Quote:
Originally Posted by jewels
Sure, we can sustain another few hours of our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan with the annual PP funding.
Nice trade-off indeed.
|
That is not actually the trade-off. If we question the cost benefit ratio of the war, we can do that on a stand alone basis - just like we can look at the cost benefit ratio of dollars spent on Planned Parenthood.
---------- Post added at 04:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:58 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
The stories of 40 year old men dropping off 14 year old girls for abortions with no questions asked, if in fact, it occurs at all, is a right wing smear attempt at Planned Parenthood to divert attention from the real services provided to those in need.
And yes, w/o these services, the costs to taxpayers down the road, are likely to be far higher...in the form of medicaid costs, welfare costs, etc.
|
What I suggest is that we take the time for a careful look at the issue. If what you say is true I can support the funding. However, my gut (I have not seen any objective analysis), tells me that at the very least some procedural changes are required. With minors, I believe a parent, guardian, or court has to be involved at the very least.
---------- Post added at 04:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:04 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
It's a shame the common decency argument isn't enough, you also have to back it up with the fact that it's ultimately cheaper. Reminds me of the torture debate.
|
What fact????
Give a source. Let's look at the data. Let's look at the assumptions used. Let's look at the methodology of the study behind the numbers given. I even question the study done by the economist who did the Freakomics documentary that should cause a conservative to support the funding, and i intend to look at their source data.
A person you agree with can pull a number out of thin air and you accept it without question, and call it a fact - is that how you do it?