DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Planned Parenthood and the Sale of Fetal Body Parts

Pit to the guy who just got his arm torn off...

"Let's discuss this."

No, you made a statement, I asked you questions about your data, and you could not come up with anything significant to add to the discussion. You've had ample opportunity to do so but continue to fail to make your one piece of data relevant to the conversation. All you do is ramble on stating "abortion bad!"

If you actually cared about the results, you would see that through and including organizations such as PP providing contraceptive services, the US has been able to prevent unwanted/unplanned pregnancies which has helped to decrease the abortion rate. As I stated earlier, PP has provided over 3.7 million contraceptive services to prevent unwanted pregnancies. That is an actual result of free and low cost healthcare. That results in possibly hundreds of thousands (if not more) abortions being avoided per year. If it were just as easy as telling a woman to keep her legs shut or a man to not sleep around, we wouldn't have these problems. Unfortunately, it's not as evidenced by higher teenage pregnancy rates in states that promote abstinence education. PP has allowed individuals to become responsible for themselves and use contraceptives so they don't have unwanted/unplanned pregnancies. Why are you fighting against people taking responsibility for themselves?

Ha, because "liberals" are the only ones having abortions or having unwanted/unplanned pregnancies, right? The statement that "liberals" don't take responsibility for themselves is completely absurd. Again, which states have higher rates of teen pregnancy? I'll give you a hint: it's not "liberal" states.

Sure, Right to Life performed zero abortions. They also made zero difference in helping to prevent unwanted/unplanned pregnancies and made zero difference in overturning existing abortion laws. Meanwhile, PP actually helped prevent millions of unwanted/unplanned pregnancies through their contraceptive services. Again, which organization is actually doing something to empower people to take responsibility and help prevent abortions?

-----



Actually, this is how my rhetorical question came about:



My response was the following:



Those squiggly lines with a dot under them at the end of sentences are question marks. They denote the asking of a question, rhetorical or otherwise. I later provided you with the information to answer your question.

I'm actually not using them interchangeably. PP performed over 3.7 million contraceptive services in one year, meaning that they prevented millions of unwanted and unplanned pregnancies, some of which would have likely ended in abortions. Hopefully that clears up your confusion.

The Christian Connection for International Health receives government grants - http://www.ccih.org/CCIH-Annual-Report-2013.pdf

Obviously not nearly as much as PP. Although, in perusing the website, they seem to be more focused in efforts abroad as opposed to those within the US. They also seem like a reasonable organization as they allow for and provide contraceptives, family planning, etc.

The House of Hope program is for runaways that often have mental health, trauma, or abuse issues. I'm sure there have been a handful of those that are pregnant, but the reality is it's likely a small number of females in the program. The needs list doesn't even list anything regarding pregnancy or preventing pregnancy, nor does the program page.

I do wish there were more mental health services available to females as well as males whether it be through PP or other similar organizations. I also have no problem with faith based services as long as the person participating in the service doesn't have a problem with it. Different people need different things to get them through difficult situations. If that person needs faith, cool. If that person needs mental health services, cool. Different strokes for different folks.

Anytime I see a post from 40, this is all I hear:

Yep, you pro infanticide folks really stick together.

Actually, as I've mentioned a few times throughout this thread, I'm against abortion. But if that's what you need to think to get yourself through your day...

Yep, people who oppose abortion are pro infanticide.

Once again your failure to grasp reality is not astounding nor surprising.

Reality?
The Reality of it all is you guys say you are against abortion and then go on to list all these economic reasons for it.

Stop killing babies, then we can discuss money.

As I recall, the current president removed the work requirement from welfare.

I explained earlier that in order to stop abortion we must change the laws which make it legal. That is the reason why abortions are happening. You just appear to skim over posts and forget that people have addressed what needs to happen to stop abortion. I simply get tired of repeating myself to you.

My other comments are intertwined. Any time you decide to make a stand on an issue, there are responsibilities that go along with it. Stopping abortion is a noble cause yet in less than nine months the direct result of that cause comes into being.

There must be a plan in place that addresses these increased births. It's not a cause to promote abortion but rather an answer to how we will deal promoting their "life" and not just their "birth".

Until the laws are changed abortion will continue. I'm more than happy to hear any common sense approach to changing abortion laws, not comparing abortion to Hitler because that doesn't further debate to help change anything.

You might wish to fact check that.

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/08/does-obamas-plan-gut-welfare-reform/

Oh shucks, Pit just went busting my chain emails again!

I am saying, look at the numbers. Look at how many Jews were murdered in the Holocaust, and look at how many Black children have been exterminated in the name of convenience since 1973.

Black lives matter .... unless their parents decide they don't.

Just to add some numbers to my post .....

In the "Final Solution", it is estimated that somewhere between 4.2 to 4.5 million Jewish people were murdered by the Nazis.

I have seen the number of abortions by Black women widely ranging between 16 million up to the mid 20s.

Sorry if it offends anyone, but the abortion epidemic in the Black community is a holocaust. There are 39-42 or so million Black people living in the US today .... and there have been (at least)16 million Black babies exterminated over the past 42 years. Sorry, but that is
a holocaust.

Those numbers should shock the crap out of everyone.

[
Agree 100%. Sad thing is Black lives do not matter when compared to the lives of others. Even Black people know this whether they admit it or not. What blows my mind is you can find information on the founder of Planned Parenthood Margret Sanger and her views on Blacks, but that doesn't stop politicians from peddling their influence and accepting donations. People will make up excuses even for those who are trying to eradicate them. Let that sink in for a minute.








quote=YTownBrownsFan]Just to add some numbers to my post .....

In the "Final Solution", it is estimated that somewhere between 4.2 to 4.5 million Jewish people were murdered by the Nazis.

I have seen the number of abortions by Black women widely ranging between 16 million up to the mid 20s.

Sorry if it offends anyone, but the abortion epidemic in the Black community is a holocaust. There are 39-42 or so million Black people living in the US today .... and there have been (at least)16 million Black babies exterminated over the past 42 years. Sorry, but that is
a holocaust.

Those numbers should shock the crap out of everyone. [/quote]

I can't really understand you.

The decision of a person black, white, or otherwise is driven by economics and the reality that one must face raising a child, perhaps as young parents, and perhaps alone.

Many times you have criticized blacks, and the breakdown of the traditional family structure as being detrimental to their ability to succeed or advance in the social-economic world that exists today.

This is an effect, not a cause of the environment that they live within.

It all starts with money, and education, take away those elements and you have the statistics as a result.

Is it a shame, yes, but it is a consequence too.

So think about this the next time you make a comment about the unfairness of an Earned Income Tax Credit. Maybe it provides someone the opportunity not to have to make a decision that they would not given different circumstance.

Just the other day I wrote about the EITC, and why I despise it. It s not an assistance to people .... it is an assistance to business. It throws money into the hands of those who will immediately spend every penny of it on "stuff". It doesn't help people on a monthly basis. Many of those who receive the EITC waste hundreds of dollars of this "assistance" by spending it on getting their refund immediately in the form of a loan, instead of waiting a few weeks, getting it all, and aving it direct deposited into their bank accounts.

It is about as much an assistance program as a $500 winning lottery ticket is.

Real assistance is helping people not need assistance anymore.

How do we get there?

Well, as I have often opined, I believe that it has to start with a complete and total overhaul of the ublic assistance program as we know it.

I think that we should help people who need help, but that help should come with a price attached. What is that price?

I think that 2 are acceptable.

1st would be that someone on public assistance goes to school to get job skills, real job skills, that will help them get, and keep a job. I want real training for people, not "Life Skills" type training, though even that could be a start, with a modified curriculum. I want people trained in available career type jobs for which employers are struggling to find people. I would like to see people who are dependent upon the welfare system to be entered into job specific education, including "how to work" classes, "how to interview", "what an employer will require of an employee", and other similar classes, in addition to the career specific classes.

Now, not everyone will want to pursue education, and that's fine. Those who do not want to pursue an education can do work for their communities. They would learn how to work, how to take direction, how to show up for a job every day, and build a piece of a resume with references as they do work for the community that supports them. If a person in this category does not have a High School Diploma, I want them to also go to classes where they will work on getting that Diploma. It is hard to do much of anything in this world without at least a high school diploma. In this category we could have people picking up trash, cleaning up city hall, filling potholes, cleaning the parks, and so on.

There is no reason a person who is just collecting money from the government because "they cannot find a job" cannot follow one of these 2 paths. It would benefit the community, and it would definitely benefit the assistance recipient.

I would do away completely with the EITC, because this is a shopping spree program, not a public assistance program. Both categories of people should also take part in budget and finance classes, so they know how to handle the money the community gives them each month.

Instead of a person receiving a $300 welfare check, they could receive a wage similar to the prevailing wage among entry level employers. If the minimum wage is $7.5, but local employers, on average, pay $9 to attract people,they these people on public assistance would be paid $9/hour for their work.

I would also make benefits taxable. People need to be invested in the system.

I think that the benefits of helping people learn to work far outweigh the benefits of just giving people money. The extra expense would be worthwhile, because it would add more money into the local community, increasing the number of jobs, and increasing the tax base.

There are some people who are unable to work because of a physical or mental/emotional problem, and these cases can be addressed on their own, but with strict review and oversight.

I could also be talked into offering assistance to the working poor, offsetting their wages with the prevailing wage paid to the welfare recipients, if they make less, and allowing them to make up the difference to a 40 hour week by working for the community and earning extra money that way. This is better than throwing a "bonus check" to a lower income person at the beginning of the year, that they will blow by the time 3 or 4 days have gone by. (optimistically)

I feel that a change in the system, such as I have outlined here, would benefit all involved. It would benefit those receiving assistance. It would benefit the communities in which these people live. It would benefit the employers in these communities, and would also benefit the employees in such areas as more money would find its way into the local communities.


I am not out to punish lower income people, but rather to try and help them. The current system does nothing to help low income people, and it can very easily be argued that it does a great deal to harm them in the long run.

The five highest expenditures for funds received via EITC are 1) food 2) vehicle purchase 3) vehicle repair or upgrade 4) gasoline and 5) clothing. Rounding out the top ten are 6) electronics, 7) fees, admissions, toys and sports, 8) child support 9) alimony and 10) charity. When ranked as broader categories, the spending charts out at 1) Food 2) Transportation 3) Clothing 4) Entertainment 5) Court-mandated Payments

Abortion bad

From my own personal experience, working with lower income people who receive the EITC, the biggest purchases are expensive, top name clothes, high end electronics, and "bling". I do know one girl who did buy a car, so that was good, but it seems to me that most people just blow their windfall, because that is exactly what it is. A addition to their monthly benefit would be much more sensible.

I would also add that the EITC can go up to what I consider to be extremely high limits.

From the main Google page:

The EITC phases out entirely (is not available) for taxpayers with an adjusted gross income of:
$14,590 with no Qualifying Children ($20,020 if married filing jointly)

$38,511 with one Qualifying Child ($43,941 if married filing jointly)

$43,756 with two Qualifying Children ($49,186 if married filing jointly)

We are subsidizing a married couple with 2 children, almost up to $50k? Really?

We need to take a real, hard look at our welfare programs, and look at how we can structure them in a better way, that will help those receiving benefits, and not throw money to those who really don't "need" the help.

I think that we can do much, much better, and truly help those who need the help.

On the face of it 50k sounds like alot, but it's supported by the living wage calculator too. The formula derives at $13.51/hr for my area (Summit County) for a 2 adult 2 child household with both parents working. By my calculation that comes to about 54k/yr (I take out 2 weeks for vacation)

http://livingwage.mit.edu/counties/39153

As inflation rises so should our concept of how efficient a given salary is at supporting a person. $100k/yr for example ain't what it used to be 15 years ago. I imagine many middle class families clear $100k or close to it by having both mom and dad work. All you need is them both making 50k/yr... But housing is much more expensive now, as are the average cost of cars and many utilities etc.

Obviously in some areas 50k for a family of four may still get you in pretty good shape. Using Youngstown for example (since your name has it :D) the cost of living is very low:

http://www.bestplaces.net/cost_of_living/city/ohio/youngstown

But just a short walk away you can head over to Canfield where the cost of living is much closer to the natl average:

http://www.bestplaces.net/cost_of_living/city/ohio/canfield

And this is the biggest issue with a federal figure for welfare/child support. It only works if you live in an area that matches the national average or lower.

Social Security recipients receive nothing like this.

Many older people are living on Social Security and receiving less than $1000/month. They get no help. My mom falls into this category.

WE have screwed up priorities in this country.

all the soldiers in the military got the EITC as well.

i didn't know that was considered welfare.

Call it whatever you want but you have an income, you pay your taxes, if you get back more than you pay in.... what would you call it?

dude...i didn't know it was considered welfare. that wasn't a sarcastic comment. chill.

I'm chill... I don't think it's technically considered "welfare" but it is one of those programs the government has set up to give low income folks something for nothing. the real shame is that our military is so poorly paid that they even qualify for it.

I've ranted on and on about simplification.. simplification of the social services, simplification of taxes, etc... it all ties together.... at one point I listed all of the social programs available to people and there were dozens of them, some to meet specific needs others open to everybody.. but there were probably 50-60 of them (and that was just at the federal level).. (to tie this to the other thread, EITC was one of them)...

Why do we need 50-60 to manage? There are about 6 or 7 basic human needs to try to get on your feet, food, shelter, clothing, transportation, communication, child care.. probably a couple more... why do we have that many programs?

By allowing things to get so complicated, we have allowed the politicians to hide things from us. If you want to raise or lower taxes, just say so and we can debate it.. don't add a new penalty or institute a new credit and claim that you didn't raise or lower taxes.. "Well we aren't going to increase welfare, we are just going to create this $2000 tax credit that people who make under $20,000 a year can get back in their taxes"..... "We aren't going to raise taxes, we are just going to levy this new $30 annual vehicle fee since 90% of the people own at least one vehicle"...

I'm telling you, they are shaking our hand with one and grabbing our wallet with the other in ways we don't even understand because it's become that complicated.

I don't mind paying my share, but damn it, I at least deserve to know how much I'm expected to pay, why, and where it's going.. and right now, I have no *$%*(#ing idea.

In a lot of cases, it's more or less welfare. In many cases, it's merely getting a chunk of tax money back that you've already paid in. It's structured as tax relief, i.e. you don't necessarily have to "qualify", you just claim it on an honor system like one does other taxes. I haven't received EITC in decades, but when I did, it was never more than I put in. It was more "here's some of your federal tax deductions back". But on the low end, you do have many getting more in their credit than they put in.

that's what i thought. it was never more than what i paid. not even close.

That is not how it works. (and bear in mind that my example below would also receive the refundable child tax credit in the amount of $2000 since they have 2 children)

Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC)
http://www.irs.gov/Credits-&-Deductions/Individuals/Earned-Income-Tax-Credit

I ran the estimator, and I put in a single person, with 2 kids, being the main support and custody of the children, making $18,000. I ran through the entire calculator, and it came up with an EITC amount of $5419.

There is no way that a person with 2 children, making $18,000, is paying federal and state income tax in the amount of $5419. Not a chance. So, this person would receive "back" a total of $7419 as a tax "refund", minus or plus any tax that has to be paid vs the amount withheld from their check.

This is not a program to help pay one's taxes. This is an entitlement program. (and I say this as a classification, not to insult anyone)

Based on the following information you entered, you are eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit. See below:

Filing Status: Head of Household
Qualifying Children: Two
Earned Income: $18,000
Adjusted Gross Income: $18,000
Your Estimated EITC Amount for 2014: $5,419
2014 Estimated Income:


Wages, Salaries, and Tips: $18,000
Statutory Employee Gross Income: $0
Clergy Income: $0
Self-Employment or Business or Farm Income (or loss): $0
Taxable Interest: $0
Tax-Exempt Interest: $0
Ordinary Dividends: $0
Capital Gain (or loss): $0
Taxable Refunds: $0
Alimony Received: $0
Unemployment Compensation: $0
Nontaxable Combat Pay Election: $0
Other Income: $0
Estimated Adjustments to Income:

IRA Deduction: $0
Alimony Paid: $0
One Half of Self-Employment Tax: $0
Self-Employed Health Insurance Deduction: $0
Moving Expenses: $0
Penalty on Early Withdrawal of Savings: $0
Student Loan Interest Deduction: $0

You missed the point.

Perhaps the EITC allows someone not to make a decision that you do not agree with.

Just beat up on the poor....

Why? They're not doing anything. If you want money when you're older than get a job. If 16 year olds can do it I assume the older generation can to? Maybe it's a laziness? I don't know. But from what I can remember this is America, a land of opportunity for those who want it. America shouldn't just be giving handouts to people.

Don't like not having money? Get a job. Not a hard concept to grasp. Even millennials get it.

Sure, when you are old and worn out and have paid into a forced social security system that earns crap compared to what you could have earned with that money by having it to invest yourself, get a job.

My advice to the elderly is to hang on to your job as long as possible, put off retirement so there will continue to be zero job openings for the Millenials and they can continue to live at home with mommy and daddy till their 50's.

huh...i'm a millennial and i don't live with my parents.

Currently 26% of you do. Look it up.

and you don't think it has anything to do with the economic collapse of 2008? which we're still trying to recover from?

Whatever gets these free loaders off of my tax money works for me. As a millennial I expect to work well into my 80's. I don't want to pay for some 65 year old who wants to be a bum.

But first you will have to turn off the Netflix and get your Butt off Mom's couch!

In the meantime, Planned Parenthood continues to kill children and harvest their body parts.

I know, I know, It's no longer on the News because somebody done killed a Lion.

Screwed up Society.
Culture of Death.
Libthingy Logic.

Haven't you been advocating for nuking population hubs?

You liked your own post?

someone has to. I'm on my phone and the 'like' button and 'next topic' button are close enough to where I accidentally 'like' a few posts a day.