Hello friends! Thanks for joining me and Nicole for episode 33 of the Fetal Position Podcast! Click here to download the episode in a new window.
Links mentioned in the episode:
- Couples are turning extra IVF embryos into jewelry
- Pelosi: Democratic candidates should not be forced to toe party line on abortion
- AHCA summary by Unbiased America (facebook)
- The important part of this one is the links to the dropbox files. These are PDFs of the AHCA bill and amendments.
If you enjoyed this or thought it was absolutely terrible, let me know in the comments below, on the facebook page, private facebook group, twitter, or by email (FetalPositionPodcast@gmail.com). Thanks so much for reading/listening!
Hello friends! Thanks for listening to The Fetal Position podcast and coming to the show-notes page for episode 25! If you haven’t listened to it yet, click this link: http://thefetalposition.libsyn.com/ep-25-why-should-we-defund-planned-parenthood
So why should we defund planned parenthood?
- Why should we fund it?
- The person wanting to fund a private organization bears the burden to show why tax dollars should go there. Where in the Constitution does it give the government power to use money for this?
- Defund everything!
- The government shouldn’t be choosing winners and losers, and shouldn’t be supporting failing businesses. Market manipulation is bad.
- If a business cannot support itself, that means the business is running inefficiently. To quote Ron Swanson, “the government should not prop up a failed business. That would be like giving food to a mortally wounded animal instead of slitting its throat and properly utilizing its meat and pelt”
- If you don’t use their services, why should you have to pay them?
- Current law (the Hyde Amendment) says that taxpayer dollars shouldn’t pay for abortions.
- Contrary to popular claim, tax dollars do go towards abortion. Maybe not on paper, but money is fungible. $100 in taxes means $100 of non-tax dollars is freed up for abortions.
- Even if the Hyde Amendment didn’t exist, we still should not force people to pay for things they are morally opposed to.
- They claim “abortion is only 3% of what we do”, yet they refuse to stop performing abortions in order to retain government funding.
- I’m confused as to why they refuse to stop only 3% of their services in order to stay in business.
- Plus, the 3% claim is total nonsense anyway.
- Although they say they offer prenatal care, very few locations actually offer anything other than pathways to termination. They do less than 1% of the nation’s pap tests, less than 2% of the nation’s breast exams, and no mammograms.
- Because abortion is legal, I’m not objecting to an organization specializing in abortion… but if we’re going to offer government funds to an organization, we should offer it to an organization that does more than merely recommend abortions.
- I don’t want the government subsidizing a failing business that does less than other more robust women’s health clinics.
- If we shut the doors of every planned parenthood, they could be easily replaced by more comprehensive women’s health clinics. But very few people are advocating shutting their doors; merely defunding them. If that means they get shut down, so be it.
- Planned Parenthood does not need taxpayer funds to survive. Here’s a link to their annual report.
- 697.1 million in non government funds
- 528.4 million in government funds
- NPR says “That totals more than 40 percent of Planned Parenthood’s total $1.3 billion in revenue for the year, which suggests that the organization would be in some heavy financial trouble without that public funding.”
That concludes this episode! Look forward to the next several episodes where I highlight some things from a recent interview on another podcast, go into some detail about a violinist analogy that I made that I might be calling Thompson’s Fiddler (or possibly Fiddler in the Womb).
I am the father of 2 handsome young boys, Micah and Cole. During a routine ultrasound, the technician was unable to locate a particular flap of skin in Cole’s developing heart. Because my wife and I weren’t sure what that meant, I had to ask. The technician said that she would need to have someone else take a look, but that there’s a possibility that our unborn son’s heart wasn’t developing according to schedule. She reassured us that it’s likely that she just can’t see it due to the angle, but even the thought that our son’s heart might not develop properly was enough to humble us immediately.
So we went back for a much more in-depth ultrasound a week or so later. We waited in the waiting room for what seemed like forever, hoping and praying that there wasn’t anything wrong with Cole’s heart. The ultrasound wasn’t considered “medically necessary”, so it was considerably more expensive than the first one, but we didn’t care. We just wanted to know that our son was ok, and if he wasn’t… well… we just wanted to know that our son was ok. The more advanced screening was much longer, and the technician pressed much harder on my wife’s belly in order to try and see the heart more clearly. He pushed Cole around a bit, and was having a visibly difficult time trying to locate the small line on the monitor.
The small line that would indicate whether or not our child would be born free of heart complications. A small shadow that might indicate a lifetime of expenses, doctor visits, medications, and time.
He was finally able to locate what he was looking for. It was because of the angle (Cole was not very active during the day).
Our son is currently 7 months old with no heart defects. Happy, healthy, and pudgy. Just like how babies are supposed to be.
But the incident got me thinking. Imagine if he had a heart defect. I would have wanted the best possible medical care for my son, just like any parent. And I’m just a regular dude with a 9am to 5pm job. My wife is a lularoe consultant. We’re not millionaires. So, more than likely, we would have had to make sacrifices in order to get Cole’s medical care.
And for this reason, I completely reject the reasoning behind increased government regulation in the healthcare marketplace. Not only is the federal government overstepping its bounds by intruding in on the healthcare market, but the intervention into the market constantly drives up costs. The meaningless regulation, the constantly increasing bureaucratic nightmare of the insurance industry, the failure of the government-run healthcare marketplaces… it’s just chaos. I can’t believe that anyone who pretends to believe in the right to healthcare would want it to be so difficult to receive proper care. The goal of anyone who actually cares about the health of his friends and family should reject anything but a free market in healthcare. The only way to make sure that families like mine are able to receive the healthcare that they need is to get the government out of the way, and allow the market to decrease the cost while increasing the quality. We should have real choices in healthcare! Who wouldn’t want real choices, increased quality, and decreased cost?
Have you noticed that medical prices are constantly increasing, but the cost of super fast computers, TVs, and drones with HD cameras are becoming better and better while the prices keep shrinking and shrinking? The laws of economics don’t change just because we’re dealing with healthcare.
So please, progressives/liberals/democrats/socialists. I beg of you.
Examine the options and realize that all of this increased regulation, bureaucracy, and government intervention into the marketplace is hurting those who you think you’re trying to help. We need to repeal the ACA. We need a free market replacement. Don’t be obstructionists. Your socialized solution has not worked, and will not work. We shouldn’t have to be dependent on the [largely incompetent] government for something as important as the health of our families.
And this doesn’t just for health insurance.
- Get the government out of our education system. I want a high quality education for my children. The government is getting in the way.
- No more government regulations in our loans and banking systems. I want to be able to afford a good house in a good area and not have to worry about you manipulating the interest rates and taxing a significant portion of my hard-earned income paying a whole variety of taxes. I want my money to go to my family and my needs.
- We need to encourage free trade with other countries. Why are so many people against high quality goods and services from other countries? Please allow me to purchase high quality goods for my children. Stop getting in the way.
- When you advocate for an increase in the minimum wage, you’re advocating for an increase in cost for unskilled labor. This should be an agreement between the employer and employee. When you force an employer to pay unskilled workers more, the cost of goods and services increases. In order to alleviate the cost, the price of goods and services go up. Why don’t you want me to be able to afford things for my family?
And how can you call yourself pro-life when you supported the Obama administration dropping over 20,000 bombs in the middle east in 2016? How can you call yourself pro-life when you support a government-run prison system that puts people to death, and only about 25% of those on death row are actually guilty?
So I have to ask… if the progressive policymakers won’t consult a basic economics textbook in their proposals (resulting in a more difficult life for everyone), can we really call them pro-life?
Dear progressives who assume (without arguing for it) that their political system is the most “pro-life”; isn’t it annoying when someone attaches extra stuff to the pro-life label? Isn’t it annoying when someone who disagrees with you on a non-abortion related issue calls you “not really pro-life” when you disagree on something other than abortion?
Great. Now you know how we feel when you do the same. Like here. And here. And so many other places.
I can understand why both sides would do it too.
Progressives hold equality as their primary political value, and they believe that the government should promote equality above almost anything else. And conservatives hold very strongly to the idea the government is here to promote a society in which the traditional family is upheld.Even though equality and family are very important things, I think mandatory, government-enforced, paid maternity leave is a bad idea. And here’s why.First, let me say this.
Please don’t support government-enforced, mandatory paid maternity leave. Please.
We can not simply embrace this culture of “free stuff” and expect to have long term progress or prosperity.