• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pro-Life Advocates Plan to Protest Opening of Largest Abortion Clinic in U.S

The plan parenthood motive was to teach how to avoid pregnancy and or how to deal with it up to and including abortions. According to Abby Johnson plan parenthood promoted abortions above all else, motivated by revenue taken in.

Allegations that Johnson cannot corroborate.

Johnson said she never got any orders to increase profits in e-mails or letters, and had no way to prove her allegations about practices at the Bryan branch. She told FoxNews.com that pressure came in personal interactions with her regional manager from the larger Houston office.

Also, back on the financials:

Without a doctor in residence, she said, her clinic offered abortions only two days a month, but the doctor could perform 30 to 40 procedures on each day he was there. Johnson estimated that each abortion could net the branch about $350, adding up to more than $10,000 a month.

Source.

That's $120,000 a year, which is a small fraction of the clinic fees for the Houston Planned Parenthood.
 
Allegations that Johnson cannot corroborate.



Also, back on the financials:



Source.

That's $120,000 a year, which is a small fraction of the clinic fees for the Houston Planned Parenthood.
Perhaps your right, so in this case plan parenthood would have no problem in receiving a complete and full audit by a third party up to and including monitors for a full year.
 
Perhaps your right, so in this case plan parenthood would have no problem in receiving a complete and full audit by a third party up to and including monitors for a full year.

Like I stated before, as a non-profit, their records are already open.
 
Like I stated before, as a non-profit, their records are already open.
Remember the United way, their records completely open, yet their embezzled millions from their donators. I am not saying this is the case, what I am saying is that plan parenthood promotes abortion because it's quick money. Promoting lessons in life nets nothing.
 
Remember the United way, their records completely open, yet their embezzled millions from their donators. I am not saying this is the case, what I am saying is that plan parenthood promotes abortion because it's quick money. Promoting lessons in life nets nothing.

Are you at all familiar with Planned Parenthood's origins and history? Ever been a client? Spoken to any of their outreach professionals?

Frankly, I find the "abortion mill for profit" allegations absurd.

You're right, none of that stuff if profitable. Planned Parenthood is a non-profit organization. They wouldn't be spending the massive amounts of time and effort on education, sexual health care, and outreach that they do if they were concerned with profit.
 
Last edited:
Are you at all familiar with Planned Parenthood's origins and history? Ever been a client? Spoken to any of their outreach professionals?

Frankly, I find the "abortion mill for profit" allegations absurd.

You're right, none of that stuff if profitable. Planned Parenthood is a non-profit organization. They wouldn't be spending the massive amounts of time and effort on education, sexual health care, and outreach that they do if they were concerned with profit.
We will see, if I am a betting man, I would say that Abby Johnson has better odds.
 
Perhaps your right, so in this case plan parenthood would have no problem in receiving a complete and full audit by a third party up to and including monitors for a full year.

They released an audited financial statement.
 
We will see, if I am a betting man, I would say that Abby Johnson has better odds.

And even Abby Johnson stated that the pressure she says she experienced was because Planned Parenthood is underfunded. No one in this organization is getting rich off abortions.
 
And even Abby Johnson stated that the pressure she says she experienced was because Planned Parenthood is underfunded. No one in this organization is getting rich off abortions.

The mission of Planned Parenthood is contraception and planned pregnancy--not abortions.
 
Awesome attack the messenger...



Fact a giant late term abortion mill has opened.


Let the savages cheer. :shrug:

I'm with you. I cannot see this as a triumph for those who advocate late term abortions.

Let's just suck the life out of women and throw the fetus in the trash bins. This is just plain sickening.
 
Why doesn't the pro-life crowd denounce this form of terrorism? Is it that they don't value the lives of the doctors, nurses or patients who are the victims of this violence?

Are fetuses their selective concern over adult human beings?
They have denounced it in the strongest of terms over and over again. If you haven't heard it, it's because you weren't listening.
 
I'm with you. I cannot see this as a triumph for those who advocate late term abortions.

Let's just suck the life out of women and throw the fetus in the trash bins. This is just plain sickening.

Who advocates late term abortions? They are illegal.
 
BBB solicits donations from those they rate. Fox henhouse. Sorry you cant see it. :lol:

Can't let you get away with insulting the BBB like that. The company I manage has won 5 Awards for Excellence from the BBB, and this includes Pinnacle Awards, which we won in 2007 and 2009. Out of the 20,000 HVAC companies in Southeast Texas, of which about 25% are BBB members, only ONE Pinnacle Award is given out each year.

The BBB provides the following:

1) If consumers choose a company that is a BBB member, and are not satisfied with what they got, they can force a company into arbitration. Companies which don't settle a complaint or agree to arbitrate it are kicked out of the BBB, and are given an F rating.

2) If a company is NOT a member of the BBB, and screws a customer, then there is not much that the BBB can do, except give that company an F rating. It is up to the consumer to check out any company they plan to deal with.

The worst thing a consumer can do is to not check out a company before he or she does business with it, and it turns out that the company has an F rating from the BBB, and is not a member. If a consumer is screwed, under that scenario, there is not much the BBB can do except to add another complaint to that company's record. If consumers are going to spend money on a product or service, especially if that product or service is an expensive one, then it is very important that the consumer educate himself or herself before doing business with ANY company offering the product or service the consumer is seeking. A consumer who educates himself or herself before purchasing something is much less likely to get ripped off. And if a consumer uses a company rated A or A+ by the BBB, the chances of being ripped off decrease to almost zero, due to the fact that member companies are required to settle any dispute, and use BBB arbitration, if appropriate, in order to keep their memberships.

Here is my company's BBB report.
 
Last edited:
They have denounced it in the strongest of terms over and over again. If you haven't heard it, it's because you weren't listening.

Kind of like Muslims who have denounced terrorism, yet people go around saying "why don't they denounce terrorism?"
 
Kind of like Muslims who have denounced terrorism, yet people go around saying "why don't they denounce terrorism?"
Precisely.
 
Kind of like Muslims who have denounced terrorism, yet people go around saying "why don't they denounce terrorism?"

That's pretty thin gruel. There have been a few, isolated, sparse instances of Muslim leaders denouncing terrorism -- in fact, those fatwas proferred by a few Canadian imams recently are the first fatwas of their kind -- but nowhere near to the extent of vigor or universality to which anti-abortion violence has been denounced.
 
That's pretty thin gruel. There have been a few, isolated, sparse instances of Muslim leaders denouncing terrorism -- in fact, those fatwas proferred by a few Canadian imams recently are the first fatwas of their kind -- but nowhere near to the extent of vigor or universality to which anti-abortion violence has been denounced.

Really?

You've counted them both?
 
Really?

You've counted them both?

Have you? You made the initial comparison.

Leaders of the pro-life movement routinely condemn any violence and extremism as a matter of course, and that includes religious leaders.

The equivalent thing in the Muslim world is the fatwa, and those Canadian imams are the only ones to have issued one.

Do you have other examples? Any other fatwas? Or even Muslim leaders strongly condemning every act of Muslim terrorism?
 
Have you? You made the initial comparison.

I didn't make any claims about numbers.

But I am familiar with some of the denunciations, and they are alot more than most people think. I know they are more than zero.

But this isn't a football game where the people with more points wins.

Leaders of the pro-life movement routinely condemn any violence and extremism as a matter of course, and that includes religious leaders.

The equivalent thing in the Muslim world is the fatwa, and those Canadian imams are the only ones to have issued one.

No, the equivalent is not a fatwa. Any condemnation counts.

Do you have other examples? Any other fatwas? Or even Muslim leaders strongly condemning every act of Muslim terrorism?

A simple Google search found a fatwa against terrorism by U.S. clerics in 2005:

U.S. Muslims issue ?fatwa? against terrorism - U.S. news- msnbc.com

And here is one from India in 2008:

Muslim seminary issues fatwa against terrorism - Asia, World - The Independent

Took me a few seconds to find these. There may be more. Don't just assume things.
 
Last edited:
I didn't make any claims about numbers.

But I am familiar with some of the denunciations, and they are alot more than most people think. I know they are more than zero.

But this isn't a football game where the people with more points wins.

You're making an apples/apples comparison, so there ought to be balance.



No, the equivalent is not a fatwa. Any condemnation counts.

Sorry, it has to be comparable if you're going to make the comparison. Sure, you can find individuals who will condemn it, but that's not the same as the leadership condemning it. The equivalent is a fatwa, because that's how the Muslim leadership does that sort of thing officially.

But I would accept some other official word by leadership even if it's not called a "fatwa."



A simple Google search found a fatwa against terrorism by U.S. clerics in 2005:

U.S. Muslims issue ?fatwa? against terrorism - U.S. news- msnbc.com

And here is one from India in 2008:

Muslim seminary issues fatwa against terrorism - Asia, World - The Independent

Took me a few seconds to find these. There may be more. Don't just assume things.

Well, good, then what I read about the Canadian fatwa was either wrong or misleading. And I did say there were isolated denunciations.

But no, the level of condemnation simply isn't comparable. The mainstream pro-life movement condemns the violence unequivocally, every time.

Mainstream Islam does not.
 
But I would accept some other official word by leadership even if it's not called a "fatwa."

I was just going to make the same point.

Well, good, then what I read about the Canadian fatwa was either wrong or misleading.

Yep.

But no, the level of condemnation simply isn't comparable. The mainstream pro-life movement condemns the violence unequivocally, every time.

It does? Every time? All leaders?

Mainstream Islam does not.

What is "mainstream islam?" And why do they have to condemn it every time? Isn't being on record once enough?

And let's get to the point - why does anyone have to denounce anything? You can't hold someone responsible for something they didn't do just because they didn't denounce it. Nobody - pro-lifers or Muslims - is obligated to denounce anything in the first place.
 
It does? Every time? All leaders?

It doesn't happen very often, and yes, every time. The leaders of the prominent organizations do -- not least because they're all asked for official statements.


What is "mainstream islam?" And why do they have to condemn it every time? Isn't being on record once enough?

You made the comparison.


And let's get to the point - why does anyone have to denounce anything? You can't hold someone responsible for something they didn't do just because they didn't denounce it. Nobody - pro-lifers or Muslims - is obligated to denounce anything in the first place.

Never said anything about holding anyone responsible. But it's pretty much beside the point, and again, you brought it up.
 
I'm just going to shoot from the hip here, no numbers or anything. But I'm fairly certain suicide bombers answering the call to jihad somewhat outweigh the amount of Christian, er, Crusaders (?) that blow up abortion clinics.

So, from that perspective, it does seem a shoe-in whether... Well, whatever salient point you two are discussing.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom