the decision, forgive me for not mentioning them. I thought I implied the father when I said all those participating in the situation. I am of the opinion that, unless I am directly responsible for the conception of that child, than I hold no connection to it at all. I will pay for an abortion only when it is my kid. And since I believe that life begins at conception morally, than I would do everything I could to protect the baby from abortion. The father should be part of the issue.

Since you parroted the democrat mantra of “between a woman and her doctor” I did not infer it that way

As for the baby, see the above narrative. It’s tragic. You wish you live in a society that doesn’t have to resort that behavior. But, the alternative is FAR WORSE.

Finally, the only other nations who ban abortions are Saudi Arabia and Iran, don’t much care being in the same group as those two nations.

Where did you get that from? A lot of countries ban convenience abortions


#18

Libertarianism is a philosophy more than it a political party. There is no Environmentalist Party. There is no Fiscal Conservative Party. They are philosophies. And I can infer that a few individuals in government have Libertarian-based political ideologies, even if they continue to call themselves Republicans (Like myself).

I did not clarify my position on the father, and I apologize for being vague.

I don’t make strawmen, I asked Devil’s Advocate. Let’s say you ban abortions. The impersonal you. Again, though, perhaps I could have written it more to context or least with better clarity through the use of the pronoun “one” or “we”.

Nevertheless, I believe that I want to base my support of candidates on the issues not the party. On most issues I back Republicans, which is why I am a member of the Republicans. But, I do support some Democrat pursuits. And when they come up in conversation, that’s where I will put in my support. I will not compromise my personal convictions to meet the purity test of either party. Don’t get me wrong, I am completely committed to getting a Republican president and Republican majority in both houses. (An extremely difficult task it would seem). I tell you what, I intend to write another op-ed in Cigar. I wrote one last night entitled Why I do not vote Democrat (and probably never will). Tonight I want to submit my next work: Why I am losing faith in the Republicans (and how I suggest to solve it).


#19

Im not suggesting you agree with every republican position, Im just suggesting on a big wedge issue like abortion you’ll have to pick a side

I don’t make strawmen, I asked Devil’s Advocate. Let’s say you ban abortions. The impersonal you. Again, though, perhaps I could have written it more to context or least with better clarity through the use of the pronoun “one” or “we”.

Well you did, you claimed that my (or republicans/conservatives) position would be to jail women for murder if they have an abortion. Not many, if any, are suggesting that.


#20

No I didn’t. I stated that, if you wish to enact Pro-Life Policies, the only way to do that is to BAN abortions. If you BAN abortions like you BAN Cocaine, you will face CRIMINAL charges. Therefore, in a USA where abortions are BANNED the women who take matters into their own hands would be BREAKING THE LAW and thus SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL CHARGES. If the death of fetus is equal to the death of full grown human, than it would be MURDER. And how does America prosecute murder? 25 to Life.

And if you do not wish to ban abortions, than you are pro-choice.

It is unbecoming to promote yourself as a “victim” of my so called “straw men” statements. That’s what Liberals do.