Indiana GOP Senator: Cutting Planned Parenthood Funding Will 'Increase Abortions'

[AllieBaba]

You know, there is an simple solution to end abortion in the United States complete. If people stop having premarital & extramarital sex, then there won't be any need for abortion will there?

Simple.

It would eliminate all STDs within a generation as well.

Shame so many people think they are not subject to the natural laws of the world.

Or we can end religion and out dated thinking like yours will eventually die out.

And how will that affect the spread of STDs and the abortion rate?

In other words, logical fallacy.

 

[Avatar4321]

Is it somehow significant that the senator's comment needed to be labeled GOP? Am I the only one who has a problem making a GOP comment somehow more significant than anybody else's comment? Most especially when the subject should have nothing to do with partisanship or ideology but should focus on whether the USA has the money to fund Planned Parenthood or any other worthy organization?

Who gets to decide what organizations are worthy to be funded and which ones are not?

Who does the measurement to determine which/what organizations do the most good with the money they receive?

How about we recognize that the treasury is bare and no matter how worthy an organization is, we do not have the money to fund it at this time?

And if Planned Parenthood is necessary to prevent abortion, God help us all.

There is a clear standard to decide which organizations are worthy of being funded and which are not: Is it a Constitutional responsibility or otherwise authorized by the Constitution? If not, then stop funding it.

Oh I agree, but the leftists/socialists can always find a 9th Circuit Judge or some such to corrupt the general welfare clause to justify constitutional payola which is what it is.

It would be wonderful if we could fund every worthy organization out there, but it simply cannot be done without corrupting both the benefactors and the beneficiaries of the people's money. And even if we could, there is no money. The U.S. government doesn't have enough money to fund a corner lemonade stand.

It's time to stop spending on EVERYTHING that does not absolutely have to be funded until the debt is paid off and the budget is balanced. And that I think is going to require a constitutional amendment to accomplish. I would very much like to write the wording of it.

IMHO if they were worthy organizations, they wouldn't need government assistance.

 

[Avatar4321]

You know, there is an simple solution to end abortion in the United States complete. If people stop having premarital & extramarital sex, then there won't be any need for abortion will there?

Simple.

It would eliminate all STDs within a generation as well.

Shame so many people think they are not subject to the natural laws of the world.

Or we can end religion and out dated thinking like yours will eventually die out.

And how will that affect the spread of STDs and the abortion rate?

In other words, logical fallacy.

It won't affect it positively, if at all.

But then, he has issues with personal responsibility and actually learning from the wisdom of the centuries.

 

[Foxfyre]

There is a clear standard to decide which organizations are worthy of being funded and which are not: Is it a Constitutional responsibility or otherwise authorized by the Constitution? If not, then stop funding it.

Oh I agree, but the leftists/socialists can always find a 9th Circuit Judge or some such to corrupt the general welfare clause to justify constitutional payola which is what it is.

It would be wonderful if we could fund every worthy organization out there, but it simply cannot be done without corrupting both the benefactors and the beneficiaries of the people's money. And even if we could, there is no money. The U.S. government doesn't have enough money to fund a corner lemonade stand.

It's time to stop spending on EVERYTHING that does not absolutely have to be funded until the debt is paid off and the budget is balanced. And that I think is going to require a constitutional amendment to accomplish. I would very much like to write the wording of it.

IMHO if they were worthy organizations, they wouldn't need government assistance.

This is very true. And if our leftist brethren were truly humanitarian, they would not want the federal treasury to be bare, would not want their children and grandchildren obligated for generations for the consequences of today's payola. And if they were truly supportive of organizatons like Planned Parenthood, they would be digging into their own pockets to fund it or would be out conducting fund raisers to raise whatever money was needed.

Charity is not giving somebody else's money.

 

[RDD_1210]

Maybe you should read what she posted.

I did.

She is suggesting that it's unnatural to have premarital or extramarital sex.

She suggested no such thing.

Incorrect as she, in fact did.

You are better than that. At least I thought so. But lately you are becoming more and more partisan. Shame.

By the very definition of the word, it is not possible for me to be partisan as I belong to no political party.

I don't care what you are registered as. We can clearly see what you are. Don't be ashamed.

 

[RDD_1210]

You know, there is an simple solution to end abortion in the United States complete. If people stop having premarital & extramarital sex, then there won't be any need for abortion will there?

Simple.

It would eliminate all STDs within a generation as well.

Shame so many people think they are not subject to the natural laws of the world.

Or we can end religion and out dated thinking like yours will eventually die out.

And how will that affect the spread of STDs and the abortion rate?

In other words, logical fallacy.

Where did I say ending religion will have an affect on STD's or the abortion rate? I don't think I did. I said it would end close minded thinking such as hers.

 

[Luissa]

You know, there is an simple solution to end abortion in the United States complete. If people stop having premarital & extramarital sex, then there won't be any need for abortion will there?

Simple.

It would eliminate all STDs within a generation as well.

Shame so many people think they are not subject to the natural laws of the world.

That would involve changing human genetics, so to speak.

Premarital and extramarital sex have been going on since marriage was invented. You live in a fantasy world, if you think you are going to stop either.

 

[Dr.Drock]

You know, there is an simple solution to end abortion in the United States complete. If people stop having premarital & extramarital sex, then there won't be any need for abortion will there?

Simple.

It would eliminate all STDs within a generation as well.

Shame so many people think they are not subject to the natural laws of the world.

That would involve changing human genetics, so to speak.

Premarital and extramarital sex have been going on since marriage was invented. You live in a fantasy world, if you think you are going to stop either.

Yeah I think he just had a bad choice of words. If we were doing what was natural we'd all be having unprotected sex and there'd be babies popping out by the litter.

 

[RDD_1210]

You know, there is an simple solution to end abortion in the United States complete. If people stop having premarital & extramarital sex, then there won't be any need for abortion will there?

Simple.

It would eliminate all STDs within a generation as well.

Shame so many people think they are not subject to the natural laws of the world.

That would involve changing human genetics, so to speak.

Premarital and extramarital sex have been going on since marriage was invented. You live in a fantasy world, if you think you are going to stop either.

Yeah I think he just had a bad choice of words. If we were doing what was natural we'd all be having unprotected sex and there'd be babies popping out by the litter.

No, you don't know Avatar then.

 

[Avatar4321]

There was nothing wrong in my choice of words. It's not my fault that you simply don't understand that choices have consequences and the only real way to avoid bad consequences is to avoid bad choices. You are fighting nature when you pretend that your choices don't have consequence.

You don't have to change genetics. You simply have to accept that the choices you make are your responsibility, that you are the only one who can make your choices, and then choose to make better choices.

Or do you honestly think that you have no choices in your life?

 

[Avatar4321]

This is very true. And if our leftist brethren were truly humanitarian, they would not want the federal treasury to be bare, would not want their children and grandchildren obligated for generations for the consequences of today's payola. And if they were truly supportive of organizatons like Planned Parenthood, they would be digging into their own pockets to fund it or would be out conducting fund raisers to raise whatever money was needed.

Charity is not giving somebody else's money.

Their goal isn't charity. It's Robbery and power.

 

[RDD_1210]

There was nothing wrong in my choice of words. It's not my fault that you simply don't understand that choices have consequences and the only real way to avoid bad consequences is to avoid bad choices. You are fighting nature when you pretend that your choices don't have consequence.

You don't have to change genetics. You simply have to accept that the choices you make are your responsibility, that you are the only one who can make your choices, and then choose to make better choices.

Or do you honestly think that you have no choices in your life?

You tried equating sex outside and before marriage as not natural. Did you perhaps make a poor choice in words when using the term natural? Or do you still think that premarital sex and extramarital sex isn't part of our genetic nature?

 

[Avatar4321]

There was nothing wrong in my choice of words. It's not my fault that you simply don't understand that choices have consequences and the only real way to avoid bad consequences is to avoid bad choices. You are fighting nature when you pretend that your choices don't have consequence.

You don't have to change genetics. You simply have to accept that the choices you make are your responsibility, that you are the only one who can make your choices, and then choose to make better choices.

Or do you honestly think that you have no choices in your life?

You tried equating sex outside and before marriage as not natural. Did you perhaps make a poor choice in words when using the term natural? Or do you still think that premarital sex and extramarital sex isn't part of our genetic nature?

Repeating the same stupid and false argument about what I said isnt going to suddenly make it true.

Natural law dictates that choices have consequences. I haven't mentioned sex in regards to nature. The fact that continually refuse to acknowledge that rather than adress the fact that the laws of nature dictate that actions have consequences tells me that at best, you have a complete disconnect with reality, and at worst you are attempting to delibrately ignore the basis of the argument. Which is it? A

And no. There is nothing in our genetics that states that we are under obligation to have premarital or extramarital sex. that's a choice.

 

[RDD_1210]

There was nothing wrong in my choice of words. It's not my fault that you simply don't understand that choices have consequences and the only real way to avoid bad consequences is to avoid bad choices. You are fighting nature when you pretend that your choices don't have consequence.

You don't have to change genetics. You simply have to accept that the choices you make are your responsibility, that you are the only one who can make your choices, and then choose to make better choices.

Or do you honestly think that you have no choices in your life?

You tried equating sex outside and before marriage as not natural. Did you perhaps make a poor choice in words when using the term natural? Or do you still think that premarital sex and extramarital sex isn't part of our genetic nature?

Repeating the same stupid and false argument about what I said isnt going to suddenly make it true.

Natural law dictates that choices have consequences. I haven't mentioned sex in regards to nature. The fact that continually refuse to acknowledge that rather than adress the fact that the laws of nature dictate that actions have consequences tells me that at best, you have a complete disconnect with reality, and at worst you are attempting to delibrately ignore the basis of the argument. Which is it? A

And no. There is nothing in our genetics that states that we are under obligation to have premarital or extramarital sex. that's a choice.

And there it is, I never said we were obligated to have premarital sex or extramarital sex. But you just changed the argument. Well done.

I said doing either of those things is not "unnatural" like you made it out to be. Nature is what is in our genetics, procreating is what we are designed to do. Whether or not that is within or before the confines of marriage has nothing to do with nature. You are inserting your belief system in to what is and is not natural. You made that argument and are not trying to change the context and what I said.

 

[Avatar4321]

I'm making the same argument I've been making from the beginning. You just refuse to understand it.

Choices have consequences. It's the law of nature.

Why you refuse to address the actual argument, is beyond me. Why you continue to claim that my claim that ignoring the law of nature that choices have consquences makes me crazy, is likewise beyond me.

If you want to not face certain consequences, you can easily avoid them by making different choices. Because you clearly don't have a clue what I've been arguing, I'm going to be generous and presume that it's because of laziness rather than stupidity or because you are lying, you very much have been arguing that people don't have a choice on whether they have premarital & extramarital sex.

In reality, you do have a choice. You don't have to give into natural urgings. You can control if and when you engage in sexual relations (with the consent of your partner, naturally).

You can choose to exercise your freedom to copulate. You can also choose not to. Each of those choices has a natural consequence. With one, you risk having a child. With another, you are guarenteed not to have a child.

If you pretend that your choices have to consequence (or in other words ignore natural law) and do whatever you want with no thought of the reprocussions, you can end up with an "unwanted pregnancy" and then you will have to make the choice to be a man (or a woman) and take care of your offspring. Or kill it because it's born.

If you make a different choice, and choose not to engage in such relations outside of marriage, or to engage in them recognizing the potential consequences and willing to accept them, then you don't have to worry about abortion because nothing will be an accident. You've already made your choice and taken responsibility for your actions.

This really isn't that difficult to understand. I have no clue why you seem to continue to pretend I'm saying that sex is unnatural. As I said earlier, Ill presume it's because of you really have no desire to understand what I'm saying. Probably because you might actually have to admit to yourself that you are responsible for your actions when you make bad choices and end up with consequences you don't like.

 

[Article 15]

No, the rules of nature dictate that our actions result in consequence. So if you want to control the consequences, the only logical solution is to make choices that result in different consequences.

Abortion is a result of selfish people trying to avoid the consequences their actions when they become pregnant. The logical way to end abortion is to avoid making choices that will result in pregnancy. In other words stop having sex.

You people act like it's written in stone that when we get horny we are obliged to have sex. Reality is that we are one of the few creations on this planet that can control when we mate. Simply because we have urges doesn't mean we don't have a choice whether to act on those urges.

We have the freedom whether to do so or not. Freedom to choose is a fundamental part of our nature. As long as you deny that and deny that their are consequences for your own actions, you will continue to run into problems and waste time and resources dealing with avoidable problems.

Why not just take responsibility for your actions? It's not that ridiculous to be adults is it?

You're in fuggin' lala land, dude.

Your response is not surprising. Expecting people to actually be responsible for their actions these days is becoming an extreme concept.

Naw, my answer is spot on. If you think that what he is talking about is even a remotely realistic situation you are just as out to lunch as he is.

You take this "not my problem" nonsense to the extreme. You are hands down the most self centered and arrogant dude on this board.

 

[AllieBaba]

You're in fuggin' lala land, dude.

Your response is not surprising. Expecting people to actually be responsible for their actions these days is becoming an extreme concept.

Naw, my answer is spot on. If you think that what he is talking about is even a remotely realistic situation you are just as out to lunch as he is.

You take this "not my problem" nonsense to the extreme. You are hands down the most self centered and arrogant dude on this board.

Says the most self centered and arrogant dude on this board, lol.

So Art, why are you such an abortion proponent? How many girls have you driven to the clinic?

 

[Avatar4321]

Naw, my answer is spot on. If you think that what he is talking about is even a remotely realistic situation you are just as out to lunch as he is.

You take this "not my problem" nonsense to the extreme. You are hands down the most self centered and arrogant dude on this board.

It's very realistic if you get over yourself and actually exercise self discipline.

 

[Article 15]

Your response is not surprising. Expecting people to actually be responsible for their actions these days is becoming an extreme concept.

Naw, my answer is spot on. If you think that what he is talking about is even a remotely realistic situation you are just as out to lunch as he is.

You take this "not my problem" nonsense to the extreme. You are hands down the most self centered and arrogant dude on this board.

Says the most self centered and arrogant dude on this board, lol.

So Art, why are you such an abortion proponent? How many girls have you driven to the clinic?

Zero.

 

[Article 15]

Naw, my answer is spot on. If you think that what he is talking about is even a remotely realistic situation you are just as out to lunch as he is.

You take this "not my problem" nonsense to the extreme. You are hands down the most self centered and arrogant dude on this board.

It's very realistic if you get over yourself and actually exercise self discipline.

No, everyone just choosing to not have premarital and extramarital sex as a solution to eliminate abortion and STD's is not even remotely realistic.