I think they do consider hospitals performing abortions in that they are covered by healthcare (which their tax dollars help pay for). Planned parenthood performing the abortions is just another instance of government funded abortions. Picketing a hospital though would disrupt their other services so a pp center is a more focused protest.
DarkJello said: ↑ Palin had a LOT more qualifications to be President than Obama I am more impressed by a 1st term governor than a 1st term senator. I am more impressed by a mayor than a community organizer. And yet I still stated her qualifications to be VP were anemic, thus I did NOT vote for her. I did not vote for Obama for the same reason. Consistency. Share why you believe Obama was more qualified. Sokolov said: ↑ Let's clarify my views on PP/Abortion in general: I have no personal moral objection to abortions in general, tho I believe that pro-life advocates have good arguments as to the rights of an unborn child I don't believe PP, or any entity for that matter, should be pushing for or against abortions in a given situation - that is up to the prospective parents and those they wish to involve so if PP is, in fact, pushing for abortions over other choices, that is a serious problem I don't believe that a federal entity specifically needs to provide abortions, but I believe that abortions should generally be safe and available for those who choose it so long as said abortion is lawful I believe PP does more than abortions, and any attempts to defund or remove PP should consider the implications thereof, rather than pretending they don't exist for example, attempts to defund should consider diverting the funding/grants towards other clinics that offer similar services Click to expand... "I essentially agree with all those points." @BurnPyro How does me essentially agreeing with Sokolov after a back and forth exchange = I don't want a debate??? How is that putting him down? Please specifically declare which of his above points you disagree with. Have you changed your mind any after all these pages? If not, do you have very set opinions? Why is that ok for you but not for me? Which of my views are "extreme" in your opinion? Disagreement does NOT have to mean 1 person or the other is extreme. Disagreements are normal and fine. If the majority of peeps feel/vote 1 way, does that mean all other opinions are "extreme"? Many groups in politics are very aggressive about their preferences. Why is that ok for the Left, but not the Right? I am genuinely interested in why you you hold such views. Hoping you won't flame. We shall see.
@Sokolov stated: "You cannot argue that PP, as a whole, only offers abortion - this is patently false." I reposted my prior statement, because it totally refutes the false narrative of the above sentence. Read post 90 or 92 again if needed. To which you replied: I found your allegation of trolling "highly disappointing" since you continued to push a false narrative. And then you stated: "Not sure what you expect by just copy and pasting the specific point I contend. Why should I continue to engage?" I expect honest interactions. I still don't get why you claim I believe "PP only offers abortion" when I have said otherwise repeatedly. Is there some other point you are trying to contend?
This is what I was originally replying to, and you haven't deviated from this point. As I have said, I understand if your point is that PP doesn't do anything that isn't offered at other places, but this is not equivalent to their sole purpose being abortions. It'd be like pointing to two water bottles, saying they serve the same purpose and therefore neither is unique, thus neither serves a purpose. That makes no sense. Is a particular brand of car's purpose not transporting people because other brand of cars also transport people? I mean, if PP's sole purpose is to do abortions, and they STOPPED doing it, that'd mean PP serves no purpose, and since your clinic does the same things, it also serves no purpose? What? You can't seriously be claiming that something does not serve a particular purpose if that purpose is duplicated, at all, by anything else? This has nothing to with narratives or ideology. It has to do with the fact that what you claim makes no logical sense. Again, if "PP doesn't do anything (besides abortion) that isn't offered at other places" is all you meant, that's fine, I will pretend that is what you said from this point forward even. I am ok with us moving past this point because it's largely irrelevant. That said, I do think that those kinds of statements you make does not help further discussions, thus, as I suggested with my original reply to it, is the type of thing that makes me NOT want to engage in said discussions.
Iow say exactly what you mean. Because any opportunity to sidetrack the discussion on 'irrelevant' points will be taken. gooberment
i dunno, the way i look at it is like if two people are talking in person and one of them starts banging on a desk. the discussion proceeds normally, but that guy is still banging on the desk. it produces a seemingly irrelevant noise that you can talk around, but it's a lot easier to continue talking if he'd stop the racket (from my side, at least- perhaps it helps his flow or thought process. maybe it's just how he's been taught to talk, and speaking without smacking a desk would not occur to him) from what i've read of DJ over, i guess over the years at this point, he fills his posts with buzzwords that at this point mean very little due to their breadth of meaning (to me, at least). he holds very strong views that are reinforced by these aforementioned buzzwords, and it seems to be difficult to cut through either to actually converse with him. he is a pleasant individual on a personal level, but i don't think we share common ground on a host of topics.
The reason you should say what you mean is so people know what you mean. If you are serious about a discussion then that seems like the right thing to do, doesn't it?
Toys-R-Us sells more than toys. It's still a toy store though. Hot wings are overwhelmingly made up of non-hot stuff. But leaving 'hot' out of the name would be misleading. Likewise planned parenthood though it offers more than abortions really should reflect that important ingredient in its name.
You know when I asked if women should be allowed to sell their own fetus material the way men sell their sperm I never got a reply.
Not the same. All 'R' Us stores sell toys. All hot wings have a spicy ingredient. Not all Planned Parenthood clinics have abortions. They do all offer family planning services. The two are not equivalent. Women can and do sell their eggs. It is far more lucrative because it is more invasive, and women have a finite number of eggs.
The question doesn't make sense. I understand making false equivalences is a popular tactic these days, but re-ask it better and you might get a proper answer.
I understand how you feel about PP and Abortions, I still think saying "sole purpose is X" because of overlapping roles makes no sense - my point was never about PP or abortions specifically, but the fact that the sentence makes no sense, yet you keep trying to convince me with more anti-PP/abortion talk. But it is OK. I have told you what I think of that kind of statement, and I have let it go. I only replied this last time because you asked about it. I am not going to reply on the subject itself again unless you ask again.
In other news, this might interest you: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/prison-reform-risk-assessment/
Immediately thought of Minority Report, thus my gut instinct is that too risky and unfair. That very movie was referenced in the 9th paragraph. Edit: I do wish many crimes were not punished so harshly. We lock up too many people, IMO of course. I believe in 2nd, 2nd chances.
