The President has very little control over the legality of abortion. It should not be a significant campaign issue.
Abortion is a highly charged emotional issue. Many people oppose abortion, under any circumstances. Others think it is just fine in all circumstances. Still others think it is OK in some, but not all circumstances. These, I submit, are "givens." What I don't understand is why abortion is a major issue in the Presidential race, since there is very little the President can do to grant the wish of any group vis a vis abortion.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - Dr Dreadful
All right, let me take a stab at reconstructing the response I wrote to Arch's #16, and which I had sitting in preview when the other site I was trying to view at the time (dratted tabbed browsing!) decided it would be fun to crash my browser...
Shall I take that to mean that if the pro-life side was all up in your grill with pictures of aborted fetuses you would have the same cavalier attitude toward them?
But the PP shirts didn't have pictures of aborted fetuses on them. Nevertheless, such tactics certainly do get one's attention.
You can believe what you want about Planned Parenthood but the truth is they're in the abortion business above all else. It is their main source of revenue and they geenrate millions in pofit from abortion every year.
All right then - I want to believe the facts and figures which are freely available. First of all, though, would you care to explain how a non-profit organization makes a profit?
In fact, according to the most recent available (2005) IRS form 990, they actually had a net operating loss that year.
Second, according to their last annual report, most women who used PP did so for advice and treatment for contraception and STDs. Only 3% received abortion services. So to say that 'they're in the abortion business above all else' is simply false.
(I'd have provided links to the two above, but Akismet thought they were spam and they're freely available on the PP website anyway.)
Numerous studies have shown that when a PP clinic comes to an area the number of abortions increases significantly.
Usually because there wasn't previously an abortion clinic in the area. That's the whole point.
Anyone with an ounce of objectity can see that Planned Parenthood's number one priorirty is turning dead babies into cold hard cash.
Ironically, this may be the least objective sentence I've ever read.
27 - Matthew T. Sussman
"show me one iota of evidence that there IS NOT a God, go ahead, do it!"
Caddyshack II.
28 - Baritone
Matthew,
I would have said Rob Schneider, or the existence of phlegm, but the reasoning is essentially the same.
Dan, etal,
If any god existed and had the stones to reveal him or her self, all of this talk would be moot. While there are some things I will accept on faith, one of them is NOT the existence of a god.
Unfortunately, no deity has stepped forward to take responsibility for this mess we call humanity.
I don't consider faith in god to be a virtue. It is a waste of time, energy, emotions and thought. So much more could be accomplished in this world if hundreds of millions of people did not spend perhaps billions of their waking hours worshiping or otherwise genuflecting to some mythical god.
By the way Doc, nice rebuttal to Dan with the misogynist observation. Again, all the self-righteous anti-abortion rhetoric here is coming from men.
Dan, your last paragraph is quite unlike you. It is all born of an emotional response, not from the cool, logical head of a litigator. It is full of unprovable assumptions. As Doc notes, not all pregnant women who seek abortions are "stupid." There is no evidence that a majority or even a significant number of them are stupid. And just how does one go about measuring such things? Should every woman who seeks an abortion be required to take a comprehensive IQ test? Are any "stupid" guys involved? Might there be a way to measure their "duh" factor?
I know I struck some nerves with my comment above, as I intended. Manning the controls of human life is nothing to be taken lightly. It does require, IMO, that god be removed from the equation before any real progress can be made. Otherwise, we remain stuck in the muck of superstition and fear. If god exists, and doesn't like it, I'm sure he or she could make his or her displeasure known to us, being omnipotent and all.
B
29 - Dr Dreadful
Dan, your last paragraph is quite unlike you. It is all born of an emotional response, not from the cool, logical head of a litigator.
A different Dan, I think, B-tone.
Although I can see how you could be confused. This is almost as brain-scrambling as the ongoing Baritone-Baronius debacle.
30 - Dr Dreadful
@ my #25:
Before Clavos (G.S.N.) chimes in, I'd like to make it a matter of record that I've just realized the correct word is misogyny.
31 - Arch Conservative
First B-tone then Dreadful....
"God is a crutch for all weak willed feeble minded chumps who can't believe that when they fucking die, they are fucking dead. People who can't accept that we are not special creations made in the image of some grand omnipotent being, rather than the results of millions of years of evolution."
Yeah god is for weak minded people but atheists who believe in federal government entitlements that provide for every last minute aspect of their welfare are A-ok right Baritone?
"Does anyone in their wildest imaginings think that the world needs more babies that no one wants?"
Yeah you're right Baritone. Despite the fact that there are no guarantees for any of us as we come into this world we should play god and not allow certain babies to be born because you and the other abortion lobbies perceive that these babies will be born to a life not worth living. Why don't you tell us exactly what the criteria should be to determine which babies lives would be worth it and which wouldn't.
"Arch is one of those GUYS pontificating about what women should or should not do with their bodies and their lives"
You got me there... myself and most other pro-lifers are always voicing our opinions about what women that AREN'T pregnant should do... it has absolutely nothing to do with concern for the life of the baby... there is no such thing as a pro-life woman... pro-lifers are only men who want to control women because we hate them....
Now dreadful...
But the PP shirts didn't have pictures of aborted fetuses on them. Nevertheless, such tactics certainly do get one's attention.
The point was that the t-shirts were very offensive to many just as pictures of aborted fetuses would be.
"All right then - I want to believe the facts and figures which are freely available. First of all, though, would you care to explain how a non-profit organization makes a profit?"
Obviously you don't understand the IRS definition of what it means to be a 410c not for profit organization so I will explain it to you. Being designated a not for profit 401 c does not mean that an organization is not allowed to make a profit. It means that the organization must provide some public good/service and that any profit made be completely reinvested in the organization rather than used for anything else outside of the operation of the organization such paying stock holders.
Lots of not for profits make a profit. As long as they reinvest that profit in the operations of the business they are allowed to keep their not for profit status.
PP is obviously in direct violation of this code when one observes them using some of the profit they make to fund political ads rather than reinvesting it in the operations of PP. They used some of that profit to lobby against Sam Alito for the supreme court in 2005. They should have their 401c status revoked.
Not only that but most of the truly altruistic not for profit organizations that seek to provide a public good or service are made up of volunteers or people making very paltry salaries. Gloria Feldt, who was president of PP before Cecile Richards took over made just under 100K in 2005. Since Cecile Richards has succeeded her as CEO PP has not publicly disclosed Richards salary. I guarantee you that is because she is making well over 100K. PP wants to maintain their image of being the compassionate champion of women's rights but admitting that their leader makes about 150K of year, most of which comes from abortion revenues doesn't really help.
"In fact, according to the most recent available (2005) IRS form 990, they actually had a net operating loss that year."
That's quite simple a blatant lie.
PP profits, like Exxon's have been increasing every year.
"Second, according to their last annual report, most women who used PP did so for advice and treatment for contraception and STDs. Only 3% received abortion services. So to say that 'they're in the abortion business above all else' is simply false."
I see that you insist regurgitating the lies that you've read on PP's own website. The fact is that they are the nation's largest abortion provider by far and their largest source of revenue and profit is based on abortions. You repeat their lies all day long but that is the reality of the situation.
"Usually because there wasn't previously an abortion clinic in the area. That's the whole point."
Not really the studies took into account the abortions at the closest clinics that had already been there and the number of abortions went up independent of those.
Here's a freebie for you Dread... your boy Obama claimed abortions have risen under Bush... that's a lie...
One last thing... if you want dread we can get into how PP has been caught on tape numerous times lying to underage girls about state laws... or how PP has accepted donations from people claiming they wanted their donations specifically used to perform abortions on black babies...
I'll go all day long with you on this one... I have the truth on my side and you have little propaganda snippets that you read on their website...
32 - Dan Miller
Baritone,
Dan, your last paragraph is quite unlike you. It is all born of an emotional response, not from the cool, logical head of a litigator.
As Doc correctly noted, you have me confused with the other Dan who occasionally posts on this board. My name, Dan Miller, is always included in the header to my comments.
Incidentally, I find his comments on this topic as offensive as you seem to.
Dan (Miller)
33 - troll
...I just went to post the link to PP's '06 financial filing available through GuideStar - not allowed by Askimet naturally
...muttering 'fuck it' as he wanders off
34 - Baritone
Dan (Miller)
Sorry. I obviously didn't note the name difference. I guess since I've been thought to be Baronius a number of times, I'm just trying to even the score.
B
35 - Christopher Rose
Troll, try posting it as a raw link and I'll tidy it up for you. If that fails, email me the link and I'll add it to your comment.
36 - Zedd
"You can believe what you want about Planned Parenthood but the truth is they're in the abortion business above all else. It is their main source of revenue and they generate millions in profit from abortion every year."
What? In my region there are 28 Planned Parenthood clinics. In this area which covers 57 counties (Texas is big), there are only two (2) offices which perform abortions. What are you on about? Planned Parenthood's waiting rooms are full everyday. People are there for physical exams and birth control pills. When women talk about PP they talk about the inexpensive birth control pills and the comfortable environment for annual visits. Never had one conversation about PP and abortions. It's a really nice doctor's office that deals with ALL matters relating to the reproductive system. Abortion is legal so YES, they deal with that too. It's not their primary function.
A quick goggle on PP and it becomes clear that all of the Earth's conspiracy theorists and mentally deranged have globed on to the anti-PP campaigned. Arch's folks. Off course there's nothing you can say to redirect these people. They love attaching to an "evil empire" (sound familiar?) and playing Justice League to stamp out destruction all over the universe. It's too exciting and they wont let it go. They feel a part of something bigger.
side note: American politicians have discovered this need in Americans and have exploited it going possibly too far. Perhaps if Bush wasn't so wobbley (no word to describe) they could exploit it for at least another century.
37 - troll
...they could exploit it for at least another century.
or another election cycle anyway
38 - Baritone
Arch doesn't bother to tell us that his data source is a site dedicated in whole or in part to opposing PP and abortions in general. It couldn't possibly be that their figures are either outright lies or at best, skewed to support their positions? Naw. They wouldn't do that, would they?
Arch says: "Yeah god is for weak minded people but atheists who believe in federal government entitlements that provide for every last minute aspect of their welfare are A-ok right Baritone?"
First: I've never made any particular statements about entitlements, but the point here is what does the first thing have to do with the other?
Further Arch asks: "Why don't you tell us exactly what the criteria should be to determine which babies lives would be worth it and which wouldn't."
Well, gosh, that's the whole point, isn't it? It is in each case the mother's choice to make. Who has a better perspective than the mother-to-be? Or does a state legislature - largely made up of men - sitting comfortably in their chambers making blanket decisions that affect every woman regardless of the circumstances?
As to whether you and your supposed "pro-life" brethren "hate women," I guess you'll have to figure that out for yourself.
B
39 - Clavos
Before Clavos (G.S.N.) chimes in, I'd like to make it a matter of record that I've just realized the correct word is misogyny.
Spoilsport...
40 - Christopher Rose
Per Pro troll: PP's '06 financial filing.
41 - Franco
"Can't prove a negative, Franco..."
My point exactly.
42 - Matthew T. Sussman
"I would have said Rob Schneider, or the existence of phlegm, but the reasoning is essentially the same."
Odd. It says here on my Verizon Wireless astral chart that if Rob Schneider ever receives an honorary doctorate, that it is proof "God hates us."
43 - Matthew T. Sussman
Franco, that is commendable, that you are willing to concede that there is in fact the existence of an army of highly-intelligent purple robot pandas who can breathe fire and shit Twizzlers.
Unless, of course, you can prove it doesn't exist.
44 - troll
(...quiet about the pandas - loose lips and all)
45 - Franco
"If any god existed and had the stones to reveal him or her self, all of this talk would be moot. Unfortunately, no deity has stepped forward to take responsibility for this mess we call humanity."
It can not get anymore antichrist then that.
"Manning the controls of human life is nothing to be taken lightly. It does require however that god be removed from the equation before any real progress can be made."
Almost verbatim from the Wannsee Conference of 1942.
46 - Franco
Comment #43 " Matthew T. Sussman
Represents the chummy self-satisfaction of a mind that mistakes the efficiency of short phrases for depth of meaning.
47 - Baritone
Ah. Now I'm the anti-christ, a bleeding heart, baby killing, liberal, AND a fascist. Interesting array. So, if I succeed in my quest, I'll have defeated Jesus and his minions at Armageddon, killed all the babies, and the fucking trains will run on time!
Damn! I wish we had some trains.
B
48 - Clavos
...And those are your good points, B-tone! :>)
49 - Baritone
Well, I don't like to brag, but...
B
50 - jamminsue
To all you extremists:
The rhetorical language - language not based on fact, but on emotion or the intent to incite emotion is getting too deep. On issues where man is now able to interfere with life process or creation of life the facts have been buried, there seems to be nothing but emotion.
Emotion does not change things, facts and circumstances do.
51 - Matthew T. Sussman
Franco, then I just have one thing to say:
"Sneakers."
52 - Dr Dreadful
@ #40: Thanks, troll, that is in fact the tax filing that I had been trying to link to (the one Akismet decided to exorcise) and that Archie obviously doesn't want to look at. Even if he did, he'd undoubtedly conclude that PP is lying to the IRS as well. For those with an open mind, Line 18 is the pertinent number here.
Now, Archie @ #31:
The point was that the t-shirts were very offensive to many just as pictures of aborted fetuses would be.
About the only point on which I agree with you, albeit not for the same reason. I have a T-shirt which I picked up in Australia that says "no fcukin' worries" on it that offends quite a few people. Quite frankly, if the T-shirt had been a picture of a rosy-cheeked mother and child prancing happily around in a field of daffodils and daisies it would have offended some people, simply because it was a PP shirt.
Lots of not for profits make a profit. As long as they reinvest that profit in the operations of the business they are allowed to keep their not for profit status.
PP is obviously in direct violation of this code when one observes them using some of the profit they make to fund political ads rather than reinvesting it in the operations of PP.
I understand the concept, Arch - thanks anyway for the Taxation 101 lesson. Unfortunately, you're talking bollocks. Such ads are germane to the operation of PP, which is an organization concerned with women's reproductive freedom. It is perfectly legal for nonprofits to do political lobbying - they're just not allowed to endorse or give money to specific candidates. I'd have a bit more time for your argument if you could demonstrate that you're just as upset about the activities of, for example, James Dobson's Focus on the Family.
Not only that but most of the truly altruistic not for profit organizations that seek to provide a public good or service are made up of volunteers or people making very paltry salaries. Gloria Feldt, who was president of PP before Cecile Richards took over made just under 100K in 2005.
Actually, according to this report, the median salary for a nonprofit CEO is (or was, in 2005) more than $327,000. Which makes the pay of Ms Richards and even her successor paltry indeed by comparison.
I see that you insist regurgitating the lies that you've read on PP's own website. The fact is that they are the nation's largest abortion provider by far and their largest source of revenue and profit is based on abortions. You repeat their lies all day long but that is the reality of the situation.
I really don't see why I should believe PP's annual report any less than I should believe your agenda-laden sources. It is extremely difficult to find anything objective on the subject, since a Google search invariably brings up a plethora of pro-life sites, many of which distort the data in a crassly obvious way.
if you want dread we can get into how PP has been caught on tape numerous times lying to underage girls about state laws...
Oh NO!! A person in a position of trust gave wrong or misleading information?!?! That never happens! No, wait - now I think about it, the nurse at my local travel clinic gave me the wrong instructions last week on how to take the malaria medication I'll need for my upcoming trip - sic her, Archie!!!
Seriously, though. A lot of those cases involved doctor-patient confidentiality issues which conflicted with statutory requirements to report child rape. I would have thought the reasons were bloody obvious and pretty damn sound, but I guess it depends on whether or not you think the Hippocratic oath overrides state law. These instances (of entrapment, in many cases) do add grist to the mill of those who think that pro-lifers don't actually give a flying fuck about the welfare of the women and girls in such a predicament.
or how PP has accepted donations from people claiming they wanted their donations specifically used to perform abortions on black babies...
More entrapment.
I have the truth on my side and you have little propaganda snippets that you read on their website...
Citation please.
Zedd hit the nail on the head in her response to you. As I said before, the vast majority of Planned Parenthood's clients do not go there to get abortions. That includes my wife and sister-in-law, both of whom credit PP's contraception services for them not becoming unmarried young mothers.
And frankly, I don't think Zedd's too far off the mark in her assessment of your mindset on this issue either.
53 - Zedd
Baritone,
I'm confused. Do you believe in god?
(... quietly packing bags and moving to an undisclosed location, feeling slightly guilty for unleashing atomic rage and oceans of spittle and froth unto the land.)
54 - Ruvy
First of all. There is no god. God is not dead. God never was. God is a myth. God is a crutch for all weak willed feeble minded chumps who can't believe that when they fucking die, they are fucking dead.
Baritone,
Don't ever make the arrogant assumption that you know what brings a person to have faith in anything. You don't.
I started my "religious" belief as an atheist. I didn't have the nasty presumptiousness of assuming what others thought or what others feared. I simply made the logical assumption that any 10 or 11 year old would make based on what I could see around me.
My neat world got challenged here and there, but belief - real belief - came when I read the last section of the Book of Deuteronomy in detail and saw the history of my people staring me in the face, revealed as prophecy thirty three centuries earlier. There is a G-d, Baritone, and there is Destiny, and there is Revelation, and for now, there is Free Will. And there will be Redemption. And you will, like all of us, be judged for your actions and intents during your life. What standards you will be held to, I do not know; I can guess that they will be the Seven Laws of Noah. But I do not know.
How do I know this? The serenity I prayed for when I had my heart attack at the end of 2003 had never left me; a Gift granted by a G-d Who knew I was willing to face what was coming to me in return for that serenity. With time, I have begin to understand what i think my mission may be in life: another Gift by a G-d Who has rudely pushed me from ignorance to wisdom, from economic security in economic insecurity, all that I might understand that the universe exists by His Will, Word and Thought alone.
shavua tov - have a good week,
Ruvy
55 - Clavos
I have a T-shirt which I picked up in Australia that says "no fcukin' worries"
So, Doc, the Aussies are also lousy spellers, eh?
56 - Dr Dreadful
They're fine spellers, Clav. But, like you Seppos, they are also lousy panderers to crass commercialism.
57 - Dan
Dr. D: "Not all women who get accidentally pregnant are stupid, Dan. Nice misogynism there."
Setting aside the fact that I never claimed "all" women who get accidentally pregnant are stupid, and that otherwise intelligent people can sometimes do stupid things, unwanted pregnancy is easily avoided. You don't even have to be a "good girl". Clearly there is stupidity at work.
Drunk driving is thought to be an act of stupidity. Many drunks reach their destinations safely all the time, just as many women have unprotected sex without pregnancy. When the drunk does mess up we call them stupid. When a female drunk driver messes up we also think them stupid.
You can see from the example that misogyny doesn't apply. So, it seems you're wrong on both counts.
Baritone: "I don't consider faith in god to be a virtue. It is a waste of time, energy, emotions and thought. So much more could be accomplished in this world if hundreds of millions of people did not spend perhaps billions of their waking hours worshiping or otherwise genuflecting to some mythical god."
I consider the vast majority of humanitarian endeavors by people in service of their faith to be a very positive thing. Whether they are justified in their worship matters not.
"I know I struck some nerves with my comment above, as I intended."
The nerve that leads to my funny bone tingles every time a pompous atheist unintentionally reveals their lack of appreciation for irony by ridiculing others faith while simultaneously promoting their own.
Of course, it is true that you can't prove a negative. So...what is it again that compels you to believe in this unproven negative?
Dan Miller: "Incidentally, I find his comments on this topic as offensive as you seem to."
Well Dan, unlike Baritone admits above, I don't intentionally set out to commit gratuitous offense. I'm not easily offended myself, so I kind of set my standard at that level, and render my considered opinions in a frank, honest way.
No one has commented on my hypothetical. I think that unfortunate, because it goes to underlying motivations for abortion. Not a lot of people want to think deeply on the subject I guess.
58 - Sam weaver
An election should never be about one issue. The last time I checked, I can not remember anything that a president did to inhibit abortion or increase or decrease anything for the religious right or left. Reality, too many people get hung up on one issue themes. The whole point is to persuade the electorate and that is the sport of politics.
59 - El Bicho
"You can see from the example that misogyny doesn't apply."
Then why no mention of the man who got the woman pregnant?
60 - Zedd
El B
You can't have it all ways. It's a woman's choice so she needs to buckle up and take the criticism. Yes most of the time the pregnancies are because of stupidity. If she knows that SHE will get pregnant and does, she made a stupid mistake.
Doesn't mean they have to incubate the embryo, have the the baby and be responsible for it for 50yrs because they were stupid.
61 - El Bicho
I don't know what happened between today and yesterday, but I like the new Arch.
62 - Clavos
Zedd #60,
Well said.
63 - Jet
Why is Abortion an Issue in the Presidential Race? Because the GOP desparately needs those church bus loads of preprogrammed voters on their side.
64 - Dr Dreadful
Clav @ #62:
!
65 - Zedd
@ #62
Am I being punked? What's going on Clav? I'm like an abused child who's gone feral. I don't know what to do with the at-a-girl. What's really going on? You missed me didn't you? And don't say you didn't realize that I haven't been around. I was missed by the Clavster!! Awe....
66 - Clavos
Easy, Doc and Zedd...here, try these smelling salts...that's it, that's it...now lean back and relax...easy...easy.
Zedd, yep, I agree with ya.
How 'bout them apples?
67 - Zedd
The world is confusing as it is. I've got teens, gas prices, food prices, China, Musharraf, LOST won start back until February, now this? The room is spinning. Who am I???
68 - Dan
"Doesn't mean they have to incubate the embryo, have the the baby and be responsible for it for 50yrs because they were stupid."
In the hypothetical, I didn't mean to imply that they would be responsible for it. It would be the same as before. Only with a better result for the embryo.
The details of how the infant is cared for aren't crucial to the point, but typically those despicable Christians would start an orphanage or something. Damn them!
See, the reason a woman opts for abortion is not just to escape responsibility for a stupid mistake. (that a stupid man was also in on. Happy El Bicho?). No sir, she wants to kill the mistake. Women have a natural instinct that would make them feel guilty of abandonement if the child were allowed to live, even if they are never made to face it.
Adoption is a courageous choice for more reasons than the obvious. And abortion is a choice that is made for more than the obvious reasons as well.
69 - Zedd
Dan,
"Only with a better result for the embryo."
The embryo doesn't care. It's an embryo.
I certainly hope you don't masturbate or engage in non reproductive sex. Doing so doesn't produce a chance for a better result for your little soldiers.
70 - Dan Miller
Zedd,
Just for clarification, I do not agree with the other Dan's position vis a vis embryos.
Dan(Miller)
71 - Dan
"The embryo doesn't care. It's an embryo.
I certainly hope you don't masturbate or engage in non reproductive sex. Doing so doesn't produce a chance for a better result for your little soldiers."
Sorry Zed, you're not the official spokesperson for embryo's. You also have no chance of being the official mouth piece for my "little soldiers".
" Just for clarification, I do not agree with the other Dan's position vis a vis embryos."
Ok, I get it. Dan Miller: easily offended *and* disagreeable, yet intriguingly reasonless.
72 - Dr Dreadful
Dan Miller: easily offended *and* disagreeable, yet intriguingly reasonless.
You got all that from his #70??
So if I give you a 10-second clip of a John McCain speech, you'll be able to tell me who his VP pick is, how many electoral votes he will win, and what color boxers he'll be wearing on election night?
73 - Jordan Richardson
Fergie, 67, and sky blue.
74 - Dan Miller
Dan,
I was simply trying to avoid confusion about who was commenting about what. Occasionally, you and I are mistakenly confused. To avoid that, and since you were posting comments on BC before I came along, I shall try in the future to remember to sign my comments "Dan(Miller)."
As to who is the official spokesperson for embryos, I wasn't aware that they had one. If your thesis is correct, they probably have several, with different views.
Dan(Miller)
75 - Dan
That's fine Dan. Although signing out with your last name could be considered redundant since the distinction is made at the top and to the right of the comment number.
It's also fine to state your offendedness or disagreement without reasoning. Although, that doesn't do much toward the goal of ending confusion.
"As to who is the official spokesperson for embryos, I wasn't aware that they had one. If your thesis is correct, they probably have several, with different views."
My only stated thesis relative to embryo's was that not being killed would seem to be a more positive outcome for the embryo. Since their natural inclination is to continue developement to a full human being if left undisturbed, and virtually all living things capable of communication consider not being killed a positive thing, the logic of this view seems to follow.