Well, you may be right. I tried to find data on the breakdown of users of PP and could not. Do you have a source for your claim?
No reason to get that specific. There should not be discriminatory public spending on overall health but it seems clearly appropriate to spend differently on different procedures. There are scientific difference between the sexes.
I was referring specifically to PP, but to address your broader point, not necessarily, they could just demand payment up front and let all those who can not pay just suffer or die. That would be in line with your position.
It is not a claim it is fact. Poor women by law are entitled to certain services which PP provides just like countless other places. Why is it for you so difficult to grap this simple fact, even if you are against government assistance? Do you really think that dishonesty can make a difference in your arguments?
Every one on this board already knows that. You prefer suffering and death for the poor.
Actually it does since we no longer live in a barbaric society where some can be cast aside because they lack money.
NO, REALLY? So you just want finances to somehow level the playing field.
Sure looks that way.
You do understand that Roe v Wade made such visits a matter of privacy between the patient and the medical facility, with no require to meet any requests by the men involved? It is a private discussion and males rights are excluded from the process. You assume that there is a benefit to the man. There may be but there is also the possibility that the man is "harmed". And even writing that last sentence indicates, to me anyway, about the wrongness of your statement. The PP has almost nothing to do with the male's wishes.
Of course they are. :roll: But hey, you know what? If the government defunds them, you and your liberal pals that love this organization so much can step up to the plate, open your own wallets for once, and make up for the lost funding.