Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Low on dough? Need Birth Control? Hope you don't live in NH


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 deadheadskier

deadheadskier
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,060 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 06:13 AM

120 women a day SCREWED

http://www.reuters.c...E7675Z820110708

:blowup:

This member of the Executive Council deserves to be spit on IMO

"I am opposed to abortion," said Raymond Wieczorek, a council member who voted against the contract. "I am opposed to providing condoms to someone. If you want to have a party, have a party but don't ask me to pay for it."

#2 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,882 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 06:25 AM

The national assault on Planned Parenthood is stunning, horrible, mean, short sighted, financially stupid, and an attack on women and families.

#3 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,477 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 10:55 AM

This member of the Executive Council deserves to be spit on IMO

"I am opposed to abortion," said Raymond Wieczorek, a council member who voted against the contract. "I am opposed to providing condoms to someone. If you want to have a party, have a party but don't ask me to pay for it."


Why?

Because he opposes abortion?

Because he doesn't support having to pay for condoms for others?

#4 gram-man

gram-man
  • VibeTribe
  • 8,172 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 11:03 AM

No, because he's putting his personal views above the needs of his constituents.

#5 Ravn

Ravn
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,803 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 11:04 AM

pffft

free birth control is one government handout that I'm all for. Means less freeloaders in the future, less welfare, less abortion,,

I'm also in favor of free tubal ligations and vasectomy's.

#6 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,477 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 11:10 AM

No, because he's putting his personal views above the needs of his constituents.

Perhaps his constituents believe abortion is murder or that they shouldn't have to pay for condoms for others.

#7 Depends

Depends
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,819 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 12:10 PM

No, abortion should not even be in the question here. Gov't funds do not pay for abortions. This gentleman wants to systematicaly destroy Planned Parenthood. Why does he bring up the fact that he doesn't believe in abortion. That has NOTHING to do with PP handing out birth control.

No, his motive is to destroy PP, because they provide abortions. And he is using the poor in NH as an excuse to push his beliefs.

#8 seany

seany
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,766 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 12:39 PM

Jack - you're free to think what you will of abortion, but government funds don't pay for it and it is a trivial amount of PP's total business (something like 3%).

This is a systematic attack on PP, nothing more. I know many lower income and self-employed women that use PP for their birth control and gynecology needs. My former gf would probably not have had the preventive screening for cervical cancer and procedure to remove a small tumor if it had not been for the PP clinic up here - one that will be defunded under this executive council decision. There just aren't a lot of other options (i.e., low income/free clinics) that provide those specialized services.

It's unconscionable, IMO, that the pro-lifers would take away quality women's health care and birth control to further their agenda :bang:

#9 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 22,262 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 12:57 PM

Perhaps if ya'll read, Joker has not taken a stand, but is rather tossing out questions. :wink:

#10 halfstar

halfstar
  • VibeTribe
  • 16,063 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 01:00 PM

I'm not here to fund your sex life, baller.

#11 deadheadskier

deadheadskier
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,060 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 01:03 PM

No, abortion should not even be in the question here. Gov't funds do not pay for abortions. This gentleman wants to systematicaly destroy Planned Parenthood. Why does he bring up the fact that he doesn't believe in abortion. That has NOTHING to do with PP handing out birth control.

No, his motive is to destroy PP, because they provide abortions. And he is using the poor in NH as an excuse to push his beliefs.


bingo

#12 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,374 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 01:04 PM

Ahem! :angel:

#13 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,477 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 01:08 PM

He says he's opposed to providing free condoms, is there any reason to believe this isn't true?

He wasn't the only one to vote to reject the funds

It appears to me the guy is legally fighting against something he doesn't believe is right.

Whether you agree with him or not, isn't that what America is supposed to be about?

#14 deadheadskier

deadheadskier
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,060 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 01:10 PM

pffft

free birth control is one government handout that I'm all for. Means less freeloaders in the future, less welfare, less abortion,,

I'm also in favor of free tubal ligations and vasectomy's.


Apply this same logic to Social Security ;)

Defunding critical social programs that certain members of society may not personally need can still come back to bite them in the ass in many ways that are often far more damaging.

#15 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 22,262 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 01:12 PM

Ahem! :angel:


D'oh, this isn't about PP, it is about politics. :bang:

#16 deadheadskier

deadheadskier
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,060 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 01:17 PM

He says he's opposed to providing free condoms, is there any reason to believe this isn't true?

He wasn't the only one to vote to reject the funds

It appears to me the guy is legally fighting against something he doesn't believe is right.

Whether you agree with him or not, isn't that what America is supposed to be about?


If it were just about the condoms for him, I'd have no problem with his statement.

I'd disagree with him, but you are right, he's free to express those feelings as an American.

It's crowbarring in his stance on Abortions (a completely separate issue) that's got the saliva welling up in my mouth. ;)

#17 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,374 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 01:19 PM

You'd think republicans would be in favor of such programs since they support population reduction and such. I guess that is part of the hypocrisy. We are good god fearing christians that believe abortion is murder. We also believe in more money for us "top tier" citizens and the rest of you are cattle to be manipulated at our will.

Friggin' idgits.

#18 Depends

Depends
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,819 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 01:27 PM

He says he's opposed to providing free condoms, is there any reason to believe this isn't true?

He wasn't the only one to vote to reject the funds

It appears to me the guy is legally fighting against something he doesn't believe is right.

Whether you agree with him or not, isn't that what America is supposed to be about?


He is legally fighting against something that is 100% legal. He is using services that are provided to low income to further his agenda. He seems to have nothing against free birth control for low income familes, but rather sees this as a way to shutdown Planned Parenthood. IMO of course.

#19 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,477 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 01:50 PM

For all we know he could have been asked what his stance on abortion was.

Perhaps some of the spit should be directed at those running things for the NH Planned Parenthood

[I]While the council approved contracts for legitimate medical centers and organizations, St. Hilaire told the newspaper that Planned Parenthood does abortions and its CEO earns in excess of $250,000 a year. St. Hilaire also cited the fact that most of the services and administration are located outside New Hampshire, in Vermont.

Commenting on the rejection of the contract, Kevin Smith, the director of the pro-life group Cornerstone Action, said he applauds

#20 deadheadskier

deadheadskier
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,060 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 02:00 PM

“The taxpayers have made it very clear that they do not want one cent going towards the funding of abortions, either directly or indirectly,” Smith said.

Again, it is against Federal Law to fund abortions with public money. The council didn't cut funding for abortion. They cut money earmarked for birth control

You just gave another example of someone crowbaring their beliefs on a totally separate issue from birth control.

#21 vic

vic
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,913 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 02:10 PM

anyone who thinks PP should be dismantled is my enemy. lines are starting to be drawn here.

#22 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,477 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 02:13 PM

He is legally fighting against something that is 100% legal. He is using services that are provided to low income to further his agenda. He seems to have nothing against free birth control for low income familes, but rather sees this as a way to shutdown Planned Parenthood. IMO of course.

And that's the thing, it's all opinions.

But it is it right to "spit" on others because you don't agree with what you think their motives are? Or because you don't agree with what they may or may not be doing?

IMO the CEO that's making over $250K off of this "non-profit" should be spit on before this guy

#23 seany

seany
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,766 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 02:32 PM

[quote name='Joker']

Perhaps some of the spit should be directed at those running things for the NH Planned Parenthood

[I]While the council approved contracts for legitimate medical centers and organizations, St. Hilaire told the newspaper that Planned Parenthood does abortions and its CEO earns in excess of $250,000 a year. St. Hilaire also cited the fact that most of the services and administration are located outside New Hampshire, in Vermont.

Commenting on the rejection of the contract, Kevin Smith, the director of the pro-life group Cornerstone Action, said he applauds

#24 vic

vic
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,913 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 02:49 PM

lifenews - now there's a likely unbiased source :rolleyes:



seriously:rolleyes:

#25 deadheadskier

deadheadskier
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,060 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 03:13 PM

IMO the CEO that's making over $250K off of this "non-profit" should be spit on before this guy


well, you better start saving up a lot of saliva because many, many, many CEOs for non-profit organizations that size receive substantial paychecks.

Even in the non-profit world, you have to pay to get good talent.

#26 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,477 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 03:18 PM

Yeah I was trying to find more on Wieczorek, got led to that site and then saw the numbers. I still direct my spit at any CEO of a non profit that my taxes are being spent on pulling in that kind of money.

Any idea how that works? Do they get funding from all 3 states?

#27 seany

seany
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,766 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 03:32 PM

Yeah I was trying to find more on Wieczorek, got led to that site and then saw the numbers. I still direct my spit at any CEO of a non profit that my taxes are being spent on pulling in that kind of money.

Any idea how that works? Do they get funding from all 3 states?


I would imagine so, since they serve all 3 states. Their most recent annual report is here: http://www.plannedpa...Report_2009.pdf
It doesn't have the breakout of revenue by state, only that 17.1% of their revenue comes from federal, state, and local grants. So, basically that money is about equal to their overhead and admin costs. And VT does have more clinics and patients than NH, though I imagine many people on the VT/NH border go to whatever clinic is closest to them. I know my friends here in VT go to the one across in NH. I wouldn't be surprised if people in northern NH are going over to VT, as those would be closest.

#28 Ravn

Ravn
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,803 posts

Posted 14 July 2011 - 08:40 PM

point of clarification: I am in favor of free birth control, I don't know what in my post made you think I wasn't.