- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 4, 2012 at 9:02 pm #746618
JanSParticipantlevity…we need levity…this made me laugh so hard I started crying…
http://gawker.com/5791100/watch-stephen-colberts-defense-of-planned-parenthood
February 5, 2012 at 6:16 pm #746619
waynsterParticipantJan the walgreens colonoscopy was great lmao…..Who knows kootch might try it on the poor just to save a tea party buck lol…. after all 90% of planned parenthoods money goes to abortion….wait that wasn’t intended to be a factual statement from the senator from arizona….lmao
February 7, 2012 at 6:41 pm #746620
kootchmanMemberActually Jan you misstate the case entirely. The right has no objection to birth control. Unless a religious doctrine and belief involved is being trampled on by the state …most conservatives practice birth control as a matter of choice. , The Catholic church has a doctrinal objection, but the church is free association, Catholics don’t mandate your enrollment as a parishioner do they? . Conservatives will defend the absolute right of the Catholic (and others) faith to not sponsor and participate in birth control as a matter of religious conscience. It’s consistant with our constitutional construct. even in times of national defense or peril we have respected conscience.. witness the military who has respected conscientious objectors throughout our history, despite Supreme Court rulings that conscription is legal, and constitutional. Bet you support that interpretation don’t ya? Abortion remains contentious as a matter of conscience. It spans multiple faiths. I can well remember the left of the 60’s screaming that abortion was an ethnic genocide…and some black churches still assert this position. Willful termination of a viable human life is what it is. Treating it as elective surgery akin to breast implants or a nose job has the country at about a 50/50 split. We have been down the road of state sponsored terminations of life…. We have mandated it in the past for mental defectives, ethnicity, income class, religious affiliation, orphan status, and for scientific curiousity. Next up? Balance the budget on the force of abortions. Of course we always say it can never happen… until it does happen. While abortion is 3% or 5%..of PP activity (why quibble?) it provides a much larger sum of proportional revenue. Bottom line it’s a revenue generator for PP. It’s the right thing to allow voices of conscience. 330,000 terminations by PP alone is not a trivial affair that should escape the scrutiny of a society constantly. It may well be the right that preserves reproduction rights…. when a genetic screening reveals a potential inherited trait that would might cause increased insurance expense, or special needs education.. and the state asserts its powers or succumbs to an insurance lobby for a campaign donation.
February 7, 2012 at 7:30 pm #746621
JanSParticipantRegardless of what you , as a Catholic, believe, abortion is a legal medical procedure. Your opinion has no sway with me, thank you very much. Please quote your source of the number 330,000. Oh, and do you honestly think that women treat abortion like a nose job or getting implants? Seriously? That’s moronic at best.
Again..Komen originally said that this was not political, not about abortion (of course, thinking people saw through this sham easily), but if (big IF) what Komen said was true, this discussion should never have even mentioned abortion.
February 7, 2012 at 8:08 pm #746622
kootchmanMemberIt is a legal procedure. No one argued that point… I didn’t. You eschew the entire argument though, of respecting conscience. Although I find it ironic that the freedom of abortion advocates actually ponied up and donated money for a change..donations up 500% according to PP… instead of relying on federal support. This controversy would go a long way towards being moot if the “pro-choice” advocates supported their principals as well as the “pro-life” groups funded their groups. The federal government would be out of the picture. That would cool the fires a bit. My stats? .. right from Planned Parenthood… as required by law they must release them. Good enough source for ya?
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/PPFA/PP_Services.pdf
AborTion services — 3.0 PercenT oF services in 2010
Abortion Procedures 329,445
February 7, 2012 at 11:14 pm #746623
JanSParticipantaw, geez, Kootch…do you honestly think we’re all just dumb deadbeats who rely on gov’t. handouts every day to exist? Do you honestly think that us “liberals” don’t give to charities? We put our money (when we can) where our mouth is. It’s not exclusive territory for rightwing conservatives…..where the hell do you come up with this stuff?
Pro life? They were willing to throw low income women’s healthcare under the bus because of their anti-choice beliefs…so don’t feed me the crock that you hand out about pro-life people being all that caring. I don’t buy it.
February 7, 2012 at 11:32 pm #746624
JanSParticipantoh, and while you were looking at that page, did you notice the breast cancer screening stats? Yet…because of the personal views of the now resigned Karen Handel and others, they were very, very willing to let that go by the wayside…now that’s really caring about women’s health…is it any wonder people objected? Do you not see anything wrong with that? I do.
February 7, 2012 at 11:57 pm #746625
kootchmanMemberNot nearly as muh as conservatives. Not even close. Obama .. funny gave 1% to charity and Romney 10%…. great.. soon as PP gets out of the abortion mill business… the objective of about 50% of the American populace the issue goes away.. then they are a health care provider and can generate revenue from everyone… . As long as “only” 3 per cent of the business is abortion, such an anathema to so many a “mere drop in the bucket. the issue can go away. As long as there is a violation of conscience, with public monies, the fight continues.. and I would say from the stats, closures, restrictions, it would be smart cause the right to abortion on demand is losing ground. The right to life coalitions are winning the gound game. Fewer and fewer targets so the fire of the right to life becomes more and more targeted and concentrated. PP is in the proverbial “kill box”.. by their own choice. There is no shortage of breast screening exam centers that Komen could fund… there are fewer and fewer termination of life on demand centers. BTY.. I am not a Catholic… go figure eh?
February 8, 2012 at 12:02 am #746626
kootchmanMemberHere ya go Jan… a liberal on liberals….what we already know…
“I came across an article that appeared in the New York Times called “Bleeding Heart Tightwads” by Nicholas D. Kristof. Kristof, a liberal, goes on to say that liberals tend to be stingy when it comes to giving to charity. I found it to be very interesting and also contradictory to what I originally believed.”
http://blog.geoiq.com/2009/01/07/dataset-of-the-day-who-is-more-generous-republicans-or-democrats/
But go ahead and make a comment on spelling or some other issue that deflects the facts. Liberals talk a good game.. conservatives actually do something. Go PP.. if you can pry a few liberal dollars lose… money where the talk is… it would be refreshing news.
February 8, 2012 at 12:10 am #746627
JanSParticipantI never looked at this as a contest to see who does more. Nah-nah-nah-nah-nah, we do more , we’re better than you. It’s all BS, and frankly, is superficial.The most nonsensical stuff turns up in conversations, don’t you think? Oh, please, you might give more than me…so what. I, and my friends, give what we can, when we can. I try not to pay attention to what others give, nor am I envious of them, nor do I donate to show that I do more than the next person. But you continue to think however you want. People of all ilks give, and that’s what’s important.
February 8, 2012 at 12:27 am #746628
JanSParticipantLet me put it this way…when we form a donors group for NV, do you think we bother to ask if the donors are republican or democrat, liberal or conservative? Do we keep track of who does more, who donates more time, more money, cooks more meals, spends more time there? No…because it’s not important. What IS important is that there are people volunteering to help. It all counts…
February 8, 2012 at 1:36 am #746629
miwsParticipantJan’s post 36 FTW.
I know for a fact, that NV has benefited greatly from the generosity of many of the folks here in the WSB Forums, both conservatives, (including kootch) and liberals.
Annnnnnddddd, that generosity doesn’t always come in the form of money, food, or clothes and such. I may be someone providing transportation to another Donor that doesn’t drive.
It might be writing the City Council, and/or Mayor to urge them to recognize the Camp as being a legal occupant of the site, and then getting water and other utilities. (I have a hunch that much of that goes on behind the scenes, and readers of WSB, and Camp Residents don’t even realize a given person has done so).
Or, it may be simply suggesting to others that post free stuff here on the Forums,or even stuff they are selling; “If you can’t sell it, would you consider donating it to Nickelsville?”
It might be posting a needs/wish list, or something else, that supports or benefits NV.
To me, it isn’t always the “value” of the Donation, but “the thought that counts”. It’s about making any contribution that helps out Nickelsville and it’s Residents.
Mike
February 8, 2012 at 5:11 am #746630
kootchmanMemberLet me put it this way… “They were willing to throw low income women’s healthcare under the bus because of their anti-choice beliefs” Not so. They are willing to throw PP under the bus. That is a distinction to consider. PP has made a pointed decision to offer abortion in the menu of services. I will give them credit for a principaled decision. They believe it. But half the country doesn’t and should not be compelled to subsidize the taking of unborn life. Conservatives are the very backbone of charitable giving, percentage and quantity. A point that should be made. That includes healthcare. I said it was ironic, and it is, that there was according to PP a 500 per cent increase in their funding since the Komen affair.. seems the left can find the money in their own pockets after all. If they love to support the PP group…they should keep up the donations and get PP off the public finance roster. Problem solved. Funny… conservatives have to quote the very public PP documents when liberals want the source of their assertions…. like while only 3 per cent of their services… it does provide 40 per cent of their fees for service revenue. It’s all in how you present the data. It’s also why 30 second attack ads work… both sides. All they do is whip up the foam..and reinforce preconceived notions… politicians know they have an uneducated electorate that is likely to stay that way. We love being reinforced about our own beliefs.
February 8, 2012 at 5:29 am #746631
dhgParticipantIt would be very unfair to make the liberals support PP when the largest consumers of abortions come from the the very conservative groups.
Don’t like abortions? Invest in good sex ed, pass out condoms to teenagers. The very things conservatives refuse to do are the things proven to reduce abortions.
And while we are at it: the director of sg komen should not be paid $5 mil / year. No one at a nonprofit should be pulling down that much.
February 8, 2012 at 5:40 am #746632
kootchmanMemberOh do show me that data dhg… that is a pull it out of thin air fabrication. Show me the data on that one !!! PP doing political surveys now when offering services, after treatment phone polling.? . oh do tell where this “fact” comes from… some source besides myth. But go ahead…pass out condoms to your kids if so compelled. I will take on the sex education role….for mine, thank-you… it;s my job. Like feeding them, clothing them, educating them, bath time, teeth brushing, bedtime stories… I see the sex ed curriculum in the LA school districts… bondage pictures of 3rd graders by their teachers… no thanks. Some things are just not the purview of the social engineers. Trying to get em young eh?
February 8, 2012 at 5:41 am #746633
redblackParticipantof course conservatives give more money to charity. as a demographic, conservatives have more money to give.
in other news, water is wet.
February 8, 2012 at 5:48 am #746634
kootchmanMemberHuh? Tell that to Soros, Gates, Buffett, now there is a trifecta … et al. They are taught to give as part of their conservative tradition could also be a reason. Are you suggesting redblack that a fundamental requirement to financial success is to be a conservative? You may actually have a valid point. Welcome aboard! Live long and prosper you closet right winger! If ya read the article redblack… as a percentage of giving conservatives far outperform liberals. Even if they have more as you seem to think…on a one to one basis they give more. The article rated the states as a percentage of income…. irregardless of actual wealth. Poor conservatives donate more readlly than rich liberals… Alabama and Mississippi conservatives donate more of their income than Seattle!!!!! Liberals are stingy. The voice of more as long as someone else pays for it!!!! Look at the data redblack…
February 8, 2012 at 5:58 am #746635
redblackParticipantwow. soros, gates, and buffet. you got me there!
any others? drop some hollywood bigwigs’ names, maybe?
which way do you want it? do liberals give more?
Obama .. funny gave 1% to charity and Romney 10%
the simple fact is that romney has about 1,000 times the net worth of the obamas. so pretending that willard gives more out of the goodness of his black little heart instead of the overwhelming magnitude of his wealth is disingenuous, at best.
February 8, 2012 at 5:58 am #746636
kootchmanMemberMichael Franks… Heritage Foundation
“Democrats now control the majority of the nation’s wealthiest congressional jurisdictions. More than half of the wealthiest households are concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats control both Senate seats.”
read that redblack? left wingers are tightwads.
February 8, 2012 at 6:09 am #746637
kootchmanMemberRomney has given 10 per cent of his wealth all his life…so… ya think the Obamas who ARE in the 1% are good to go with 1%… how do you live with the inconsistancy? You are the one who stated conservatives have more of the wealth.that’s why they give more.. and gosh..the data says that ain’t so. They give more because they are more generous.
This was your statement…and it isn’t fact
“of course conservatives give more money to charity. as a demographic, conservatives have more money to give.”
Since ya asked though.. if the liberals who have more, and matched the giving of conservatives who “out give” by a factor of over 120 per cent… whew…we could solve a lot of problems. Catch up with conservatives… there is a worthy challenge!!! Imagine more than doubling charitable giving without a single increase in taxes!!! Maybe we could shame the shameless. ..Alabama outranks WA. OR, MA, DE, CA in generosity…..
February 8, 2012 at 6:25 am #746638
dhgParticipantFox distorts the news a tad. If you use the same math calculations on Romney and Obama tax returns, the first family gave more
February 8, 2012 at 6:41 am #746639
kootchmanMemberNo they got taxed more…voluntary giving… that which comes from personal choice, not government confiscation.. Romney gave more and has done so routinely … all his life. He tithes. Media Matters eh? Oh hell.. I am going to quote The Heritage Foundation to death… at least I quoted and sourced a liberal.
Where are those stats that conservatives use abortion services the most? I do so want to see them dhg.. I showed you mine…you show me yours.
February 8, 2012 at 7:05 am #746640
dhgParticipantRegarding use of services: Catholics, 24% of the population in America, account for 31% of all abortions; Evangelicals 27% / 18%;
And you think they shouldn’t contribute to PP?
February 8, 2012 at 9:49 am #746641
kootchmanMemberNope. The population is an even distribution my stats sourced, for Catholics who use the service in proportion to their population and evangelicals who use it less…. and your stats as interesting as they are..come from PP. … I still doubt the data. Its PP provided data…But even if so…oiver 50 per cent of the US population does not support abortion.. and that is intolerable to place that assault on conscience. PP should stand on the support of its protagonists and not confiscation from those who vehemently oppose it on ethical conscience. If it has merit… it should stand on its own.
But do take the task on…. as liberal, progressives, write some checks and show your support. Take away the federal funding. For certain the abortion debate is going towards more restriction and more curtailment and as long as it is in the public arena … it’s fair game. A private foundation doesn’t have to contend with the battles of the legitimate protest of a public provided service. Abortions are in decline, in part by access to birth control, and in part by there being more restrictions to access which result in more deliberate decision… almost 60 per cent of abortion on demand is for women over the age of 20… sorta past the age of “geez … how did that happen?”
February 8, 2012 at 1:44 pm #746642
redblackParticipantthere’s no inconsistency. if a guy who makes $100,000 per year gives 1% of his income to charity, i’d call that pretty generous.
a guy who makes $20 million per year giving 10% of his income to charity is someone looking to write off some taxes.
it’s a matter of scale. it’s easy to yell “romney gave $2 million to charity, and the obamas only gave $1,000! ha! stupid liberal tightwads!” …if you don’t understand the numbers.
interesting take on wealthiest households, etc. i’d like to see the concentration of wealth in the districts and states that you mention, though.
for example, in those wealthy democratic districts, i’m guessing there’s greater population density – the nation’s population is concentrated in the blue states, after all. then there’s alabama, where i’m guessing there’s a warren of extremely oil-wealthy oligarchs. in other words, the blue “tightwad” districts probably have more people in the 98th percentile of income-earners, while the holier-than-thou red districts have a few 1-percenters.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.