Planned Parenthood's former president says she was instructed to say 'abortion' in every interview.

So this former President went into the job thinking that abortion was not Planned Parenthood's main business! She was SHOCKED to learn that they only care about abortion! It actually came as a SURPRISE to her!

But don't worry - abortion is only 3% of Planned Parenthood's business!

https://www.insider.com/former-planned-parenthood-leader-i-was-pressured-to-say-abortion-2021-7

"Until that moment, I'd thought that the overriding reason Planned Parenthood was equated with abortion instead of its other health-care services was the anti-choice opposition. I was taken aback to see that it wasn't just the anti-choice side that wanted to brand Planned Parenthood with abortion." https://www.christianitydaily.com/a...nborn-babies-its-former-president-reveals.htm

"It's more accurate to say that we're advocates for all aspects of reproductive health, including birth control
and sex education to reduce the need for abortion, right?" - nope, WRONG! It SHOULD be that, but it's NOT! https://www.christianitydaily.com/a...nborn-babies-its-former-president-reveals.htm

 

Can't have doctors running Planned Parenthood, no real science allowed. They need political/social "science" only.

 

HEADS UP....PREPARE FOR INCOMING WHATABOUTISM......

 

What do you predict will be the subject of the whataboutism?

 

Yeah, the JOKERS won't make that mistake again! Their current President isn't a doctor!

 

An individual woman's choice on this matter is an individuals woman's choice. End of story. Planned Parenthood
is providing a service - whether it's 3% or 30% is of no consequence. We've already seen what happened
in a pre-Roe v Wade world in this country - women turned to unlicensed sources or the rich one's took a "vacation"
to someplace abortion was legal. Ending PP does not end abortion, it just makes life more difficult for women who
may have medical, rape or mental health issues that make carrying to term problematic.

So don't congratulate yourselves for making a 16 year old who been raped by a family member or a woman
suffering from manic-depression turn to some back alley quack for an abortion.

 

Their argument has always been a joke. They never had to worry about losing funding if they had just decided to drop the abortion part of Planned Parenthood. But, even though it was only 3% of their business, they would rather lose funding than 3% of their business. Honesty did not further their objective so misinformation and lies is what they needed to be funded. Oh, now those poor ladies won't be able to get mammograms!

 

There are hundreds of thousands of abortions performed each year in this country. How many of them do you think are performed on a rape victim? Like, are you under the impression that "a 16 year old who been raped by a family member" is representative of the typical woman seeking abortion?

 

Less than 20% of rapes are reported, so you simply don't know if a woman is seeking
an abortion because of a rape - for that reason alone, I don't think you can ethically restrict abortion.
We've seen what hell women are put through in a rape trial, forcing a woman to go through that for
the right to abortion is like a double rape.

And by the way - with over 450,000 reported sexual assaults each year ... you do the math.

 

I've posted about this before but I find it strange that people that people against abortion have no hesitation in decrying housing and food assistance to single mothers and/or daycare subsidies so that mom can hold a job. I've worked in and around various programs for women's health initiatives and the ONLY people that refuse to get involved are the anti-abortionists. They want to rule the roost from some self-appointed throne but have no real and direct experience working with this demographic. I have also been a child abuse advocate and, again, the ONLY people that won't go near it are the ones wanting a say in how and when and why a parent can retain custody of their child.

I believe that ANYONE holding power over the decisions for any demographic (for whatever cause) should be required to actually have field experience within that group. Otherwise, we just get these armchair "experts" on everything from how to make a PB&J to space exploration. And, that's all it is. Just hot air.

 

Cue Archie Bunker. and ditto!

 

What about them?

 

Let's make murder legal! After all, if you don't like murder, don't murder!

 

Planned Parenthood's former president says she was instructed to say 'abortion' in every interview.


Well, whether the liberals can admit it or not, that's their number 1 priority. More abortions.

 

- it isn't just about the individual woman now though, is it? In case you had forgotten, the act of an abortion is the murdering of a completely separate individual.
- am I suppose to be concerned with women who need to turn to back alley abortions in order to commit murder? lol?
- nobody would deny a woman an abortion if she or the baby had health issues.
- rape accounts for 1 percent of all abortions. The great bulk of abortions boil down to the baby being an inconvenience. But we all know how baby's are made. If you didn't want the inconvenience, why did you have sex in the one and only way that it's possible that you can have a baby?

 

Right. IMO the only realistic way to reduce abortions is to prevent unplanned pregnancies via making contraceptives more available and education. Many other countries have managed to do this and there is no reason US can't do it too.

 

Using that logic, lets make anything legal, why have laws at all. My lord, I wonder sometimes.

 

OK, IF the ZEF is a "completely SEPERATE individual"" then let the woman have it taken out and set on a shelf to grow on it's own !!!!!

OH, gosh no...those who want to destroy women's right to their own bodies obviously NEVER cares about women's lives..

So in that case you DO approve of "murder"???????

.

IF YOU were one of the "few" who were impregnated by a rapist would YOU want to be punished for the rest of your life for something done TO you?

"Life" is a much longer sentence than any rapist gets!

Yes, it is very INCONVENIENT to have one's body harmed by 9 months of pregnancy and childbirth.

It is inconvenient to suffer the pain of pregnancy and childbirth.

It IS INCONVENIENT to have medical bills.

It is inconvenient to take time off work and lose pay.

It is inconvenient to possibly lose one's job if pregnant.

It is inconvenient to suffer education and financial setbacks.


It is INCONVENIENT to have a child you can't afford and/or don't want.
It is INCONVENIENT for a child to be born to someone who can't afford it or want it.


Of course it's INCONVENIENT....did you think women have abortions for FUN!!!?????

 

Why would they and where's your proof ???

 

"Christianity Daily"....now there's an unbiased source (sarcasm alert)

 

Sort of asinine to think it's a completely separate individual, otherwise the thing could just grow on it's own outside the
woman's body and we wouldn't even be discussing abortion - now would we.

And here are the three rules of human behavior :

1. People will have sex.
2. See rule #1.
3. See rule #2.

Reproduction is a basic human activity - built into the DNA. So just accept people are going to have sex and deal
with reality. Reality is that providing reproductive services, like condoms, birth control, and pre-natal care are the
best way to reduce abortions. Supporting mothers in need financially is also working model to reduce abortions.
"Just don't have sex," was a silly slogan from back in the 80's and 90's when abortion rates were HIGHER in this country.

 

The Abrahamic religions have been trying to make sex a dirty word and activity for thousands of years. IMHO, its based upon fear of the power of women to reproduce, a power men did not have. Combine that power with a physically weaker sex and men got away with controlling women via religion and social norms. Its no different now, its the same man trying to control a woman with willing women willing to tag along in the name of Jesus or Allah. I get tired of it, just let women make their own choices and give them the power to manage their own bodies.

 

Yep.

 

And yet it is.

At the point of conception it has it's entire DNA mapped, and it's own blood type. Reproduction is built into people's DNA for sure. Of that I agree with you. However. The act of reproduction is to REPRODUCE. It's not for pleasure. Pleasure is mapped onto reproduction is natures incentive to reproduce.

Here is the reality of the situation. The two most powerful abilities we have on this planet is the ability to take life and create life. We as a society hold a great responsibility in the act of taking a life. And as such we should also hold a great responsibility with the ONE act that creates life. Of the great vast of women wanting abortions, you will be hard pressed to find a woman who wasn't aware that if you stick a penis into a vagina, there is risk of pregnancy. That's how baby's are created. Furthermore. I doubt you would be able to find many at all who were claiming "woops! I have no idea how that sperm got inside my vagina!"

To claim this would be ridiculous. Everyone knows how baby's are made, and women know how the hell sperm got into their vagina.

We should not be perpetuating grotesque and irresponsible behaviour. "Hey don't worry about creating a person! We can just erase that responsibility by tearing it apart piece by piece and sucking it out with a vacuum cleaner so you can get on to your next tinder date of debauchery!" and "Don't worry about your conscious! We just won't show you any pictures of your child that we are helping you kill especially if it starts looking anything like how it will when it comes out of the womb because we know that your brain associates certain features to what a baby is and we certainly don't want you sad on that next tinder date!"

I think we have become completely immoral with regards to the responsibilities and consequences of having sex (or should I say the one way of having sex that can result in reproduction). This action has consequences. NEGATIVE consequences of which there should be a punishment. Like any other actions within society that have negative consequences. They shouldn't be swept under a rug. The action is what it is and cannot be ignored.

 

That's the entire point of the argument. The woman purposefully put it in there. Created a person and now wants to kill that person because it's inconvenient. That is a morally bankrupt action of which at no other point in our society do we allow people to kill anyone because they are inconvenient.

There are women who are pro life you know. It's not an argument to try and control women's bodies. It's an argument of morality. One should not be able to simply create life and then end that life as they will. That's immoral.

While tragic, if the health of the fetus or the baby is at risk then sadly we must make the tough choice of ending one life to save the other. I don't think anyone prolife would ever claim otherwise.

Rape accounts for less than 1 percent. It's an outlier beyond outliers. While I personally still feel that while a crime of rape was committed, a third life (the life of the child) shouldn't be killed to make the action better. However, the women didn't agree to the action that could result in someone being created inside of her so it's a grey area. But again. 1 percent. So if we could knock down abortions to this outlier we would be morally in a better spot.

Simple solve. Don't have sex in the ONE way that makes it possible to create life. How easy is that? If you want to have sex in the one way possible that creates life then you need to be able to accept the responsibility of your action. Creating life isn't something we should take for granted or bastardize or dehumanize. It's a pretty big deal. It's how we all came to be. You are making the argument that life doesn't matter because of;

bodily changes resulting from pregnancy
pain of child birth
medical bills
time off work (lol)
education and financial set backs

Here let me put it in a way you will like understand. Would it be immoral for someone to adopt a kitten and then kill the kitten the moment it became inconvenient?