What are your important issues? (1 Viewer)

[wardorican]

Forget the current headlines. Forget the manufactured talking points. What are the big issues you care about? Or the small ones that don't get enough attention?

I'm just going to rattle off a few. I may dig into these more later. In no special order...

1. Infrastructure investment. The major categories being road transportation, flood protection / drainage, electrical grid resiliency, and better mass transit, especially rail. Our rail systems, outside of a few areas like Chicago, NYC, DC.. are just awful. They don't serve enough of the areas. They aren't tying the Suburbs, and towns nearby to the major city centers and major concentrations of Industry.
   1. A - I'd have much preferred no tax cut for the wealthy, and use that money towards Infrastructure. I don't mind some of the corporate tax cuts (not a fan of profitable companies finding ways to pay $0 in taxes.. that's unfair), but take a little back to go towards infrastructure and mass transit, which will boost productivity and lower congestion in major cities.
2. Wage growth. Not just min wage, all wages. Not sure what the government policy could be to drive this, but it's a huge pet issue for me.
3. Technology. Finding the balance between a company being large enough to have stability/security (think Apple, Microsoft, Samsung) to have things work well, but no so large as to stifle all competition and drive up prices. Also, who controls/owns our data. If my data is so valuable, why can't I be compensated for it?
4. Education funding. It's ridiculous how much the States cut from Colleges and how little they controlled their growth since the 1990's. That's why tuition is out of control. So, it's not just the funding issue, but also the lack of forcing public Universities to cap operating budget increases. In college, tuition increases was probably one of the biggest things I tried to fight against when in Student Government. We usually failed, but I did get one win on that topic, when I realized the committee that year was being somewhat dishonest about the increases, and called them out in public about it.

I care about a lot of other things, but I'm going to stop with these four.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

This is the excerpt from the article. 80% of the below is to prevent unintended pregnancies (I’m not even referencing the 950k emergency contraception kits). 3 % of what they do is abortions. As you see abortions is listed below with things like pap smears.


With a focus on prevention, Planned Parenthood said that 80% of its patients receive services to prevent unintended pregnancy.
What services does Planned Parenthood offer?
This is how its services break down:
Abortion

• Planned Parenthood says 3% of the services it provides are abortions.
• 323,999 abortions were performed in 2014, according to the organization.

Sexual education

• Planned Parenthood says it provides sex education to 1.5 million young people and adults each year.

Pregnancy prevention and birth control

• Planned Parenthood says it prevents an estimated 579,000 unintended pregnancies per year.
• Contraception accounted for 34% of the services it provided, according to the 2015 GAO report.

In 2014, Planned Parenthood saw:

• 2 milion reversible contraception patients
• 941,589 emergency contraception kits
• 3,445 vasectomies
• 718 female sterilization procedures

Pregnancy tests: 1.1 million tests done in 2014
Prenatal care: provided to 17,419 people in 2014
Sexually transmitted disease screening and treatment

• Planned Parenthood says this accounts for 42% of the services provided. (The GAO calculates 41% in 2012 by affiliates.)
• 4.2 million tests and treatments provided in 2014
• This represents the largest proportion of medical services provided.

Pap smears (cervical cancer screening):270,000 per year
Breast exams: 360,000 per year

Right, so that is clear that they don't make any statement about the reasons for the abortions they do perform, right? It is not addressed in that article at all. The point of that article is to show that Planned Parenthood's main services are not abortion.

 

[Lazybones]

I'm not making a claim about the numbers done for convenience. You are.

To be honest though, if you want to prevent abortions and you think they are done for convenience, then shouldn't you support making birth control easier to obtain?

To be honest, the other point is not arguable. How much easier do you want it to be? Cheaper than a bottle of water?

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

To be honest, the other point is not arguable. How much easier do you want it to be? Cheaper than a bottle of water?

Yes. I want it handed out like candy everywhere.

 

[Intensesaint]

Right, so that is clear that they don't make any statement about the reasons for the abortions they do perform, right? It is not addressed in that article at all. The point of that article is to show that Planned Parenthood's main services are not abortion.

But that is still a lot of abortions.

There are millions of guns that are made in this country by gun manufactures, but only a tiny fraction of them have been used in mass shootings. Does that dismiss the fact that those mass shootings are horrendous?

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

But that is still a lot of abortions.

There are millions of guns that are made in this country by gun manufactures, but only a tiny fraction of them have been used in mass shootings. Does that dismiss the fact that those mass shootings are horrendous?

Sure, but again, I find the Republican argument to be hollow. There is a huge drive to shut down Planned Parenthood but no concerted effort from the Republicans to replace the non-abortion services they do provide. The net result is likely to increase unwanted pregnancies and abortions.

 

[Ayo]

But that is still a lot of abortions.

There are millions of guns that are made in this country by gun manufactures, but only a tiny fraction of them have been used in mass shootings. Does that dismiss the fact that those mass shootings are horrendous?

Seems to me - pretty clearly - he'd like to see fewer abortions. There's a pretty clear insistence on preventative measures for that specific purpose in his posts. So, I'd guess that the current number of abortions is too high a number. I don't see any intent to 'dismiss' the number of abortions. And the curiosity around why a group against abortions wouldn't want the same.

 

[Intensesaint]

Seems to me - pretty clearly - he'd like to see fewer abortions. There's a pretty clear insistence on preventative measures for that specific purpose in his posts. So, I'd guess that the current number of abortions is too high a number. I don't see any intent to 'dismiss' the number of abortions. And the curiosity around why a group against abortions wouldn't want the same.

It seems to me like you were both attempting to get him hung up in a semantics trap over what the Abortions were for, rather than the original crux of the argument. If that isn't the case(Lazybones?), then I apologize.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

It seems to me like you were both attempting to get him hung up in a semantics trap over what the Abortions were for, rather than the original crux of the argument. If that isn't the case(Lazybones?), then I apologize.

No, he made a claim and then misinterpreted an article to support that claim. Misuse of statistics is one of my pet peeves. This is not limited to conservatives, and I'm not immune to it either, however, it is something I find to be extremely important.

 

[SystemShock]

please provide any info saying other wise.

Sure. Women don't have abortions because it is convenient.

I can provide other similar articles. However, it’s pretty clear. If 80% of what they do is prevent unwanted pregnancies and 3 % of what they do is abortions, that means 80% of the abortions are to prevent unwanted pregnancies. And I want to reiterate, this is only planned parenthood.

So, when you prevent something, it means you didn't allow it to happen. If a pregnancy was prevented, then there is nothing to abort.

 

[Ayo]

It seems to me like you were both attempting to get him hung up in a semantics trap over what the Abortions were for, rather than the original crux of the argument. If that isn't the case(Lazybones?), then I apologize.

Nope - not the intent.

In this part of the discussion - and elsewhere when I talked about sex education for purposes of reducing abortions (among other things) I've made the same point. More than once. I'd expect that if people are against abortions, they would support more expansive sexual education and resources to prevent them from happening. It's definitely not a semantics argument - never was the intent. The "original crux" has been my interest in more than this part of the thread, and remains so.

But apology accepted. Thanks for being willing to acknowledge.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

It seems to me like you were both attempting to get him hung up in a semantics trap over what the Abortions were for, rather than the original crux of the argument. If that isn't the case(Lazybones?), then I apologize.

Asking someone to support a claim is not semantics.

Pointing out that someone has failed to interpret data correctly is not semantics.

 

[Intensesaint]

No, he made a claim and then misinterpreted an article to support that claim. Misuse of statistics is one of my pet peeves. This is not limited to conservatives, and I'm not immune to it either, however, it is something I find to be extremely important.

I see ok, well I think we can all agree that abortions are horrible and should be the absolute last option used.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

I see ok, well I think we can all agree that abortions are horrible and should be the absolute last option used.

I do agree with that. I'd like to see abortions for anything other than endangerment to the health of the mother drop to 0, and I actively support and push for policies to make that happen.

 

[Ayo]

I do agree with that. I'd like to see abortions for anything other than endangerment to the health of the mother drop to 0, and I actively support and push for policies to make that happen.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I see ok, well I think we can all agree that abortions are horrible and should be the absolute last option used.

As someone that is 100% pro choice, I would love nothing more than to see this country take measures at every level that prevent every single unwanted pregnancy in this country, thus keeping those women from being put in a position where they would seek an abortion.

 

[Lazybones]

No, he made a claim and then misinterpreted an article to support that claim. Misuse of statistics is one of my pet peeves. This is not limited to conservatives, and I'm not immune to it either, however, it is something I find to be extremely important.

I am taking offense to this charge. Please point to where I’m wrong. Or any info to counter what I said. We are both reading the same info.

there are thousands of articles that support my position.

 

[The moose]

All I have to ask is one question.

All of the people here so worried about the abortion issue what are you doing today to help children.

How many do you foster?

You must at least foster kids right?

If you want more unwanted children in the world you must be helping the unwanted children we have now.

I'd would say it is pretty much living a lie of you don't.

I donate to planned Parenthood. Proud of it.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

I am taking offense to this charge. Please point to where I’m wrong. Or any info to counter what I said. We are both reading the same info.

there are thousands of articles that support my position.

You said the article claimed that 80% of abortions that Planned Parenthood performed were for convenience. The article didn't say that. It said that 80% of the services provided were to prevent pregnancies. That is not abortion related.