Fertility clinics destroy embryos all the time. Why aren’t conservatives after them?

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I for one see a clear distinction between a microscopic pre-embryo in a petri dish versus a growing fetus that has functional and distinguishable human body parts. I find it odd that you can't see the same distinction.

Is there a difference? Sure. Is it a meaningful difference? No.

Just pointing out that there is a difference doesn't make it meaningful. Could be, but you haven't established that merely by pointing it out.

If you think having functional parts or distinguishable parts is a sufficient reason to treat it differently, and to pass laws punishing people who don't do what you think they should do, you need to explain why that's the case.

 

[TJ8869]

Are you deliberately missing the point? Have you become one of those posters?

You said IVF was a small part of what UHIC does. Abortion is a small part of what PP does.

A laundry list with each point followed by the same disingenuous and irrelevant question doesn't alter that the part being criticized - the part that some might say should lead to defunding - is a small part of the function of each target. YOU are the one who made that point. I agree with it. I just pointed out that it applies to both.

No, abortion is not a small part of what Planned Parenthood does. Abortion is a fairly significant part of what Planned Parenthood does.

If you compare the percentage of UIHC patients who are there for IVF against the percentage of PP patients who are there for an abortion, I promise you the numbers are separated by a deep, yawning chasm.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

No, abortion is not a small part of what Planned Parenthood does. Abortion is a fairly significant part of what Planned Parenthood does.

If you compare the percentage of UIHC patients who are there for IVF against the percentage of PP patients who are there for an abortion, I promise you the numbers are separated by a deep, yawning chasm.

The number I keep hearing is 3%. And I also keep hearing that doesn't come from federal funding. Is that wrong?

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

 

[gusto79]

The number I keep hearing is 3%. And I also keep hearing that doesn't come from federal funding. Is that wrong?

I think 3% of all procedures are abortions, but something like 12% of patients receive an abortion.

 

[TJ8869]

The number I keep hearing is 3%. And I also keep hearing that doesn't come from federal funding. Is that wrong?

3% is the number PP officials like to toss around. But, as gusto79 points out, that number is quite deceptive.

PP performs about 11.4 million individual services per year for about 3 million different people. About 330,000 of those 11.4 million services are abortions.

So about 3% of the services they provide are abortions, but about 11% of the patients they service are there for an abortion.

Here's an example of how they massage the numbers:

A woman enters a PP clinic and says she thinks she is pregnant. Naturally, the first thing clinic workers do is give her a pregnancy test to confirm. That's one service. The test is positive so the next thing they do is sit down with her and outline her options. That's the second service. After mulling it over, the woman decides to terminate the pregnancy, so the clinic provides her with detailed information on what to expect before, during, and after the abortion. That's the third service. Finally, the actual abortion is performed. That's the fourth service.

One woman had one abortion. But, for statistical purposes, abortion only counted as 25% of what the clinic did in her case.

It's more accurate to say that 11% of all patients served by PP have an abortion. Now, you could argue that 11% is still not a significant percentage. I suppose that's a matter of perspective.

If 11% of African-American voters were turned away at the polls for not having photo id, I suspect you would consider 11% to be a fairly significant number.

 

[BABiscuit]

The difference is that in the case of the UIHC, it's actually true. The UIHC covers the entire spectrum of health care. PP is devoted exclusively to issues pertaining to the female reproductive system, and abortion represents a significant percentage of their services.

The UIHC offers cardiothoracic surgery. Does Planned Parenthood?

The UIHC offers family medical care. Does Planned Parenthood?

The UIHC offers opthalmology and visual care. Does Planned Parenthood?

The UIHC offers pediatric care. Does Planned Parenthood?

The UIHC offers radiation oncology. Does Planned Parenthood?

The UIHC offers neonatal care. Does Planned Parenthood?

The UIHC offers neurology and neurosurgery. Does Planned Parenthood?

The UIHC offers psychiatric and psychological treatment. Does Planned Parenthood?

The UIHC offers otolaryngology. Does Planned Parenthood?

The UIHC offers dentistry and oral surgery. Does Planned Parenthood?

The UIHC offers orthopedics and physical rehabilitation. Does Planned Parenthood?

The UIHC offers labor and delivery. Does Planned Parenthood?

The UIHC offers surgery and internal medicine and emergency medicine. Does Planned Parenthood?

Do you know what else the UIHC does? Abortions. The GOP would withhold all taxpayer money to the hospital because of this. I dont recall reading the same about IVF.

 

[BABiscuit]

Is that true?

I disapprove. To me that's more like cosmetic surgery. Sure, I sympathize with you if you are ugly. And in some cases I would probably agree that such voluntary operations should be covered. A kid born badly disfigured. Someone disfigured in an accident. But you want liposuction so you can fit into your bathing suit? Fine. Just don't ask me to pay for it.

I feel sorry for people who want kids and can't conceive. But what's the argument for subsidizing expensive treatments? And, yes, the expense part does matter. We aren't talking about fundamental rights here. Or are we?

The subsidies aren't really covering that part of the plan. They are for the basic coverages mandated by Obamacare. Sort of like how federal dollars dont subsidize abortions at PP. They are covering other parts.

 

[TJ8869]

Do you know what else the UIHC does? Abortions. The GOP would withhold all taxpayer money to the hospital because of this. I dont recall reading the same about IVF.

The UIHC performs about 70 abortions per year on average. And if hospital spokespersons can be believed, each of them have been medically necessary - either because the mother's life was in danger or because the fetus had a medical condition that compromised its ability to survive outside the womb.

 

[GarryO37]

Is there a difference? Sure. Is it a meaningful difference? No.

Just pointing out that there is a difference doesn't make it meaningful. Could be, but you haven't established that merely by pointing it out.

If you think having functional parts or distinguishable parts is a sufficient reason to treat it differently, and to pass laws punishing people who don't do what you think they should do, you need to explain why that's the case.

Care to explain exactly how it's not a meaningful difference?

 

[BABiscuit]

The UIHC performs about 70 abortions per year on average. And if hospital spokespersons can be believed, each of them have been medically necessary - either because the mother's life was in danger or because the fetus had a medical condition that compromised its ability to survive outside the womb.

That's great. Are you at least seeing that the core issue is not funding of abortions?

 

[22*43*51]

I'm consistent.

The list of government funded entities I would like to see unfunded is almost limitless.

 

[ottumwan in tx]

Having an abortion IS taking personal responsibility.

well, not if the baby is born alive and then harvested for its body parts for money, then that's dead baby parts pimpin'

 

[TJ8869]

That's great. Are you at least seeing that the core issue is not funding of abortions?

That depends. Are we talking about PP or are we talking about your UIHC straw man?

 

[BABiscuit]

That depends. Are we talking about PP or are we talking about your UIHC straw man?

I guess you can pick either. Funding is not the core issue. Why does IVF receive a pass compared to abortion? That is the core issue and what the article is asking.

 

[naturalmwa]

I guess you can pick either. Funding is not the core issue. Why does IVF receive a pass compared to abortion? That is the core issue and what the article is asking.

IMO, because people instinctively do not think personhood starts at conception, even if they claim otherwise. Ben Carson was on the Sunday shows stumbling all over this point today.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

IMO, because people instinctively do not think personhood starts at conception, even if they claim otherwise. Ben Carson was on the Sunday shows stumbling all over this point today.

That's why they generally avoid the word personhood in these contexts.

They talk about life. Or human life. Or the unborn baby.

Notice how nobody talks about the unborn nursing home resident. But if unborn baby makes sense, why not that? And definitely nobody talks about the unborn rapist or unborn child abuser or unborn corrupt politician.

 

[naturalmwa]

That's why they generally avoid the word personhood in these contexts.

They talk about life. Or human life. Or the unborn baby.

Notice how nobody talks about the unborn nursing home resident. But if unborn baby makes sense, why not that? And definitely nobody talks about the unborn rapist or unborn child abuser or unborn corrupt politician.

They do sometimes talk about the aborted Einstein or Jesus, so future potential as an adult isn't off the table.

 

[TJ8869]

I guess you can pick either. Funding is not the core issue. Why does IVF receive a pass compared to abortion? That is the core issue and what the article is asking.

I suppose for the same reason that people who despise "The Bachelor" don't necessarily despise "Austin City Limits". They're both television programs, but they're two entirely different kinds of television programs.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

They do sometimes talk about the aborted Einstein or Jesus, so future potential as an adult isn't off the table.

Wait! They talk about an unborn Jesus?

If Jesus were to be born again would it have to involve God raping a virgin again?

And if Jesus really were reborn, what if He grew up as a welfare baby? How can we consider cutting welfare if that's a possibility? Shouldn't we immediately improve welfare support by a dramatic amount? Just to be on the safe side.

 

[naturalmwa]

Wait! They talk about an unborn Jesus?

If Jesus were to be born again would it have to involve God raping a virgin again?

And if Jesus really were reborn, what if He grew up as a welfare baby? How can we consider cutting welfare if that's a possibility? Shouldn't we immediately improve welfare support by a dramatic amount? Just to be on the safe side.

That's what Joseph was, the welfare plan for JC. Maybe we should take welfare recipients and star pair bonding them.

 

[THE_DEVIL]

I'm consistent.

The list of government funded entities I would like to see unfunded is almost limitless.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

That's what Joseph was, the welfare plan for JC. Maybe we should take welfare recipients and star pair bonding them.

Well, we all know that what's wrong with the high rate of unwed teenage mothers is the unwed part.

Forced marriages should do wonders for fixing what's wrong with America.

 

[naturalmwa]

Well, we all know that what's wrong with the high rate of unwed teenage mothers is the unwed part.

Forced marriages should do wonders for fixing what's wrong with America.

And now we see the true purpose behind SSM.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

And now we see the true purpose behind SSM.

Wait a minute. Are you suggesting we should force unwed teenage mothers to marry other unwed teenage mothers?

 

[naturalmwa]

Wait a minute. Are you suggesting we should force unwed teenage mothers to marry other unwed teenage mothers?

Now we're thinking. Maybe in big poly groups for efficient child rearing. And while we are on the subject, how do you think the word rearing came to mean taking care of? Think about that for a moment.

 

[PhantomFlyer]

That's why they generally avoid the word personhood in these contexts.

They talk about life. Or human life. Or the unborn baby.

Notice how nobody talks about the unborn nursing home resident. But if unborn baby makes sense, why not that? And definitely nobody talks about the unborn rapist or unborn child abuser or unborn corrupt politician.

Probably because "personhood" is a legal term or philosophical concept. So, when the pro-life side tries to make the argument based on science (and you guys claim to be all about science) you protest that the argument is based on a legal/philosophical basis. Make up your mind. It's perfectly valid to make the argument talking about life, human life, etc. Personhood is a legal concept, but one doesn't have to legally define a fetus a person to argue the gov't should protect the life of the unborn. The reason the government should protect the fetus is we can't prove a fetus isn't a person. Hell, the government provides more protection/rights to the egg of an eagle than it does a fetus.

A fetus is a human being, it's more than just human life. A single cell in our body is human life, but not a human being. A human being is a subset of person, not the other way around. A person is one with a natural, inherent capacity for performing personal acts.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Now we're thinking. Maybe in big poly groups for efficient child rearing. And while we are on the subject, how do you think the word rearing came to mean taking care of? Think about that for a moment.

So you're saying gays are the real traditionalists. I mean missionary position is relatively new in evolutionary terms. As we all know if we saw the movie Quest for Fire.

 

[naturalmwa]

So you're saying gays are the real traditionalists. I mean missionary position is relatively new in evolutionary terms. As we all know if we saw the movie Quest for Fire.

I'm not sure I could back that up, but the Egyptions have a creation myth about masterbation so I don't see why I couldn't skip down that road for a ways.