What is your source for the 75%? I do not think that is accurate.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Supreme Court Strikes Down Texas Abortion Clinic Regulations
- Thread starter InTheLight
- Start date
What is your source for the 75%? I do not think that is accurate.
Zaac
Well-Known Member
Where does the Constitution say that they don't have the right?
I'm in no way in favor of abortion. But Christians seem to be oblivious to how we combat this. And it's not through the Supreme Court.
Zaac
Well-Known Member
Really shouldn't mean a hill of beans to Christians. Keep making disciples who will obey everything that God commands.
Zaac
Well-Known Member
The only way this happens is if Christians continue to trust in the government to pass laws to deal with abortion. Abortion is deal with in the same manner as is other sins: Make disciples who obey everything that HE commands.
Trump, who has given to numerous causes, has never given money to Planned Parenthood. And, Trump, who has been selling himself as a pro-lifer, needs pro-lifers to have any chance of winning. It's asinine prejudice for someone to insist that Trump would have debate proceeds go to Planned Parenthood (from a Trump vs. Berny debate). #NeverTrump (de facto Hillary supporters) are busy telling all sorts of evil lies against Trump, what he would do. Meanwhile, Hillary is 100% pro-abortion and far, far worse than Trump, overall.
Maybe if Trump gets elected and doesn't do all those evil things, the #NeverTrump people will insist that Trump just wanted people to think he'd do those things. Or, maybe they'll claim he did all those evil things, but he's just hiding them in Syria.
When he praised Planned Parenthood on the debate stage there were no caviot. Only after he got called on supporting abortion did he try to back peddle. It is obvious from his more off the cuff remarks that he is pro-choice. He is just playing the altright like fiddles and doing a fantastic job at it.
Praising planned parenthood, wanting to donate 10 million to "women's health" all show where his true be life's are.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
No one has said on here that the 10 to 15 million would go to planned parenthood. Only that we all know what women's health is code for. Like I said when you listen to Trump supporters they always show their cards after awhile.
So now I have learned from Trump supporter that his speeches are comparable to the Huffington Post talking about Aliens,
They are propaganda
And women's health = planned parenthood.
Thanks for the info
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Someone else once posted:
The exact number is debatable. Slate (leftist) says it's about 35%. The Heritage Foundation says it's about 77%. Washington Post says it's about 41%. Fox News Five says it's 86%.
No matter what the number, it's clear that Planned Parenthood would not exist without doing abortions. So any praise for that organization is a de facto endorsement of abortion.
Last edited:
Yes, when Democrats say "women's health care", they generally mean abortion, which may be why Trump used that phrase, to trigger a positive reaction to him. But, there's no way Trump would have sent a penny to Planned Parenthood or any abortion provider
Remember this is the guy who donated to the Clinton, which literally make him a Clinton supporter. He knows what women's health is code for as you yourself just admitted. Of course the coward back out of the debate even after several networks put up the money and were ready to donate it to "women's health." The off the cuff remark showed his true pro-choice colors, just like his debate praise of planned parenthood showed his pro-choice colors.
#NEVERTRUMP
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Everything they do is about abortions. Pregnancy test so they know if they can perform abortions, give birth control (which I see as an abortion but I know other have different convictions). All of it destroys life, and this is the organization that Trump (a Clinton supporter I might add) praised for all their good work.
PP is the last place I would even think to go considering they destroy life not heal if there was an emergency. They don't do mamograms.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Incorrect - Even if 90% of what they do - is abortion related - then 10% is acceptable medical practice.
We need to be careful of saying All, everything, ect.
Now, I made four points in my previous post - of those four - how many do you agree?
Can you give me links to these numbers? From what I have read the large majority of their funding comes from outside the organization.
From the research I have done all those numbers seem very suspect.
Here is where the Gulf Coast PP receives its money.
46% Government Contracts for Health Services (for low-income and income eligible women)
38% Client Fees for health services
16% Fundraising - See more at: https://www.plannedparenthood.org/planned-parenthood-gulf-coast/who-we-are/faq#sthash.tVupwSjO.dpuf
It is easy to take these numbers and manipulate them to give different results depending on how they are used. Just throwing out numbers does not give us a clear picture.
For instance the Heritage Foundations's number of 77% standing alone tells us little. Do they mean 77% of the total budget or 77% of the Client Fees for service?
Slate must be speaking about the entire budget.
Last edited:
This chart is quite deceptive. A woman goes in for a pregnancy test (other women's health services) and it is positive. More than likely they would have also done an STD testing and a PAP at the same time or a follow up visit. Then they schedule an abortion. Once they do the abortion (which is hundreds of dollars), they will then provide contraception. The largest sum of money they receive is from the abortion but they have now provided 5 different services of which an abortion was only one of the services. So we can say that only 1/5 of this woman's services was an abortion but how much money did PP receive for each service? More than 1/2 will be the abortion.
I am not arguing with you. But can you give me credible links to your information?
.................
When all services are counted equally, abortion procedures do account for 3 percent of Planned Parenthood’s total services.
But there are obvious differences between these services. For example, a first trimester abortion can cost up to $1,500, according to the Planned Parenthood Web site. Yet an emergency contraceptive pill costs around $45 and a urine pregnancy test costs around $10 at a pharmacy. An abortion is a different type of procedure than a vasectomy, or testing for sexually transmitted infections or diseases, or a vaccine for human papilloma virus (HPV), and so forth.
While each service is listed separately, many clients received multiple services. A woman may get a pregnancy test, birth control and a pap smear, but she would be counted three times, once for each service, in the annual report.
Those who oppose abortion rights have criticized this definition, saying the 3 percent figure misleads the public. In a recent New York Post op-ed, National Review editor Rich Lowry wrote a series of analogies to argue that the 3 percent figure “is crafted to obscure the reality of Planned Parenthood’s business:”
Such cracked reasoning could be used to obscure the purpose of any organization.
The sponsors of the New York City Marathon could count each small cup of water they hand out (some 2 million cups, compared with 45,000 runners) and say they are mainly in the hydration business.
Or Major League Baseball teams could say that they sell about 20 million hot dogs and play 2,430 games in a season, so baseball is only .012 percent of what they do.
Supporters of Planned Parenthood want to use its health services as leverage to preserve its abortions, as if you can’t get one without the other.
Of course, this is nonsense.
Slate’s Rachael Larimore, the left-leaning online magazine’s conservative senior editor, called this the “most meaningless abortion statistic ever.”
Susan B. Anthony List’s ‘94 percent’
SBA List, which opposes abortion rights, arrives at its 94 percent figure by comparing abortions to two other categories of services that are provided to pregnant patients — or “pregnancy services.”
Recall the earlier breakdown of Planned Parenthood’s services. SBA List compares abortions to the number of prenatal services (18,684) and adoption referrals to other agencies (1,880). Using this measure, abortions do account for 94 percent of the combined three categories.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...3-percent-and-94-percent-are-both-misleading/
When all services are counted equally, abortion procedures do account for 3 percent of Planned Parenthood’s total services.
But there are obvious differences between these services. For example, a first trimester abortion can cost up to $1,500, according to the Planned Parenthood Web site. Yet an emergency contraceptive pill costs around $45 and a urine pregnancy test costs around $10 at a pharmacy. An abortion is a different type of procedure than a vasectomy, or testing for sexually transmitted infections or diseases, or a vaccine for human papilloma virus (HPV), and so forth.
While each service is listed separately, many clients received multiple services. A woman may get a pregnancy test, birth control and a pap smear, but she would be counted three times, once for each service, in the annual report.
Those who oppose abortion rights have criticized this definition, saying the 3 percent figure misleads the public. In a recent New York Post op-ed, National Review editor Rich Lowry wrote a series of analogies to argue that the 3 percent figure “is crafted to obscure the reality of Planned Parenthood’s business:”
Such cracked reasoning could be used to obscure the purpose of any organization.
The sponsors of the New York City Marathon could count each small cup of water they hand out (some 2 million cups, compared with 45,000 runners) and say they are mainly in the hydration business.
Or Major League Baseball teams could say that they sell about 20 million hot dogs and play 2,430 games in a season, so baseball is only .012 percent of what they do.
Supporters of Planned Parenthood want to use its health services as leverage to preserve its abortions, as if you can’t get one without the other.
Of course, this is nonsense.
Slate’s Rachael Larimore, the left-leaning online magazine’s conservative senior editor, called this the “most meaningless abortion statistic ever.”
Susan B. Anthony List’s ‘94 percent’
SBA List, which opposes abortion rights, arrives at its 94 percent figure by comparing abortions to two other categories of services that are provided to pregnant patients — or “pregnancy services.”
Recall the earlier breakdown of Planned Parenthood’s services. SBA List compares abortions to the number of prenatal services (18,684) and adoption referrals to other agencies (1,880). Using this measure, abortions do account for 94 percent of the combined three categories.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...3-percent-and-94-percent-are-both-misleading/
Interesting article Rev. Thanks for posting it.
I think the following paragraph, from the same article, is most truthful.
With limited data, there is no accurate way to measure how much of Planned Parenthood’s activities comprise abortions. Both sides are using meaningless and incomplete comparisons to make their argument, and the public should be wary of both figures.
I am reminded of the book published in 1954 "How To Lie With Statistics". I read this little book while in college and have viewed statistics with caution since. I do not know if the book is still in print, but used copies are available on Amazon.
In many polls it depends on the questions ask or not ask.
From a Wikipedia article:
The book is a brief, breezy, illustrated volume outlining errors when it comes to the interpretation of statistics, and how these errors may create incorrect conclusions. In the 1960s and 1970s, it became a standard textbook introduction to the subject of statistics for many college students. It has become one of the best-selling statistics books in history, with over one and a half million copies sold in the English-language edition.[1] It has also been widely translated.
Themes of the book include "Correlation does not imply causation" and "Using random sampling". It also shows how statistical graphs can be used to distort reality, for example by truncating the bottom of a line or bar chart, so that differences seem larger than they are, or by representing one-dimensional quantities on a pictogram by two- or three-dimensional objects to compare their sizes, so that the reader forgets that the images do not scale the same way the quantities do.
Last edited:
So if I make cookies and only 90% of the chocolate chips are poison then that is acceptable to you?
PP is all about abortion. There is no way around that. That's why it was founded, and that is it main purpose. That is thr simple fact of the matter. But because your guy praised their work you now have to make them more ok and I'm not going to play that game.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk