Planned Parenthood Is Going Down!

The purpose of the government is not to pay for every aspect of ones existence. The government is not responsible for all of our needs.

If your answer is not creating dependency, what long term solution is achieved by enabling individuals to depend on the government for even the most rudimentary of wants/needs? The amazing thing is how these discussions always end up with your ideology hating the idea of pushing responsibility yet completely silent when it comes to how "positive" it is enabling people. For not wanting the creation of dependency, nothing is done to stop it.

Can you name one social program that should be left to the individual?

Since you insist on framing this in terms of dependency, let's explore that route (even though I think it skirts the real issues at play).

Family planning services save money (as noted in my earlier link) because they provide the means to reduce dependency on more costly items such as children the parents are unprepared for (which reduces dependency for both the child and the parents) and abortions (which are more costly than family planning services).

If reducing dependency is your primary goal, this is a no-brainer win-win scenario.

You act with the idea that the government needs to wipe the nose of those with sniffles. If one has a child when the parents are in a state of unpreparedness, why does the responsibility fall on the government? Saving tax payers money when we should not be paying for many of these things in the first place? You give me the impression of believing in selective responsibility.

The dependency state needs to stop already.

@Solaryellow: No, my statements are predicated on the trends and numbers of a large sample size as well as the knowledge that speaking in individual terms on a sociological matter is beyond pointless. Preaching about personal responsibility is not good public policy, it is making an excuse for abdicating public policy.

PP does a lot LOT more than what the dumbass right think it does, in reality they provide healthcare to a lot of low income and rural communities for many important medical services, defunding them would again just be the dumbass right shooting themselves in the foot. I totally agree with TC, people need to feel the weight of their mistakes, it's just not going to go down the way he thinks.

smh, trying to use wishful thinking and "society should be like this" against facts, data and research.

What a hyperbolic way to describe our actual stance... Using those deductive skills you just demonstrated, I could assert that you shun pragmaticism.

Contraception and other family planning services ultimately save money in the long run (Thanks for that link matt). Policies that result in the government needing to spend less on people, is generally money well spent. It is the government's responsibility to ensure the well being of the society they govern. Efficiency is a great thing. And spending on birth control, be it pills or condoms, has been shown to be a rather efficient way to spend money.

As society we are dependant on a lot of things.

• Infrastructure
• Technology
• The economy
• The environment
• The government

Ultimately, as a social species, we will be dependant on other things whether you like it or not.

Next time, use actual arguments over loaded language.

And while I am at it, this isnt the only case where the rhethoric put into practice "personal responsibility" ends up costing the average citizen more. Letting everyone have a home to curb homelessness has repeatedly shown itself to be cheaper on the taxpayer. Yes, leaving a person on the street costs you more than letting them have a roof over their head.

Well said,

I cant stand this ideology over pragmaticism approach. If a dependancy on the government ultimately leads to a better quality of life for most people, so be it.

Do you understand how stupid you sound? You're rhetoric is nothing more than sampling and clips from Hannity, and lacks any type of pragmatism or understanding of the reality of the situation. Y

It's real easy to just say, 'Be more responsible!'. However, it doesn't solve real world problems since it's nothing more than a hollow slogan.

I don't get what there is to cheer about. The state money doesn't go towards funding abortions (even though it should) due to the Hyde Amendment ; this will only remove money for things like contraception (which leads to less abortions) and cancer screenings (which saves more money if diagnosed early).

How is family planning akin to the government wiping the noses of every child? What a fallacious and stupid thing to say. Family planning services lead to better sexual education. People with better sexual education tend to have less unwanted pregnancies. This obviously applies to those who would have to put their children up for adoption, or rely upon government assistance until the child is 18. Now, if the government educates people in the first place on family planning, these unwanted pregnancies happen less, therefore less children are wards of the state.

It's kind of akin to how the Republicans hate abortions, but ruthlessly try to get rid of abstinence education, and organizations like Planned Parenthood. This action leads to what? More abortions, more deaths to mothers and their babies, and more lives ruined. But we would not want to educate people in order to solve bigger problems now, would we?