In response to skeeter20's comment:

 

 

How about some math?

 

If abortion represents 3% of the services done, and PP performed 333,900 abortions last year, then the 97% represents @33,000,000 services offered.  Yet Planned Parenthood indicates that only 1,800,000 people took advantage of any PP service.  So, either everyone who stops by used FIFTEEN planned parenthood services, or the numbers are BS.

Or put another way, 20% of the people who came to planned parenthood had an abortion, buty magically, it accounts for only 3% of the services.

 

The 3% doesn't pass the smell test.

 

 

Moving the goalposts again...just like the rest of the crooked anti-choice movement trying to legislate (big government!) every sperm and egg cell.

 

86% of services are either contraceptive-, STD-, or cancer-related.  Whether some or all of those are provided to the same person is quite beside the point.

 

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

 

Moving the goalposts again...just like the rest of the crooked anti-choice movement trying to legislate (big government!) every sperm and egg cell.

86% of services are either contraceptive-, STD-, or cancer-related.  Whether some or all of those are provided to the same person is quite beside the point. 

 

 

 

Asking for financial clarification for entities receiving taxpayer money where services, expenses, cost are not explained in detail; whether its bonuses to executives, resort team building execizes or specifics on each service provided is not only prudent for the govts and citizens to ask but a responsibility when they are receiving taxpayer funds!!

 

 

Not moving the goalposts, simply showing the 3% number is BS.  Simple math:

1.8 million visitors, 334,000 abortions, or about 20% 

Asking for financial clarification for entities receiving taxpayer money where services, expenses, cost are not explained in detail; whether its bonuses to executives, resort team building execizes or specifics on each service provided is not only prudent for the govts and citizens to ask but a responsibility when they are receiving taxpayer funds!!

 

In response to skeeter20's comment:

 

The fact is that not every PP clinic performs abortions, so 100% of visitors to a single clinic would mean a 0% per capita abortion rate.

 

The real War Against Women is "sex-selection' abortions...coming soon to America, as soon as abortion on demand thru the 9th month is adopted...paid for by taxpayers. 

Now available  in other countries which the liberals consider 'progressive' ...

India, China, Great Britain ..

In England, newspapers found doctors offering pregnancy terminations based on gender...

"Last night, Lord Alton said the presence of sex-selective abortion in the UK could be a product of terminations becoming too “routine”.

“Abortion has become so routine in Britain with 600 taking place every day that people have accepted the mantra that it’s just a matter of choice but that’s not what the law says,” he said. “There is a fundamental debate to take place here.”

He said the practice may have been imported from areas of the world where it is more common, including India and China “where sex-selective abortions have taken place on an industrial scale”.

The real War Against Women is "sex-selection' abortions...coming soon to America, as soon as abortion on demand thru the 9th month is adopted...paid for by taxpayers. 

Now available  in other countries which the liberals consider 'progressive' ...

India, China, Great Britain ..

In England, newspapers found doctors offering pregnancy terminations based on gender...

"Last night, Lord Alton said the presence of sex-selective abortion in the UK could be a product of terminations becoming too “routine”.

“Abortion has become so routine in Britain with 600 taking place every day that people have accepted the mantra that it’s just a matter of choice but that’s not what the law says,” he said. “There is a fundamental debate to take place here.”

He said the practice may have been imported from areas of the world where it is more common, including India and China “where sex-selective abortions have taken place on an industrial scale”.

 

Compassionate conservatism, right?

If, you are so partisan that all you have is general grouped negatives that you think reflect 60,000,000 people then just go away please.

 

In response to tvoter's comment:

If, you are so partisan that all you have is general grouped negatives that you think reflect 60,000,000 people then just go away please.

 

 

 

Blah blah blah, crap crap crap.

 

 

Look in a mirror, fella

In response to skeeter20's comment:

 

 

Not moving the goalposts, simply showing the 3% number is BS.  Simple math:

1.8 million visitors, 334,000 abortions, or about 20% 

 

 

The 3% number is fine and accurate; you just don't like it.

Again, the metric we're talking about is % of total services rendered - 11,400,000 - not the number of people treated.

Your stat only shows estimated number of abortions performed per capita.

Either way, it's wrong.  PP estimates 3,000,000 people served, so your stat would mean 11% per cap maximum.

The fact is that not every PP clinic performs abortions, so 100% of visitors to a single clinic would mean a 0% per capita abortion rate.

 

 

 

 

In response to miscricket's comment:

 

Whether intentional or unintentional..the result of Wisconsin's war on Planned Parenthood will result in less access to women's health care for women in poorer and rural areas of Wisconsin...but what's a little collateral damage when you're fighting an imaginary enemy..right..?

 

Less access".

 

I guess women really are just frail vessels, and need the government to run their lives.

 

What a load.

In response to skeeter20's comment:

 

In response to miscricket's comment:

 

Whether intentional or unintentional..the result of Wisconsin's war on Planned Parenthood will result in less access to women's health care for women in poorer and rural areas of Wisconsin...but what's a little collateral damage when you're fighting an imaginary enemy..right..?

 

Less access".

 

I guess women really are just frail vessels, and need the government to run their lives.

 

What a load.

 

So subsidized health care equates the government running your life?

 

I thought the republicans were against legislation that put the government in the treatment room with the patient and the doctor.  But they seem perfectly happy looking over the doctor's shoulder when it comes to a woman's vag.

In response to tvoter's comment:

 

Asking for financial clarification for entities receiving taxpayer money where services, expenses, cost are not explained in detail; whether its bonuses to executives, resort team building execizes or specifics on each service provided is not only prudent for the govts and citizens to ask but a responsibility when they are receiving taxpayer funds!!

 

 

And that information was provided, but you, skeeter, et al., just don't like the results.

 

Way to pretend you care, though.

 

 

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

 

In response to skeeter20's comment:

 

 

Not moving the goalposts, simply showing the 3% number is BS.  Simple math:

1.8 million visitors, 334,000 abortions, or about 20% 

 

 

The 3% number is fine and accurate; you just don't like it.

Again, the metric we're talking about is % of total services rendered - 11,400,000 - not the number of people treated.

Your stat only shows estimated number of abortions performed per capita.

Either way, it's wrong.  PP estimates 3,000,000 people served, so your stat would mean 11% per cap maximum.

The fact is that not every PP clinic performs abortions, so 100% of visitors to a single clinic would mean a 0% per capita abortion rate.

 

The 3% number doesn't tell you anything useful, on purpose.

 

The FACT, by Planned Parenthood's own numbers, that 20% of the people who go there get an abortion.

 

that's the number you just don't like.

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

 

In response to skeeter20's comment:

 

The fact is that not every PP clinic performs abortions, so 100% of visitors to a single clinic would mean a 0% per capita abortion rate.

 

Au contraire.

 

"This profit-driven business chose to up the ante this year, mandating that all of its affiliates must provide abortions beginning this month. This mandate has already prompted several clinics that do not wish to perform abortions to break off and go independent.

Requiring that all of its affiliates provide abortions is the ultimate evidence that Planned Parenthoods chief concern is making money off abortion,  not the health of vulnerable women and girls.

"Cancer screenings" ?  Planned Parenthood provided ZERO mammagrams ! The abortion provider’s purported “referral services” to outside mammogram facilities are negligible — especially given the widespread availability of free and low-cost breast and cervical cancer screening services across the country supported by both private and public grants.

In response to skeeter20's comment:

 

 

Not moving the goalposts, simply showing the 3% number is BS.  Simple math:

1.8 million visitors, 334,000 abortions, or about 20% 

 

 

The 3% number is fine and accurate; you just don't like it.

Again, the metric we're talking about is % of total services rendered - 11,400,000 - not the number of people treated.

Your stat only shows estimated number of abortions performed per capita.

Either way, it's wrong.  PP estimates 3,000,000 people served, so your stat would mean 11% per cap maximum.

The fact is that not every PP clinic performs abortions, so 100% of visitors to a single clinic would mean a 0% per capita abortion rate.

 

 

 

 

In response to skeeter20's comment:

 

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

 

In response to skeeter20's comment:

 

 

Not moving the goalposts, simply showing the 3% number is BS.  Simple math:

1.8 million visitors, 334,000 abortions, or about 20% 

 

 

The 3% number is fine and accurate; you just don't like it.

Again, the metric we're talking about is % of total services rendered - 11,400,000 - not the number of people treated.

Your stat only shows estimated number of abortions performed per capita.

Either way, it's wrong.  PP estimates 3,000,000 people served, so your stat would mean 11% per cap maximum.

The fact is that not every PP clinic performs abortions, so 100% of visitors to a single clinic would mean a 0% per capita abortion rate.

 

The 3% number doesn't tell you anything useful, on purpose.

 

The FACT, by Planned Parenthood's own numbers, that 20% of the people who go there get an abortion.

 

that's the number you just don't like.

 

NO.  Again, you're just wrong, and again, you don't pay attention.

 

PP's numbers state they serve over 3,000,000 people, so 330k abortions is only 11%.

You're really bad at this....