Amy Barrett for Supreme Court?

[DZ]

R v W IMO is here to stay. Those wishing to terminate their potential children is ingrained in our culture. To many women it's an agonizing decision, but sadly many others use it as a routine method of birth control.

But what could come into play in the SC is tax payer funding of organizations that perform abortions. If you want to terminate your child you shouldn't depend on others to pay for it.

[spence]

Originally Posted by DZ

But what could come into play in the SC is tax payer funding of organizations that perform abortions. If you want to terminate your child you shouldn't depend on others to pay for it.

It's worth noting though that taxpayer funding of abortions is already illegal.

[DZ]

Originally Posted by spence

It's worth noting though that taxpayer funding of abortions is already illegal.

Yes, I'm thinking the Planned Parenthood defunding issue. I'm sure if it were defunded the case would rise to the SC.

[spence]

Originally Posted by DZ

Yes, I'm thinking the Planned Parenthood defunding issue. I'm sure if it were defunded the case would rise to the SC.

The thing is, most of the federal money that goes to Planned Parenthood is from preventative care reimbursements for people who qualify for Medicaid and Title X. It's not like there's a taxpayer line item in the budget for PP. They're just providing federally funded service like any hospital. Oh, and hospitals perform abortions as well...

[DZ]

Originally Posted by spence

The thing is, most of the federal money that goes to Planned Parenthood is from preventative care reimbursements for people who qualify for Medicaid and Title X. It's not like there's a taxpayer line item in the budget for PP. They're just providing federally funded service like any hospital. Oh, and hospitals perform abortions as well...

Understood.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

The thing is, most of the federal money that goes to Planned Parenthood is from preventative care reimbursements for people who qualify for Medicaid and Title X. It's not like there's a taxpayer line item in the budget for PP. They're just providing federally funded service like any hospital. Oh, and hospitaabortions as well...

"The thing is, most of the federal money that goes to Planned Parenthood is from preventative care reimbursements for people"

The other thing is, and you know this, is that cash is liquid, so if the feds give PP $100 to buy mammogram equipment, that's $100 more that PP can free up to fund abortions. That's why if this wasn't about funding abortions, liberals would embrace the conservative notion of defunding PP, but diverting every cent of that (thus no cuts to overall funding) to clinics that don't perform abortions. Problem solved. But liberals won't get on board, and there's only one reason why. It's about abortion.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

The other thing is, and you know this, is that cash is liquid, so if the feds give PP $100 to buy mammogram equipment, that's $100 more that PP can free up to fund abortions. That's why if this wasn't about funding abortions, liberals would embrace the conservative notion of defunding PP, but diverting every cent of that (thus no cuts to overall funding) to clinics that don't perform abortions. Problem solved. But liberals won't get on board, and there's only one reason why. It's about abortion.

But the feds don't give PP cash to buy equipment. They're also a non-profit organization so it's not like profit from a health screening could be used to offset abortion costs.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"The thing is, most of the federal money that goes to Planned Parenthood is from preventative care reimbursements for people"

The other thing is, and you know this, is that cash is liquid, so if the feds give PP $100 to buy mammogram equipment, that's $100 more that PP can free up to fund abortions. That's why if this wasn't about funding abortions, liberals would embrace the conservative notion of defunding PP, but diverting every cent of that (thus no cuts to overall funding) to clinics that don't perform abortions. Problem solved. But liberals won't get on board, and there's only one reason why. It's about abortion.

Texas did eliminated funding for PP and replaced it with a Pro-life organization, how well did that work.
https://www.sacurrent.com/the-daily/...ned-parenthood

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Texas did eliminated funding for PP and replaced it with a Pro-life organization, how well did that work.
https://www.sacurrent.com/the-daily/...ned-parenthood

That doesn't look like it worked. Doesn't mean it can't work. One woman failed to start up an effective clinic in one place. Does that mean we should stop trying.