By: Valerie Ryan
magine that. According to a January Guttmatcher Institute report for
2006 Public Funding for Family Planning, Sterilization and abortion
services, the term "family planning" does not include having a family.
It does include, however:
[C]lient counseling and education, contraceptive drugs and devices, related diagnostic tests (e.g., pregnancy, Pap, HIV, other STIs) and treatment after diagnosis (e.g., urinary tract infections and STIs other than HIV). Whenever possible, we separated out services that are not part of the standard package provided to clients seeking contraceptives, such as outreach and education activities, sterilization services (both of which we report separately), and administrative expenses....
What was this report about? It was about our tax money going toward "family planning" for low income people.
Now, I have no problems helping low income people get needed reproductive health care such as PAPs, STD testing, other diagnostic tests and treatments if needed, prenatal and postnatal care.
However, this report indicated we are spending a good deal of money for non-medical reasons.
Here are a few highlights:
- Public expenditures for "family planning" client services totaled $1.85 Billion in 2006.
- Medicaid accounted for 71% of the total spending; The rest from other government programs such as Title X and different state appropriations.
- 6 states (CA, KY, NY, OR, PA and WA) accounted for half of all Medicaid expenditures, yet Medicaid was the single largest source of funding for 41 states.
- By the middle of 2006, 14 states had initiated income-based expansion programs providing family planning services under Medicaid to individuals with incomes well above the cut-off for Medicaid eligibility overall.
- From 2001-2006 Medicaid spending in 8 of the states with income-based expansion programs increased by 57%, compared to 18% among states without expansions.
- During 1994-2006 Medicaid spending in the 14 states with expansion programs tripled. Spending went from $252 Million to $759 Million.
- For 2006 $43 million was spent for outreach and education activities.
- In 2006 $116 million was spent of sterilization services, 97% were spent through Medicaid. Eight states account for half of all reported spending.
- The federal and state governments funded over 177,000 abortion procedures which cost $89 Million dollars. 191 procedures were paid for by the federal government the rest by the individual states.
(This means the government spent appx $500 for each abortion. Guttmatcher 2007 abortion costs report said that the average cost of an abortion is $372; also appx 21% of abortions are paid for by the government.) - Over 99% of publicly funded abortion procedures occurred in 17 states that have nonrestrictive policies.
- Medicaid agencies in some states dedicate their own funds to provide services to groups of people, such as many immigrants, who are barred from federally reimbursed Medicaid. (Medicaid pays for Immigrants who are here legally.)
- 53,381 abortions were from 4 states that have nonrestrictive policies on government funding for abortions
- 123,272 abortions were from 13 states that are court ordered to pay for "medically necessary abortions." (Life/health of mother; gross fetal deformity; rape and incest make up 7% of abortions according to Guttmatcher. However, this number represents appx 14% of abortions.)
- 54 abortions were from 27 states that provide funding for abortion in cases of rape, incest and life of mother.
- 697 abortions were from 6 states that provide funding for abortion in cases of rape, incest and life/health of mother.
Comments:
this is off topic, however a case extremely similar to this one just popped up on my local news station. It seems that, like the one in this (who seems to have won a discrimination case) is also fighting back and trying to regain her job. The mention I use the older link (on top of the fact that I cant find a copy of the newer story) is that in this case, pro-lifers BACKED the woman, and said she SHOULD keep her job because, though it was against the teachings of the church, she was setting a good example by keeping the child even though it was unplanned. Seeing as how this generated discussion earlier in a coach supporting hillary, I figured that a more recent example would generate more thought and discussion on the topic.
Posted by: Dan at February 12, 2008 5:05 PMscratch that, another woman had one a case in NY, and others have failed. So essentially the issue is still up in the air in a fashion.
Posted by: Dan at February 12, 2008 5:06 PMThank you, Dan! I hope we can find the newer story because that would be a great discussion.
Posted by: Bethany at February 12, 2008 5:07 PMThe PC Lexicon:
1. Family planning: Preventing yourself from having a family
2. Reproductive health: Tampering with your reproductive organs so as to prevent reproduction
3. Planned Parenthood: Planning never to be a parent
Posted by: Christina at February 12, 2008 5:40 PMGreat!
Paying for contraceptives, abortions and sterilizations is WAY cheaper than paying for everyone's "oopsie" offspring.
I have no problem with my tax dollah$ going in that direction.
The pictures of the bloody fingers make my stomach turn. It looks like menstrual blood. That makes me feel sick, periods. The thought of my uterus sloughing off its lining is disturbing to me.
Posted by: Jess at February 12, 2008 6:07 PMIts making me shake I can't look at it. I don't have a problem with gore or blood, just menstrual blood.
Posted by: Jess at February 12, 2008 6:09 PMJess,
I'm with you on that one!
That picture did throw me off guard and turn my stomach a bit!
...and now that you mention it...
Posted by: Anonymous at February 12, 2008 6:13 PMI know I didn't have any problem disecting animal things in anatomy but yeah I get dizzy when I look at a used tampon even if it's my own.
Posted by: Jess at February 12, 2008 6:16 PMJess,
Don't look, then!
Just pull the string & flush!
Isn't that wierd, though, how we always need to "look" at what came out...like something freakishly wierd is going to be on it one day? It is gross.
Posted by: Anonymous at February 12, 2008 6:21 PMThen what happens if I really don't have my period and all of a sudden I'm 8 months pregnant?
Posted by: Jess at February 12, 2008 6:46 PMJess,
Then we'd all have to get together & throw you the BIGGEST BABY SHOWER EVER!!!!
Aw awesome dude! Don't give me any crazy idea, it may get in the way of my new dream of becoming a librarian.
Posted by: Jess at February 12, 2008 7:17 PMSometimes I wish I would have chosen that as a career. I can't stand noise, so at this point of my life, it looks like a dream job to me. People don't tend to be so cranky in libraries, either. I mean, if you can help them find their book, they are soooooo grateful! (and the late fees arn't something to whine about, either!).
A vegan librarian. hmmmmmm
Posted by: Anonymous at February 12, 2008 7:29 PMBetter then working in that stupid restaurant as a bus-girl. Amazing money but it was horrible. I always smelled like meat, the fish makes me break out in hives, old men touched me, kids throw their food and someone tried to stab me with a fork.
Posted by: Jess at February 12, 2008 7:34 PMI don't see where there is any significant content or controversy in this posting. Family planning means having the knowledge and tools to avoid conceiving until you are ready to have children. This is desirable, as it prevents abortions of unwanted fetuses, prevents unwanted children from being raised in environments which statistically result in lower rates of achievement and higher rates of criminal behavior, and helps keep the population in check, an increasingly important goal as we outstrip the planet's ability to support us. Thus, government funding is devoted toward it.
The article does not mention two important facts: Title X funding pays for family planning, but NOT abortion, and thanks to Henry Hyde, Medicaid pays for abortion only in cases of rape, incest, and life endangerment, unless further coverage is decided on by the individual states.
If you have a problem with federal funding of birth control and abortions only in case of rape, incest, and life endangerment, then you are an extremist outside the mainstream, and there isn't much more to discuss.
Posted by: Ray at February 12, 2008 7:40 PMRay,
You're more than welcome to disuss gross periods with me & Jess, then! LOL
Jess,
That was my first job-busgirl! I didn't mind it much, though, because I was only 15, me & my best friend got the job at the same time, and I met my first boyfriend there. He was a cook.
The most embarassing part of it was when me & my friend "cold-called" to see if we could get a job there. We asked the owner "do you have any positions available?" Needless to say, dirty old man got such a huge "kick" out of the question, that he hired us on the spot!
The un-eaten food was pretty gross to clean up, too!
Are you really serious about becoming a librarian?
Posted by: Anonymous at February 12, 2008 7:46 PMFamily planning: Preventing yourself from having a family
Nope, just that it's preferable for many people to plan their families if they want one in the first place.
Posted by: Doug at February 12, 2008 8:48 PMJess --
So you want to be a librarian? That's what I am, LB is short for Library Betty. These days libraries aren't and don't want to be quiet places anymore -- we want to buzz a bit with activity.
If you want to avoid cranky people, choose carefully --- a public library is a cranky magnet somedays. That is unless you are a children's librarian.
Posted by: LB at February 12, 2008 8:58 PMDoug,
If everybody is doing such a fine job of "planning" their families, why are there so many un"planned" pregnancies? Somethin' ain't a workin'...
Posted by: mk at February 12, 2008 9:08 PMLB,
I had no idea! Sounds like a rockin' place now. I haven't been to one in ages, I'll have to go check it out!
Ray -
Here is the point of the article.
According to Guttmatcher - family planning doesn't include when a woman chooses to have a child. Where are the funds for prenatal care? postnatal care? and everything in between?
Why does contraception, sterilization and abortion get a higher priority then other medical problems/procedures? If you go on the federal medicaid website there are restrictions on income level for free vaccines, restrictions on treatment of certain kinds of cancer, restrictions on getting a surgery that would cure faster but more expensive then medication for years - all the while the person is in pain. Why do we cover someones sexual behavior when there isn't a medical problem? Why does the government have to bail irresponsible people out all the time, all the while the taxpayers are paying for it?
I have no problems with the states that help pay for abortions in cases of life of mother, rape and incest. True medical problems. But I draw the line at elective abortion being paid for by the government. It's called responsibility - take some!
I am also in shock that so much money is going out for abortions and sterilizations while so little money is going towards education and outreach programs. Only 43 million out of 1.85 billion went to education.
Not to mention the fact that the goverment was overcharged for the abortions that they did pay for. also, the government paid for appx 21% of the abortions in 2006. Abortions for medical reasons only made up about 7 - 8% of the abortions that year.
you said:
"The article does not mention two important facts: Title X funding pays for family planning, but NOT abortion, and thanks to Henry Hyde, Medicaid pays for abortion only in cases of rape, incest, and life endangerment, unless further coverage is decided on by the individual states."
Title X was mentioned in the article. They only accounted for 12% of the total spending. Why would Title X have to pay for abortions when medicaid paid for more than 177,000?
Also, if you had read the end you would have seen that 17 states pay for more than just life of mother, rape/incest.
The majority of abortions paid by medicare is by the individual states and not federal - which I did note in the article. However, the more money a state pays on this, the more money that state will need to take from the federal government to make up the difference. OR they just raise the taxes of the people in that state.
I know that you (and others) think it is our responsiblity to take care of the irresponsibility of others. I think the money should go to true medical problems - cancer, emergency surgery, pain treatments, depression, back injuries...etc..... These are things that are restricted in medicaid.....they go by income and income only. But not with family planning - anything goes then.
Posted by: valerie at February 12, 2008 9:18 PMYes I would love to get a job at our local library. The main reason was it was the only place within bike riding distance plus I would love to get people as excited about life as I am.
Posted by: Jess at February 12, 2008 10:28 PMJess --
You sound like a good candidate! Libraries are much more about working with people than books. (It's our little secret). The new crop of librarians I meet are really doing some exciting things with technology and people.
Your comment about thinking pregnancy would hurt your career as a librarian, I know you were kidding about it. But in fact, being a single mom didn't kill my career. I discovered my unplanned pregnancy in my last semester of grad school and have managed to have a pretty good career all along.
Posted by: LB at February 12, 2008 10:42 PMFF, you're not addressing the Orwellian way that the Left calls things the oppostite of what they are. Why are "reproductive rights" all about refraining from reproducing? Why is "family planning" all about not having a family? Why is Planned Parenthood specifically there to serve people who are NOT planning parenthood at all?
It's as if a music store was called "Blessed Silence" or a program to build dams was called "Let the River Flow Free".
Posted by: Christina at February 12, 2008 11:40 PMIf everybody is doing such a fine job of "planning" their families, why are there so many un"planned" pregnancies? Somethin' ain't a workin'...
MK, that's just it - not everybody plans their families as well as they could. For some people it's not an issue, but for some it is, and within the latter group are those who could stand to do a better job planning, with or without PP's assistance.
Posted by: Doug at February 13, 2008 12:52 AMChristina: It's as if a music store was called "Blessed Silence" or a program to build dams was called "Let the River Flow Free".
No, both of those would be being anti-choice; against the choice.
If one wants "silence" or for nobody to have kids, then one is not Pro-Choice.
If one wants "no dams on rivers" or for nobody to have abortions, then one is not Pro-Choice.
Looks to me like Hillary is getting pretty well behind the mathematical 8-ball here in thie Democratic Primary deal....
Doug
Posted by: Doug at February 13, 2008 12:54 AM"54 abortions were from 27 states that provide funding for abortion in cases of rape, incest and life of mother."
That is an average of 2 abortions per year per state for the poor in what some folks would say are the situations that women would most likely choose abortion.
Hmm.
How many arguments have we heard about these women who are so desperate because they were victims or their lives were in danger and are poor etc, etc.
Uh huh, 2 women per state per year fit that description.
Interesting.
Posted by: hippie at February 13, 2008 1:07 AM*Sighs* I worked at a small community library for almost 2 yrs as a children's librarian assistant and loved it. Then I got married and moved, and none of the libraries down here are hiring. I miss my job at the library :-(
Posted by: Rachael at February 13, 2008 5:23 AMDoug, shes not too far behind though. Time to make calls to Wisconsin and (if one is up to it) Hawaii. Then we got to GOTV like crazy in Texas (where current rules favor Obama) and Ohio. If Hillary wins there by small margins, shes done for.
Posted by: Dan at February 13, 2008 5:35 AMwhat about superdelegates though? anyone know what the status is on that?
Posted by: prettyinpink at February 13, 2008 8:37 AMDoug,
MK, that's just it - not everybody plans their families as well as they could. For some people it's not an issue, but for some it is, and within the latter group are those who could stand to do a better job planning, with or without PP's assistance.
And for the poor planners? What, so abortion is like the great delete button? Just hit "UNDO"? Condom broke? Here, have an eraser?
Posted by: mk at February 13, 2008 11:19 AMJust what kind of 'education' do people NEED when they are ready to start a family, in order to get pregnant?
Posted by: TexasRed at February 13, 2008 12:02 PMTexasred -
"Just what kind of 'education' do people NEED when they are ready to start a family, in order to get pregnant? "
Proper nutrition, what kind of supplements are best to prepare the body for pregnancy. What to expect while pregnant. What to do in case of bleeding or spotting after confirming your pregnant. Before pregnancy woman should be thinking about breast feeding or the bottle. Cloth diapers or disposable. What to look for in a good OB/GYN and what to avoid. what kind of childbirth plan would be best for you. There are tons of education that people need before getting pregnant. Unfortunately all the information people get is how NOT to get pregnant.
Posted by: valerie at February 13, 2008 1:49 PMpip, with "projected" supers he is ahead.
However, with the current climate, supers are likely to jump ship for anyone who gains enough momentum and enough pledged delegates (at this point Obama) Others are simply planning to vote with their districts.
So unless one is forced out of the race, it may be awhile before we know for sure
In other news I've started listening to the Audacity of Hope. Amazing.
I have a family.
I use contraception.
Oh, but I guess my family doesn't count, because I'm not open to the idea of having more kids than I can afford.
Posted by: reality at February 13, 2008 3:24 PMnice dan! I'll put it on my reading list.
Posted by: prettyinpink at February 13, 2008 5:18 PMHere's a joke: Dracula goes into a bar and asks for a cup of hot water. When he gets it, he pulls out a tampon and dips it in the hot water. The bartender asks him, what are you doing? Dracula replies: making tea!
Posted by: SoMG at February 13, 2008 5:53 PM(It's a used tampon.)
Posted by: SoMG at February 13, 2008 5:54 PMEw SoMG. I have often threatened to rip out my used tampon and throw it at people.
SoMG are you a guy or a girl? How old are? What does SoMG stand for? Send Bethany your picture please : )
"MK, that's just it - not everybody plans their families as well as they could. For some people it's not an issue, but for some it is, and within the latter group are those who could stand to do a better job planning, with or without PP's assistance."
And for the poor planners? What, so abortion is like the great delete button? Just hit "UNDO"? Condom broke? Here, have an eraser?
Yes, sometimes a remedy for the unwanted situation is sought, as with many such things.
Posted by: Doug at February 13, 2008 6:24 PMwhat about superdelegates though? anyone know what the status is on that?
PIP, hard for me to believe that they will ignore the popular vote, which favors Obama even more than his delegate count. Additionally, don't you think that he would have an easier time versus McCain? They pretty much know he would, IMO, and they won't forget that in their deciding.
Doug
Posted by: Doug at February 13, 2008 6:27 PMJess:
SoMG are you a guy or a girl?
Yes.
How old are?
Old enough to know better.
What does SoMG stand for?
Spirit of Martin Gardner. Google him.
Send Bethany your picture please
Request denied.
Doug, I guess you're right!
Posted by: prettyinpink at February 13, 2008 10:32 PMSoMG,
Not all abortionists are evil. Some are actually "doctors who learn the procedure for the purpose of protecting a woman's health, say D&E on a baby that is already dead in the womb etc.... But the ones that are just professional baby killers aren't even doctors. They are scum.
Obama is a joke. If he wins the nomination that is McCains best shot at the presidency. If Obama had been president on 9/11 we would still be fighting AlQueda, only they'd be blowing us to bits here in America. Fortunately for the safety of our citizens most people care more about reality then being a part of Obama's pipe dream. He does ave a great appeal with the young though, cause they still trust the world and don't really believe there are a lot more terrorists looking to hurt America.
BTW- There is only one candidate that fits my requirements. The only one who is "consistent" in his pro-life stance, Ron Paul. He is the only one who is both against the war and against abortion.
Posted by: Truthseeker at February 13, 2008 11:55 PM"Truthseeker", you wrote: "But the ones that are just professional baby killers aren't even doctors."
If by "baby killers" you mean abortion docs, you are wrong. To legally do abortions in the USA you must hold either an MD or a DO, both of which are doctors.
"They are scum."
That hasn't been my experience and unless you are a professional I will bet that I have interacted with more of them than you have. Where I was, I found the abortion docs to be very conscientious, very professional. They tended to be control freaks.
Posted by: SoMG at February 14, 2008 12:32 AMBy the way, I agree with you that Obama is weaker than Hillary Clinton and untested. However, Ohio is strongly predicted to go democratic (Intrade price for OHIO.DEM.2008 is $75 and has been forever, regardless of who was frontrunner) and without Ohio the Republicans cannot win.
Personally I'll be happy with either Obama or Clinton, both are co-sponsors of the Freedom of Choice Act.
Posted by: SoMG at February 14, 2008 12:46 AMSoMG,
Judging by your answers I'd say you're... God?
Does this mean I get three wishes?
Posted by: Jess at February 14, 2008 1:35 AMYes, sometimes a remedy for the unwanted situation is sought, as with many such things.
"REMEDY FOR AN UNWANTED SITUATION"
Posted by: mk at February 14, 2008 6:01 AMThat hasn't been my experience and unless you are a professional I will bet that I have interacted with more of them than you have. Where I was, I found the abortion docs to be very conscientious, very professional. They tended to be control freaks.
Posted by: SoMG at February 14, 2008 12:32 AM
Well of course they are...(emphasis on "freaks").
Posted by: Janet at February 14, 2008 6:53 AMRay says: "If you have a problem with federal funding of birth control and abortions only in case of rape, incest, and life endangerment, then you are an extremist outside the mainstream, and there isn't much more to discuss."
Gee, Ray..... sounds like you've found a convenient excuse not to debate anyone! Just call them an "extremist" and say you won't debate with extremists! What a flaky cop-out, Ray!
(btw, I have a problem with the federal funding you mention, so I guess I'm an "extremist" too!)
Posted by: Doyle at February 14, 2008 7:56 AM"He is the only one who is both against the war and against abortion."
Yeah, but have you seen his war plan v. Obama's? Look and then tell me Obama is soft on terrorists.
Posted by: prettyinpink at February 14, 2008 8:40 AMSoMG -
"If by "baby killers" you mean abortion docs, you are wrong. To legally do abortions in the USA you must hold either an MD or a DO, both of which are doctors."
Of course the description the CDC has for an "abortion" and who can "perform" them is a bit different.
"Legal induced abortion was defined as a procedure, performed by a licensed physician or someone acting under the supervision of a licensed physician, that was intended
to terminate a suspected or known intrauterine pregnancy and to produce a nonviable fetus at any gestational age"
The licensed physician only has to have their name on the door and not necessarily in the building or in the city.
And then, when this licensed physician gets investigated all the PC'ers rally around the abortionist and nothing happens.
Abortion - the only legal way to malpractice medicine.
Reality says she can't afford more kids so she uses contraceptives????
Reality check here reality, You can still get pregnant when taking contraceptives, and the baby still "counts".
Abortion - the only legal way to malpractice medicine.
Posted by: valerie at February 14, 2008 9:57 AM
Q. How do you know when you have a malpractice case against an abortionist?
A. The baby survives.
SoMG: Spirit of Martin Gardner
Well I'll be dogged. SoMG, that rocks - I remember his columns in 'Scientific American" while I was growing up.
Posted by: Doug at February 14, 2008 5:23 PM"REMEDY FOR AN UNWANTED SITUATION"
Yes, MK. Granted that it can be messy, yucky, bloody, gory, etc., and that many people think it's sad.
Posted by: Doug at February 14, 2008 5:26 PMYes, sometimes a remedy for the unwanted situation is sought, as with many such things.
"REMEDY FOR AN UNWANTED SITUATION"
Posted by: mk at February 14, 2008 6:01 AM
........................................................
Reminds me of claymation mk.
On a Sunday, after church, my sister and I were riding home with our minister and his wife for Sunday dinner. We came upon an accident scene that Capt Larsen thought he might be of some use. We pulled up to see a woman laying in the middle of the road. She was on fire and quite dead. Yet her arms and legs were twitching wildly. Her husband was also ablaze. He was alive and screaming hideously.
A month later, driving into Chicago, I passed another accident. A man's torso was hanging out of the door of his truck. His head was laying on the ground.
Two months later, I watched my father die of cancer. Gasping for air. Mad as can be and intensely worried about those he was leaving behind.
Do you really think that the sight of a dead fetus that no one knew, knew no one, had no emotional attachments and never felt life should be something to get all upset about?
And yes, I feel for the departed. I don't waste my emotions for that which fails to arrive.
Reality says she can't afford more kids so she uses contraceptives????
Reality check here reality, You can still get pregnant when taking contraceptives, and the baby still "counts".
Posted by: Truthseeker at February 14, 2008 10:58 AM
.................................................
Not according to census takers.
Posted by: Sally at February 14, 2008 7:38 PMSally,
WOW. I'm so sorry you've had to experience those horrors. God bless you.
Posted by: Janet at February 14, 2008 8:26 PMSally said:
***********
Not according to census takers.
Posted by: Sally at February 14, 2008 7:38 PM
***********
Oh Sally, but mine counted. Dead in the womb at five months. Delivered, cremated, and buried. And registered in the churchs records. It does count.
SoMG,
Just cause your a control freak doesn't mean your not scum. People who make their living killing human life are scum.
Doug,
People rob businesses and they aree afraid of getting caught so they round up everybody in the store and kill them. That is their "remedy for an unwanted situation. Yucky, messy, bloody, gory, but a remedy for an unwanted situation.
Where do you come up with this logic?
Sally said:
********
Do you really think that the sight of a dead fetus that no one knew, knew no one, had no emotional attachments and never felt life should be something to get all upset about?
And yes, I feel for the departed. I don't waste my emotions for that which fails to arrive.
Posted by: Sally at February 14, 2008 7:37 PM
********
Sally, the baby did feel life. WoW, so you don't think baby's are alive when they are in the womb? How do you convince yourself of that? And it is not only possible, but it is normal to get emotionally attached to a baby in the womb. And you put the blame on the baby for "failing to arrive", but he/she was already arrived since the point of conception and it wasn't his fault he was killed as he/she was born. The fault here lies with the the mother's
decision to walk into that House of Horrors and submit herself to the abortionist and his sacrament of Satan.
Truthseeker, I am so very sorry to hear about your loss.
Posted by: Bethany at February 15, 2008 7:50 AMDo you really think that the sight of a dead fetus that no one knew, knew no one, had no emotional attachments and never felt life should be something to get all upset about?
And yes, I feel for the departed. I don't waste my emotions for that which fails to arrive.
Sally, I naturally bonded with my babies who I lost through miscarriage. It is a natural thing to bond with your baby while pregnant. It is abnormal not to. I knew they were there, I had emotional attachments, and my unborn babies did feel life before they died. And this is precisely why I was upset (understatement of the year) when I lost them.
Posted by: Bethany at February 15, 2008 7:53 AMSally, the baby did feel life. WoW, so you don't think baby's are alive when they are in the womb? How do you convince yourself of that?
If a lie is repeated often enough, loud enough, and long enough, people will believe it.
Posted by: Bethany at February 15, 2008 7:55 AMPeople rob businesses and they aree afraid of getting caught so they round up everybody in the store and kill them. That is their "remedy for an unwanted situation. Yucky, messy, bloody, gory, but a remedy for an unwanted situation.
Where do you come up with this logic?
Truthseeker, being logical is seeing that the people in the store are not inside the body of a person, first of all. And, the morality of what you describe isn't really even at issue.
On both counts, abortion is far, far different.
Posted by: Doug at February 15, 2008 3:33 PMOf course abortion is far different. But your analogy was the messy, bloody, gory killing of a human to remedy a situation. They both fit that description and they are both disgusting.
Posted by: Truthseeker at February 15, 2008 10:27 PM