• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Faith Leaders: ‘A World Without Planned Parenthood Would Be Disastrous’ [W:220]

Exactly, and I think every human being knows in their heart of hearts, it's wrong.

While I am a Christian, and I believe the Bible is very clear about abortion, the Bible and Christianity have no role in the debate regarding abortion except between Christians and those who claim to believe the Bible. The last thing I want to see is the courts referring to religious belief or "holy books" in reaching a decision... nor should anyone.
 
Federal funds ARE being used for abortions. You are trying to dance...but it doesnt work. You want to draw the distinction that even though 41% of Planned Parenthoods overall budget comes from federal funding, that money isnt used to provide abortions. Thats just ****ing goofy. Thats like saying someone giving you 41% of your overall income isnt subsidizing you to go out and buy crack just because you 'only' spend that 41% on the rent.


It is a myth that taxpayers are paying for abortion at PP.

Elective abortions are paid by the woman herself with help on occasion by donated abortion funds.
By law Therapeutic abortions ( rape, incest, risk to woman's life ) are the only ones covered by federal funds.

From the Washington Post.
[MYTH]

1. Planned Parenthood’s federal funding frees up other money to pay for abortions.

Opponents of Planned Parenthood insist that giving the organization federal dollars allows it to spend other money in its budget to provide abortions. That is not possible — there is no other money.


Title X is a federal grant program that exists solely to help low-income and uninsured people access contraceptives and sexual health care; 5.2 million people use the program annually. But Congress has never appropriated enough money to take care of the estimated 17 million Americans who need publicly funded family-planning care. There always are more patients than subsidies.

Further, a Title X grant is designed to help with costs, not to fully cover them.
So family-planning programs are required to find other money to support the Title X project — not the other way around. For patients who qualify for Medicaid, reimbursement rates for reproductive health services are lower than the cost of the care. A typical family-planning visit might cost upward of $200, including the exam, lab tests and contraceptive method, but the Medicaid reimbursement rate may be as low as $20.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ned-parenthood/2011/04/14/AFogj1iD_story.html
 
It is a myth that taxpayers are paying for abortion at PP.

Elective abortions are paid by the woman herself with help on occasion by donated abortion funds.
By law Therapeutic abortions ( rape, incest, risk to woman's life ) are the only ones covered by federal funds.

From the Washington Post.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ned-parenthood/2011/04/14/AFogj1iD_story.html

From reading many of your posts, you are obviously well informed. Do you know how the charges for abortion at a PP facility are determined. Specifically, does the charge include the actual facility cost, as it would in a hospital or outpatient surgical center?
 
From reading many of your posts, you are obviously well informed. Do you know how the charges for abortion at a PP facility are determined. Specifically, does the charge include the actual facility cost, as it would in a hospital or outpatient surgical center?

Not sure but I think they include the actual facility cost for the in clinic porcudure.

In-Clinic Abortion Procedures at a Glance

Medical procedures that end pregnancy
Safe and effective

Available from many Planned Parenthood health centers

Costs up to $1,500 in the first trimester, but often less
A woman has many decisions to make when considering abortion. If you're thinking about abortion, your health care provider may talk with you about a few different abortion methods.

You may be offered the option to have an in-clinic abortion procedure, which is the kind of abortion discussed on this page. Or you may be offered the abortion pill. ...

- See more at: In-Clinic Abortion Procedure | What is the Cost & Process?
 
Not sure but I think they include the actual facility cost for the in clinic porcudure.



- See more at: In-Clinic Abortion Procedure | What is the Cost & Process?


I appreciate the link. Unfortunately it doesn't provide a breakdown of the costs. While I haven't spent any significant amount of time looking, I couldn't seem to find any recent cost figures for outpatient abortions except general estimates of charges for abortions at PP.
 
I appreciate the link. Unfortunately it doesn't provide a breakdown of the costs. While I haven't spent any significant amount of time looking, I couldn't seem to find any recent cost figures for outpatient abortions except general estimates of charges for abortions at PP.

From the following website:

Typical costs:
The cost of abortion depends on the type of abortion performed and how far the pregnancy has progressed.

For patients not covered by insurance, a surgical abortion in a doctor's office or a medical abortion at 10 weeks typically costs about $320 to $500. ...

Most abortions -- 88 percent -- are obtained by week 13;
...

Cost examples include: the Aalto Women's Center[2] in Houston, Texas, which charges $320 up to 11 weeks, up to $595 at their maximum of 15 weeks;

and Choice Medical Group[3] in San Francisco, Calif., which charges $450 to $600 up to 12 weeks,



For patients covered by insurance, out-of-pocket costs typically include a copay for routine outpatient surgery -- usually between $15 and $150, depending on the plan. For medical abortions, out-of-pocket costs usually include copays for the prescription drug and for the office visit.

Elective abortion is sometimes covered by health insurance. For example, Women's Health Practice[4] works with BlueCross BlueShield, United Healthcare and Unicare. However, five states -- Colorado, Kentucky, Missouri, North Dakota and Oklahoma -- restrict private insurers' ability to cover abortions, allowing it only under certain circumstances, such as rape or for health reasons. Plans vary, so it is important to check with your insurer to see if abortion is covered, and to check with the clinic to see if they accept your insurance.

Cost of an Abortion - Consumer Information - CostHelper
 
The Commandment doesn't refer to the killing of animals; it's about the murder of human beings. :roll:

Since it does not say that explicitly, this ^^^ is an 'interpretation.'
 
I never claimed the constitution supports it. And not for their beliefs, for their statements.

That's cool. So then stop hoping the law is changed, which IS Constitutional, and just not have an abortion yourself...in other words...feel free to practice your beliefs personally.
 
Not from a Biblical standpoint. Which begs the question, why do Christianity hating libs insist on invoking the Bible in lame attempts to make their arguments?

I don't know ..... why don't you ask them?

There is nowhere in the Bible saying abortion is murder.
 
Last edited:
I don't know ..... why don't you ask them?

There is nowhere in the Bible saying abortion is murder.

The Bible clearly refers multiple times to those in utero as being people. The Bible clearly describes the killing of innocents as murder. You do the math. :roll:
 
Not from a Biblical standpoint. Which begs the question, why do Christianity hating libs insist on invoking the Bible in lame attempts to make their arguments?

Why do Christians get all butt hurt every time "Christianity Hating Libs" ask questions about their Bible(s)?
 
Why do Christians get all butt hurt every time "Christianity Hating Libs" ask questions about their Bible(s)?

Asking questions is not the same as making pronouncements that clearly aren't there, then invoking the old "interpretation" chestnut.
 
Asking questions is not the same as making pronouncements that clearly aren't there, then invoking the old "interpretation" chestnut.

I see....so we non-Christians simply need to keep up with the new versions that Christians have come up with? Silly me, I thought the books were the "Word of God".
 
I see....so we non-Christians simply need to keep up with the new versions that Christians have come up with? Silly me, I thought the books were the "Word of God".

There are no "new versions". Only more recent translations of the same extant ancient texts. The science of linguistics advances like any other. Which "new versions are you talking about?
 
There are no "new versions". Only more recent translations of the same extant ancient texts. The science of linguistics advances like any other. Which "new versions are you talking about?

I was going to answer your query with a list of "Versions" found online...but do not think the server here would be able to handle it. As far as "Translations...well, there are as many as there are languages and each will inherently contain errors and changes, thus cannot be the original "Word of God". Of course we also have the obviously "New Testament" which tells us by its very name it is not the Old one and is thus a newer version.
Regardless, Your commentary indicates that we heathens are attacking Christians by addressing mostly the Older version (which is apparently no longer en vogue), and the question was WHY you feel pointing out impossible things is an Attack?
 
I was going to answer your query with a list of "Versions" found online...but do not think the server here would be able to handle it. As far as "Translations...well, there are as many as there are languages and each will inherently contain errors and changes, thus cannot be the original "Word of God". Of course we also have the obviously "New Testament" which tells us by its very name it is not the Old one and is thus a newer version.
Regardless, Your commentary indicates that we heathens are attacking Christians by addressing mostly the Older version (which is apparently no longer en vogue), and the question was WHY you feel pointing out impossible things is an Attack?

I never said anything of the kind. I merely wondered why non believers feel the need to use the Bible in their arguments at all.
 
I appreciate the link. Unfortunately it doesn't provide a breakdown of the costs. While I haven't spent any significant amount of time looking, I couldn't seem to find any recent cost figures for outpatient abortions except general estimates of charges for abortions at PP.

And that link was comparing the cost of an abortion in a doctors office with the cost of an abortion in a clinic.

The costs were very similar whether is was a private doctor or a woman's clinic.

For patients not covered by insurance, a surgical abortion in a doctor's office or a medical abortion at 10 weeks typically costs about $320 to $500. At 16 weeks, a surgical abortion costs about $500 to $700.

Cost examples include: the Aalto Women's Center[2] in Houston, Texas, which charges $320 up to 11 weeks, up to $595 at their maximum of 15 weeks; and Choice Medical Group[3] in San Francisco, Calif., which charges $450 to $600 up to 12 weeks, $1,000 at 15 to 16 weeks; ...

Cost of an Abortion - Consumer Information - CostHelper
 
From the Columbus Dispatch:

When an Ohio Senate committee met last month to consider a bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, members heard testimony from 13 people.

Five testified as people of religious faith, and all five spoke out against the ban.

The Rev. Laura Young, who helped organize some of the speakers, said they represent an interfaith voice that supports abortion rights and too often goes unheard.

“Very, very few pro-choice clergy testify in these hearings,” she said. “It’s typically a lot of anti-abortion clergy. That’s particularly why I’m impassioned about making this voice heard — because it is there, it’s just not loud enough.”

This year, Young, a United Methodist minister in the West Ohio Conference,
was assigned by Bishop Gregory Palmer to serve as executive director of the Ohio Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice.

....Young said goals include encouraging clergy members to testify at legislative hearings on anti-abortion bills and advocating for organizations that provide women’s health care, including abortions and contraception.

Most Ohioans, she said, are unaware of the reproductive laws in the state or what sacred Scriptures say about abortion.

“There’s a lot of misinformation and lack of information out there, and even greater, I think, there’s a vast lack of compassion,” she said. A goal is to help educate people “so they can develop that compassion they have as humans and as, I would say, children of God.”
...


The group is affiliated with the national Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, formed in 1973 when the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision legalized abortion.

The Ohio coalition has hundreds of members, said the Rev. Richard Venus, the group’s board president. He said goals are to have candidates who support abortion rights elected to the governor’s and legislative offices.

Venus said he worked years ago in inner-city Detroit, where he helped women who wanted abortions.

“I learned very early on that this was a huge decision for them but so very vital to their life, so very important to them,” said Venus, an ordained Methodist who now ministers at First Universalist Church of New Madison, a Unitarian-Universalist congregation in Darke County.

“I believe strongly that a woman has to have the final say about her life and her body, and it’s not the right of society to determine how she should live her life.”


At the June 24 hearing on the 20-week ban, members of the Senate Health and Human Services Committee heard from Episcopal, United Methodist and United Church of Christ clergy members who spoke against the ban on behalf of the Ohio Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice.

Young said the abortion-restricting policies discriminate against women from poor and minority communities and reduce health-care access for women.

Before the Roe v. Wade decision, Young said, clergy members were “on the front lines” of the issue, with desperate women and their families reaching out for help in obtaining abortions.

Read more:

Minister aims to increase clergy voice in favor of abortion rights | The Columbus Dispatch
 
Last edited:
I never said anything of the kind. I merely wondered why non believers feel the need to use the Bible in their arguments at all.

Seriously?....Uh....How can you possibly discuss the Bible(s) without discussing the Bible(s)?
 
..

That's cool. So then stop hoping the law is changed, which IS Constitutional, and just not have an abortion yourself...in other words...feel free to practice your beliefs personally.

No.
 
I never said anything of the kind. I merely wondered why non believers feel the need to use the Bible in their arguments at all.

Because it's amusing to watch you use a book full of contradictions as your main source of authority for your personal morality.
 
Because it's amusing to watch you use a book full of contradictions as your main source of authority for your personal morality.

That just shows your ignorance of Scripture. I don't mean that as an insult. The Bible has. zero contradictions, and must be taken as a whole.

But thanks for admitting your only purpose is to mock Christians for personal entertainment.
 
That just shows your ignorance of Scripture. I don't mean that as an insult. The Bible has. zero contradictions, and must be taken as a whole.

But thanks for admitting your only purpose is to mock Christians for personal entertainment.

I find that the people who make that claim tend to overlook the lamentably obvious ones, with really really weird and stupid 'harmonizing' of the contradictions.
 
Back
Top Bottom