Planned Parenthood is organ farming

Post by **GORDON** » Thu Feb 16, 2017 6:57 pm

Troy wrote:
GORDON wrote: Does anyone else roll their eyes when the discussion of federal funding for planned parenthood gets turned into the claim that "they are trying to outlaw abortions!" I do, I just wonder if anyone else does.
The problem is that the people that are normally spearheading a push to cut said funding normally DO want that.

But the reverberation chamber doesn't know the difference. Confounding.

Post by **TPRJones** » Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:08 pm

Ah, I thought you were getting at "block implantation". I think the day after is too late to block conception, isn't it?

Conception itself can occur anywhere between a few hours and 5 days after intercourse.

Well, I stand corrected. Maybe they aren't the pills I thought they were.

Malcolm · Post by **Malcolm** » Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:11 pm

TPRJones wrote: Ah, I thought you were getting at "block implantation". I think the day after is too late to block conception, isn't it?

Conception itself can occur anywhere between a few hours and 5 days after intercourse.
Well, I stand corrected. Maybe they aren't the pills I thought they were.

They do more than stop conception. They chemically try to eject any potentially fertilized eggs.

Post by **GORDON** » Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:14 pm

TPRJones wrote: Ah, I thought you were getting at "block implantation". I think the day after is too late to block conception, isn't it?

Conception itself can occur anywhere between a few hours and 5 days after intercourse.
Well, I stand corrected. Maybe they aren't the pills I thought they were.

Honestly, I don't know for sure. That's just what I thought.

Post by **TPRJones** » Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:17 pm

Either way my point stands: I don't think you can lump those pills in with abortion, but some people would.

Malcolm · Post by **Malcolm** » Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:19 pm

TPRJones wrote: Either way my point stands: I don't think you can lump those pills in with abortion, but some people would.

Most of those pills induce what is medically termed "an abortion."

Post by **TPRJones** » Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:29 pm

Malcolm wrote:Most of those pills induce what is medically termed "an abortion."

They can, but that would be listed under abortion. They can also be used for emergency contraception, which is distinct from abortion and was it's own separate category. I can't say for sure that none of the emergency contraception should instead be classified as abortion, but I think it's more likely they classified them properly than there being a conspiracy to fake the classifications.

Post by **Vince** » Thu Feb 16, 2017 8:06 pm

TPRJones wrote: That may have validity if you assume that those women would not have come in for a pregnancy test or STI treatment or to get contraception or whatever else if they had not also needed an abortion. I'm not sure that is so in most cases.

All because you buy some eggs at the store when you went to get whiskey it doesn't mean those eggs are now a form of liquor.

No, but buying eggs and whiskey doesn't mean that only 7% of your grocery items was liquor because you had 12 eggs, an egg carton, a whiskey bottle and whiskey. That's what they're doing.

Post by **Vince** » Thu Feb 16, 2017 8:08 pm

GORDON wrote: Does anyone else roll their eyes when the discussion of federal funding for planned parenthood gets turned into the claim that "they are trying to outlaw abortions!" I do, I just wonder if anyone else does.

I do. I also roll my eyes when pro abortion types ask if pro lifers would insist on victims of rape and incest carrying their babies to term.

Post by **Troy** » Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:50 pm

Why are we talking about groceries?

What number is an acceptable percentage?

The services list is impressive. I didn't know they did IUDs. I checked how much those are and we are getting robbed.

Post by **GORDON** » Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:51 pm

He's looking for an honest number, not an "alternative facts" number.

That's a fun expression.

Post by **TPRJones** » Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:22 pm

Vince wrote:No, but buying eggs and whiskey doesn't mean that only 7% of your grocery items was liquor because you had 12 eggs, an egg carton, a whiskey bottle and whiskey. That's what they're doing.

That doesn't track at all. You were saying that all the other things they did on that list for someone getting an abortion should be considered to be part of the abortion. I am saying that people getting both an STI treatment and contraception along with their abortion is getting three different things all at once. There's no more reason to insist those are all part of the abortion than there is to insist that the abortion is part of the STI treatment. If you are going to inflate one number you'll also need to inflate all the other numbers in the same way and we're right back to the same percentages.

Post by **Vince** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 8:47 am

TPRJones wrote:
Vince wrote:No, but buying eggs and whiskey doesn't mean that only 7% of your grocery items was liquor because you had 12 eggs, an egg carton, a whiskey bottle and whiskey. That's what they're doing.
That doesn't track at all. You were saying that all the other things they did on that list for someone getting an abortion should be considered to be part of the abortion. I am saying that people getting both an STI treatment and contraception along with their abortion is getting three different things all at once. There's no more reason to insist those are all part of the abortion than there is to insist that the abortion is part of the STI treatment. If you are going to inflate one number you'll also need to inflate all the other numbers in the same way and we're right back to the same percentages.

I'm saying that if they give an STD test and pregnancy test before they will do an abortion, then those tests don't count as separate non-abortion services in that instance. It's part of getting the abortion done. Two women go into PP. One wants an abortion and one wants to be tested for syphilis. The woman wanting the abortion is not asking for a pregnancy test (assuming if she's getting an abortion that she knows she's pregnant) or an STD test, but they have to do them before they will do the abortion. To say after the two patients are treated that only 25% of the services provided were abortions isn't very honest. In this particular case with the two women, actually 75% of the service provided were abortion related. But I don't think that's the direction they're wanting to skew their numbers.

Post by **TPRJones** » Fri Feb 17, 2017 10:47 pm

I will concede that if they require these other things before the abortion rather than being optional extras, then I do agree with you. Is that something they do, though? I haven't seen any indication of such.

Post by **Vince** » Sat Feb 18, 2017 8:38 am

TPRJones wrote: I will concede that if they require these other things before the abortion rather than being optional extras, then I do agree with you. Is that something they do, though? I haven't seen any indication of such.

Yes, I know for sure the pregnancy test and there are two or three other things they require but list separately. Not positive that one of the others is the STD, but that would make sense. Or maybe a smear. They don't want to walk into a medical situation they could avoid and get sued for.

That was the whole point of my talking about the vet bill. Everything (aside from the nail clipping) was a required part of doing the neutering and spaying, but if counted as separate procedures meant that less than 15% of the services provided were technically spaying and neutering.

Post by **TPRJones** » Sat Feb 18, 2017 12:27 pm

According to what I can find they require either a positive pregnancy test or a certain amount of time from the last period. Nowhere can I find that they require their own pregnancy testing; it sounds like you may be able to just bring in the stick you peed on yourself. Can you link to your reference about them requiring their own test?

Post by **TPRJones** » Sat Feb 18, 2017 12:51 pm

For the sake of argument, if we presume that a full 327,166 of the pregnancy tests they did was because they were required before an abortion, that would change abortions from 3% of all services to 3.1% of all services. I don't see how even the worst case scenario there is anywhere near as damning as you seem to think it is.

Post by **Vince** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 7:02 pm

TPRJones wrote: According to what I can find they require either a positive pregnancy test or a certain amount of time from the last period. Nowhere can I find that they require their own pregnancy testing; it sounds like you may be able to just bring in the stick you peed on yourself. Can you link to your reference about them requiring their own test?

Heck, you may actually be right on that. I'm having trouble finding the article again.

Post by **Vince** » Wed Feb 22, 2017 8:28 am

Judge rules now that the state of Texas doesn't get to decide their own budget.

Post by **TPRJones** » Wed Feb 22, 2017 11:00 am

No. Or at the least that's an intensely misleading way to put it.

Texas is not required to participate in Medicaid. Texas can shut the whole thing down and stop taking federal money. But what they can not do is take the federal money and then ignore the federal laws that describe how that money will be spent. And 42 CFR 431.51 clearly states that a Medicaid recipient has the right to choose who they get their medical care from as long as that party is qualified and willing to provide service. The state can rule parties unqualified and refuse to pay the Medicaid payments, sure, but they have to provide evidence of a lack of qualifications or of some sort of medical misconduct to do this. They can't just do it because they feel like it. And in this case the state has failed to provide any evidence.

If Texas conservatives want to stop Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood that's fine, they can man up and cancel the entire statewide Medicaid program and face the consequences of that. But trying to be sneaky - and illegal - about it like this is conniving bullshit.