Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,

Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.

If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.

Thank you.

Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.

Re: Carson on CNN - Planned Parenthood

  • That is EXACTLY what I've been saying.  I actually confronted a local representative who had voted to defund Planned Parenthood in NH in a bill that simultaneously funded several other brands of health clinics.  When I said, "So all you did was change brands", she said "Well I wish it hadn't been other abortion clinics, but at least these ones didn't have a history of selling baby parts."  To which I said, "I'm pro-choice, so I actually don't care if the clinic offers abortion services, I care that we are redundantly spending money.  Isn't Obamacare suppose to offering all of these services to low income women?  As of right now, it is, so why is my state spending millions of dollars on the exact same service?"  She just shrugged.

    Just for the record, I'm horrified by Planned Parenthood's illegal practices, and it's beyond me why everybody isn't outraged on both sides.
  • I loved Carly's input tonight on PP during the debate. Super convicting.
  • I don't know if this answers the Obamacare question, but I do know there are still a lot of people who have not gotten coverage. The penalty was less than the cost of coverage. This year that penalty doubles so maybe more people will apply. Obamacare doesn't actually give people coverage. It requires that insurance policies cover preventative care like mammograms and birth control.
  • vlagrl29vlagrl29 member
    Sixth Anniversary 2500 Comments 500 Love Its Name Dropper
    edited September 2015
    Listening to carly's response on PP almost made me cry because I hand't heard of the latest tape going around.
    Baby Birthday Ticker Ticker
  • vlagrl29 said:
    Listening to carly's response on PP almost made me cry because I hand't heard of the latest tape going around.
    There are something like 9 videos out of PP and their illegal, immoral, disgusting exploits. I have seen only the first one of the "Dr." eating lunch.
  • smerka said:
    I don't know if this answers the Obamacare question, but I do know there are still a lot of people who have not gotten coverage. The penalty was less than the cost of coverage. This year that penalty doubles so maybe more people will apply. Obamacare doesn't actually give people coverage. It requires that insurance policies cover preventative care like mammograms and birth control.
    Yes, but it's "suppose to" and it does give coverage to low income families including preventative care.  And that coverage is subsidized by tax dollars already.  
  • BlueBirdMBBlueBirdMB member
    500 Love Its 1000 Comments Second Anniversary Name Dropper
    edited September 2015
    I believe she was misleading actually.  There is no video that shows the scene she described.  They describe that scene, but do not actually show it and all the fact checkers are going crazy about that comment this morning.  

    However, there are a couple of videos that do show fetal tissue, just not the scene she specifically described. 
  • I believe she was misleading actually.  There is no video that shows the scene she described.  They describe that scene, but do not actually show it and all the fact checkers are going crazy about that comment this morning.  

    However, there are a couple of videos that do show fetal tissue, just not the scene she specifically described. 
    It doesn't matter really. Are we really going to "fact check" this to death? Like what PP is doing isn't already horrid enough? FACT: PP is doing this. Fact: The are breaking federal laws. FACT: Babies are dying in painful inhuman matters and their parts are being cut off and sold. Fiorina's point is still valid.
  • BlueBirdMBBlueBirdMB member
    500 Love Its 1000 Comments Second Anniversary Name Dropper
    edited September 2015
    I believe she was misleading actually.  There is no video that shows the scene she described.  They describe that scene, but do not actually show it and all the fact checkers are going crazy about that comment this morning.  

    However, there are a couple of videos that do show fetal tissue, just not the scene she specifically described. 
    It doesn't matter really. Are we really going to "fact check" this to death? Like what PP is doing isn't already horrid enough? FACT: PP is doing this. Fact: The are breaking federal laws. FACT: Babies are dying in painful inhuman matters and their parts are being cut off and sold. Fiorina's point is still valid.
    Of course her point was valid and no it doesn't make it any less horrible.  She said in a perfect way to illustrate her point and it showed her passion and made people feel.  Someone here mentioned that they didn't know there was a video like that, so I was just correcting any misconceptions.
  • But on the fact checking point, I read a bunch of fact checkers today and none of them had much that was truly incorrect.  The only blatant lies were from Trump.  Remember his back and forth with Bush about whether he had lobbied for gambling in FL?  Bush was correct.  Trump's did hire lobbyist in FL to lobby for gambling.

    Also, Trump claims we spend 200 million a year on illegal immigration.  He's been using that line quite a bit in recent weeks to justify his "wall" plan, but there has never a been a study that shows that we spend 200 million a year.  He made that number up out of thin air.
  • I believe she was misleading actually.  There is no video that shows the scene she described.  They describe that scene, but do not actually show it and all the fact checkers are going crazy about that comment this morning.  

    However, there are a couple of videos that do show fetal tissue, just not the scene she specifically described. 
    It doesn't matter really. Are we really going to "fact check" this to death? Like what PP is doing isn't already horrid enough? FACT: PP is doing this. Fact: The are breaking federal laws. FACT: Babies are dying in painful inhuman matters and their parts are being cut off and sold. Fiorina's point is still valid.
    Of course her point was valid and no it doesn't make it any less horrible.  She said in a perfect way to illustrate her point and it showed her passion and made people feel.  Someone here mentioned that they didn't know there was a video like that, so I was just correcting any misconceptions.
    That was me - I was assuming it was a video.  Regardless I find it very appalling.  Although someone told me that the abortion part of PP is not paid for by tax payer money.  Is that true?
    Baby Birthday Ticker Ticker
  • I have always heard that something like 97% of PP money goes to non-abortion related services. And yes from what I understand, abortions are not funded by taxpayers.
  • BlueBirdMBBlueBirdMB member
    500 Love Its 1000 Comments Second Anniversary Name Dropper
    edited September 2015
    smerka said:
    I have always heard that something like 97% of PP money goes to non-abortion related services. And yes from what I understand, abortions are not funded by taxpayers.
    Nobody's arguing that.  That's a fact.

    Edited, I didn't see the above.  Yes, @vlagrl29 we don't fund abortions directly, but we do fund PP as whole to operate and do as they please.


  • I believe she was misleading actually.  There is no video that shows the scene she described.  They describe that scene, but do not actually show it and all the fact checkers are going crazy about that comment this morning.  

    However, there are a couple of videos that do show fetal tissue, just not the scene she specifically described. 

    It doesn't matter really. Are we really going to "fact check" this to death? Like what PP is doing isn't already horrid enough? FACT: PP is doing this. Fact: The are breaking federal laws. FACT: Babies are dying in painful inhuman matters and their parts are being cut off and sold. Fiorina's point is still valid.


    But its NOT a fact that PP is breaking any laws. Federal law does allow organizations like PP to recoup fees to cover the costs associated with donating fetal tissue.
    HeartlandHustle | Personal Finance and Betterment Blog  
  • smerka said:
    I have always heard that something like 97% of PP money goes to non-abortion related services. And yes from what I understand, abortions are not funded by taxpayers.

    Yes, but if you look at the break down, any activity that PP does counts toward this figure. So the blood test leading up to an abortion is counted, administering of pain meds after an abortion is counted. The abortion itself is one act that is counted in the stat, but the procedures, testing, administration of meds all count toward the figure but they are subsets of the overall abortion procedure. None of them would occur if the abortion wasn't happening in the first place.

    For example (hypothetical numbers), let's say you have 10 abortion "patients" on the schedule.

    Each abortion requires 9 additional medical procedures before, during, and after the actual act of abortion taking place to maintain cleanliness, prevent infection, deal with pain, handle the immediate recovery room, disposal, weekly check-up, etc. So if you have a total of 100 medical procedures, 10 of which are the actual abortion itself - it's very easy to say then that 90% of your efforts, and therefore, funds go toward non-abortions.

    And, as Dr. Carson aptly stated, why do we need PP for women's health anyways when we have what Obamacare will do?  


  • I believe she was misleading actually.  There is no video that shows the scene she described.  They describe that scene, but do not actually show it and all the fact checkers are going crazy about that comment this morning.  

    However, there are a couple of videos that do show fetal tissue, just not the scene she specifically described. 
    It doesn't matter really. Are we really going to "fact check" this to death? Like what PP is doing isn't already horrid enough? FACT: PP is doing this. Fact: The are breaking federal laws. FACT: Babies are dying in painful inhuman matters and their parts are being cut off and sold. Fiorina's point is still valid.
    Of course her point was valid and no it doesn't make it any less horrible.  She said in a perfect way to illustrate her point and it showed her passion and made people feel.  Someone here mentioned that they didn't know there was a video like that, so I was just correcting any misconceptions.
    To be clear, I wasn't criticizing you. Just empathizing the validity of Fiorina's remarks.
  • But on the fact checking point, I read a bunch of fact checkers today and none of them had much that was truly incorrect.  The only blatant lies were from Trump.  Remember his back and forth with Bush about whether he had lobbied for gambling in FL?  Bush was correct.  Trump's did hire lobbyist in FL to lobby for gambling.

    Also, Trump claims we spend 200 million a year on illegal immigration.  He's been using that line quite a bit in recent weeks to justify his "wall" plan, but there has never a been a study that shows that we spend 200 million a year.  He made that number up out of thin air.

    Such a turd. So, first he's a liar. Then, he isn't smart enough to know that the fact checkers will check out his claims re: FL gambling? I mean, what game does he think he's playing? He was so bent on being right with Bush that he was just probably hoping he still has enough media graces to bypass actual facts? Bleh.

    Oh and them there's that jerky move of refusing to apologize to Bush's Mexican wife? Come on!

    1. Liar.

    2. Cheater of the American political system (paying candidates and politicians).

    3. Non-apologetic to women (O'Donnell, Kelly, Fiorina and Bush's wife, propbably others.

    4. No public speaking skills.

    5. Cheap shot - re: the cheap shot he made to Paul (unprovoked) in the debate about Paul being on the stage.

  • Like your list!
  • I'm going to throw in another point of view, specifically about medical care cost/availability and why I am glad they recently opened a PP in my city.  First off, low cost medical care where I live in NOLA is atrocious and almost non-existent.  So I welcome any help we can get to that end.

    Also, although I have insurance through my employer, it is a high deductible plan.  In a nutshell, it's more of a catastrophic plan.  Until I hit my $8,000 deductible, I have to pay for EVERYTHING...and that includes doctor visits and prescriptions.  The one exception is I do have a free well-care visit to my obgyn each year, but I'm hoping the PP could be a lower cost fill-in for any other women's health needs I might have.  Or, if I get laid off, could be a low cost place for my annual check-up.  I've been employed since the ACA, so I have no idea about what those costs/coverages in my area are like for one of those plans.

    However, I am strongly pro-choice so I don't have the animosity for PP, like a lot of other people do.  

  • @short+sassy PP only offers low cost options to low income people.  They don't care what your insurance deductible is.  I've used PP in the past because it was the only clinic in my area for a while and I paid full price because of my income.  They aren't a "low cost" option. In fact, after comparing prices, I found PP to be expensive compared to other women's health clinics.

    If you get laid off and have no insurance or income, you could get heavily subsidized insurance because of Obamacare that would pay for BC and preventative care.  I don't agree with ACA, but as of right now, those are the options, so I don't see why we should be redundantly paying for the same services.  

    I'm also pro-choice, but I believe in cutting government spending.  If we repeal ACA, I would support subsidizing women's health care clinics for low income women, but not as of now.
  • @short+sassy PP only offers low cost options to low income people.  They don't care what your insurance deductible is.  I've used PP in the past because it was the only clinic in my area for a while and I paid full price because of my income.  They aren't a "low cost" option. In fact, after comparing prices, I found PP to be expensive compared to other women's health clinics.

    If you get laid off and have no insurance or income, you could get heavily subsidized insurance because of Obamacare that would pay for BC and preventative care.  I don't agree with ACA, but as of right now, those are the options, so I don't see why we should be redundantly paying for the same services.  

    I'm also pro-choice, but I believe in cutting government spending.  If we repeal ACA, I would support subsidizing women's health care clinics for low income women, but not as of now.

    Thanks for the info.  I just assumed they were low cost across the board, but they're pretty new in my city, and I haven't had a need to check them out.

    I have a serious medical condition that, before the ACA, has left me out in the cold for half my adult life.  If I had an employer's plan, I at least had major medial coverage, but wasn't covered for my pre-existing condition for the first year.  And if I was unemployed?  I literally could not buy any medical coverage, other than COBRA...which cost more than my entire month's unemployment check...not even a major medical plan.

    Considering my past, I will admit to being super, super paranoid about the availability of affordable health care for the people in our country.  Because I've known the hopelessness and desperation of wondering how I will pay for my medication when times have been tough.  Or feeling completely freaked out because I'm given no choice but to completely go without any type of medical insurance.  Even something relatively minor, like a broken leg or arm, would have sent me into bankruptcy.

    Supposedly with the ACA all of that is no longer the case, but I've been employed and have insurance (though not very good insurance) since it was enacted, so I just don't know much about what the plans are, what they cover, and how much they cost.  Plus it is a new system...that obviously a lot of citizens don't like...so I worry we'll be thrown back into the "go die in the street" barbarism we had before.   

Sign In or Register to comment.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards