ADVERTISEMENT

She's back! Katie Britt introduces the Scarlet Letter bill

330,000 out of 3 million is about 11%. I thought it would have been higher.
Those numbers are about 10 years old. So the values may be different now but I would imagine the percentages are still about the same. Basically about 1 out of every 9 women who go to Planned Parenthood do so for the purpose of getting an abortion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
Those numbers are about 10 years old. So the values may be different now but I would imagine the percentages are still about the same. Basically about 1 out of every 9 women who go to Planned Parenthood do so for the purpose of getting an abortion.
Agree with that - point I was trying to make was that there's alot of people who seem to think that abortion services is the ONLY thing that Planned Parenthood does.
 
Agree with that - point I was trying to make was that there's alot of people who seem to think that abortion services is the ONLY thing that Planned Parenthood does.
Sounds like you and I are on the same page here.

It’s a bit of an uneasy feeling, isn’t it? ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: sober_teacher


giphy.gif
 
The bill sounds just like the saying “we’re from the government and we’re here to help”. Just harmless, only good intentions…Sorry but if I’m of childbearing age it’s no regulatory agency’s business.
This is spot on. And once government thinks it's helping it's going to help even more and just wait, every mother will have to create an account and be tracked. If the mother doesn't do something the government requires she will be prosecuted if something happens to the baby. That's where the republican states want to get to (total control) and now they want it at the federal level. It's not about states rights, it's about extreme right rights.
 
Some of you people are so stupid.

It stuns me how easy people swallow propaganda.

Embarrassing.

Your mom should have swallowed your dad’s baby batter. Instead: we got you.

Anywho: you think the government should be steering pregnant women to “crisis pregnancy centers” that offer nothing but propaganda to pregnant women - and no actual healthcare?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ft254
I’m curious as to which part of this bill, with the limited information provided, all of those who posted above, are against?

It prohibits reference to ANY entity that performs abortions.

UIHC would not be legally allowed to include any information, if abortions are performed there. Which would pretty much eliminate ANY medical facility with an ObGyn clinic from providing links for pre-natal care.

You don't see a problem with this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: THE_DEVIL
It prohibits reference to ANY entity that performs abortions.

UIHC would not be legally allowed to include any information, if abortions are performed there. Which would pretty much eliminate ANY medical facility with an ObGyn clinic from providing links for pre-natal care.

You don't see a problem with this?
Convince me otherwise. This is a resource to women who plan to keep their baby full term. There is already ample govt resources and info available for abortions, is there not?

Why would you be against helping pregnant women who want to keep their baby?
 
Whole thing looks like anti abortion propaganda.

‘‘(I) Comprehensive information on alter-
5 natives to abortion.
6 ‘‘(J) Information about abortion risks, in-
7 cluding complications and failures.
8 ‘‘(K) Links to information on child devel-
9 opment from moment of conception."
 
Convince me otherwise. This is a resource to women who plan to keep their baby full term. There is already ample govt resources and info available for abortions, is there not?

Why would you be against helping pregnant women who want to keep their baby?
It's propaganda wagering that Trump will become the next president and install a whackjob as Secretary of Health who can turn the website into a Christian fascist paradise.
 
Actually you can. Ever heard of Meidas News? When the first sentence reads “creepy Katie Britt”, one would think to research the bill a bit more. But nah, that’s not the clickbait headline world we live in. I read the MTN report. No real mention of a national database of pregnant women in the opinion piece. As of this afternoon, it’s difficult to even find a copy of the bill online that isn’t a pain in the ass to read due to all the ads.

If somehow this bill creates some weird national database of pregnant women, then I’ll gladly come back and change my opinion.

Here’s the list of horrible things the bill would do. Which again, it’s rather difficult to find much info via Google search.

The MOMS Act would:

  • Establish Pregnancy.gov – a federal clearinghouse of resources available to expecting and postpartum moms, as well as those with young children.
    • This clearinghouse would increase access to adoption agencies, pregnancy resource centers, and other relevant public and private resources available to pregnant women within their zip code and surrounding areas.
    • As part of Pregnancy.gov, HHS would be required to include and maintain a national list of federal funding opportunities available to non-profit and healthcare entities for pregnancy support.
  • Improve access to pre- and post-natal resources.
    • This legislation would establish a grant program for non-profit entities to support, encourage, and assist women in carrying their pregnancies to term; and to care for their babies after birth.
    • It would also provide tools for pre-natal and post-natal telehealth appointments by instituting a grant program to purchase necessary medical equipment and technology in rural areas and other medically underserved areas.
  • Require states to apply child support obligations to the time period during pregnancy, if so requested by the mother.

I’m curious as to which part of this bill, with the limited information provided, all of those who posted above, are against? Or, is it another case of all Republicans are bad?

By the way, I approve of a national database of gun owners. I oppose a national database of pregnant women, if that’s really what this bill will establish.
There won't be actual medical experts making any of these decisions. By design the Secretary of Health and Human Services will be making these calls. And guess who appoints this person. The President. Zero percent chance Trump wouldn't install a crackpot at this position.
 
Convince me otherwise.
You won't be convinced of anything.

Legitimate pre-natal resources for medical hospitals and facilities, who do provide accurate information for women, will be excluded from this by providing abortions (necessary ones) to women who miscarry. And that information is critical to women who are having problem pregnancies, which is a very large number.
 
That's exactly what it is.

On taxpayer dollars.
Looks at this garbage. Notice that even talking about abortion options is prohibited even if you don't provide them. Hell if your clinic even has an affiliate that does anything involving abortion you are banned.

(2) INELIGIBLE ENTITIES.—An entity shall be
4 ineligible to receive a grant under this section if the
5 entity or any affiliate, subsidiary, successor, or clinic
6 thereof—
7 (A) performs, induces, refers for, or coun-
8 sels in favor of abortions; or
9 (B) provides financial support to any other
10 entity that conducts any activity described in
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Joes Place
That’s an intentionally deceptive statistic that Planned Parenthood likes to tout in order to downplay their role in providing abortions.

3% is the number PP officials like to toss around. 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 total number of 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 and doesn’t want to keep the baby. Naturally, the first thing clinic workers do is give her a pregnancy test to confirm. That's one service. They also screen her for STDs. That’s a separate, second service. The pregnancy test is positive so the next thing they do is sit down with her to counsel her and outline her options. That's the third service. After mulling it over, the woman decides to terminate the pregnancy. Finally, the actual abortion is performed. That's the fourth service.

One woman went to PP for the singular purpose of having an abortion. But, for statistical purposes, abortion only counted as 25% of what the clinic did in her case.
Keep telling us what's best for women, white male.
 
You won't be convinced of anything.

Legitimate pre-natal resources for medical hospitals and facilities, who do provide accurate information for women, will be excluded from this by providing abortions (necessary ones) to women who miscarry. And that information is critical to women who are having problem pregnancies, which is a very large number.
How do women access this information today? Is that going away?
 
😆 thanks for the laughs this Saturday evening. Always deliver.
You’re welcome, dumbass.

Here’s a fun little exercise for you if you’re still looking for entertainment - point out specifically where in my post #36 I told you “what’s best for women.”

Hint - it’s an impossible assignment because at no point did I tell you “what’s best for women.” But feel free to waste as much time as you like trying to find it.

And don’t forget to call an Uber tonight. You don’t want another DUI on your record.
 
The same can be said about every single one of your posts.
OH THAT'S A GOOD ONE FROM DA HAWKEYE HITMAN!!!!!! LOOK AT HIM OWNING YOU CUCK LIBTAHDS WHO WORSHIP ALL OF DA MARXIST COMMUNISTS LIKE DA BERNIE SANDAHS AND DA SQUAD AND DA CHE GUEVARA!!!!!!!! HITMAN BOUT TO CRACK OPEN DA ICE COLD CAN OF SPRITE AND GUZZLE DAT REFRESHING FREEDOM JUICE AFTER OWNING YOU LOONY LIBS ON DA MESSAGE BOARDS!!!!!!!!!
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT