What is wrong with Planned Parenthood and why Planned Parenthood must be defunded

Planned Parenthood claims to be a “trusted health care provider” who “delivers vital reproductive health care, sex education, and information to millions of women, men, and young people worldwide,” but is really a pro-abortion organization whose primary purpose is to make as much money as possible from abortions. In addition, there are many other things that are wrong with Planned Parenthood, including but not limited to the sale of fetal body parts that are harvested from aborted children, the cover-up of statutory rape and the sexual abuse of minors, encouraging children to engage in sexual activity outside of marriage through its sex education programs, lobbying to get pro-abortion politicians elected and to keep abortion legal, pressuring pregnant patients into undergoing an abortion, and lying to prospective abortion patients about the facts of fetal development. As such, Planned Parenthood should lose its government funding, and individuals and corporations should stop donating to Planned Parenthood.

One of the biggest problems with Planned Parenthood is that it misrepresents itself to the government, to its donors, and its potential patients. First, Planned Parenthood claims that without birth control, women are unable to choose when they want to have children and how many children they want to have, but women are actually able to make these decisions without birth control by choosing to completely abstain from sexual activity when they do not want to have children. Second, Planned Parenthood represents abortion as a safe procedure on its website and portrays abortion as being a safe procedure in its YouTube video on in-clinic abortion, but there have been incidents of botched abortions being performed at Planned Parenthood abortion clinics, including an abortion performed at a Chicago Planned Parenthood clinic that resulted in the death of Tonya Reaves back in 2012. Third, even though Planned Parenthood claims that only 3% of its services are abortions, Planned Parenthood performs abortions on approximately 92% of its pregnant patients and Planned Parenthood’s primary source of revenue is from the abortions performed at Planned Parenthood abortion clinics. Fourth, Planned Parenthood receives over $500 million dollars of taxpayer funding, but Planned Parenthood has lied to the government in order to receive taxpayer money that it should not have been able to receive in the first place. Moreover, Planned Parenthood misrepresents itself as a comprehensive woman’s healthcare provider that cares about women when they are primarily in the business of performing as many abortions as possible.

Another major problem with Planned Parenthood is that at least some Planned Parenthood clinics are believed to be involved in the sale of fetal body parts from babies who are aborted at Planned Parenthood clinics. It is also believed that Planned Parenthood is violating the law by profiting from the sale of fetal body parts, by altering the manner in which the abortions from which these fetal body parts are obtained, and by performing abortions with the knowledge that fetal body parts will be harvested from these aborted babies and resold. In addition, Abby Johnson has recently admitted that the Planned Parenthood clinic that she used to work for did harvest fetal body parts from aborted babies. Furthermore, there are even indications that Planned Parenthood might possibly be willing to kill babies who are born as a result of a failed abortion in order to harvest fetal body parts. Finally, many individuals are outraged by the harvesting and resale of fetal body parts that are harvested from babies aborted at Planned Parenthood clinics.

In addition to misrepresenting itself as a comprehensive woman’s health provider and in addition to possible involvement in the harvesting and resale of fetal body parts, Planned Parenthood is actively trying to increase demand for abortions in order to make additional profit, and they are taking several measures in an attempt to achieve this goal. First, Planned Parenthood is pushing comprehensive sex education to school-age children with the intentions of increasing the number of sexually active teens, increasing the number of unplanned teenage pregnancies, and increasing the demand for abortion. Second, Planned Parenthood imposes quotas on the number of abortions that each clinic must perform in order to maximize its profits. Third, Planned Parenthood promotes birth control with the knowledge that it will sometimes fail to prevent unplanned pregnancies in order to increase the number of unplanned pregnancies and in order to increase demand for abortion. Additionally, pregnant women who seek medical care at Planned Parenthood clinics are usually pressured into undergoing an abortion by Planned Parenthood employees because Planned Parenthood wants to do as many abortions as they can and because they want to make as much money as they can off of abortions. Furthermore, Planned Parenthood is willing to cut corners on patient safety to maximize profits, to increase the efficiency of its abortion operations, and to increase the number of abortions that it can perform. Finally, Planned Parenthood actually cares more about the money than it does about protecting the health of women and reducing the number of unplanned pregnancies.

Individuals and corporations must stop donating to Planned Parenthood, and taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood by federal, state, and local governments must also be stopped for several reasons. First, Planned Parenthood is using the taxpayer funding and donations in order to increase demand for abortions. Second, Planned Parenthood misrepresents itself to the government, to the general public, to its patients, and to its prospective patients in order to receive donations and taxpayer funding that it would not otherwise receive. Third, Planned Parenthood might be covering the cost of abortions by overcharging Medicaid and other health insurance companies for other medical services that are rendered to patients who had undergone an abortion at Planned Parenthood abortion clinics. Furthermore, Planned Parenthood contributes large sums of money to the campaigns of pro-abortion candidates in order to ensure that they can continue to legally make money off of its abortion services, and the large sums of money paid to these campaigns come from taxpayer funds, donations, and abortion revenue. If people and companies stopped donating to Planned Parenthood and if the taxpayer funding to Planned Parenthood is stopped, there will be a reduction in the demand for Planned Parenthood’s abortion services and Planned Parenthood would not be contributing large sums of money to the campaigns of pro-abortion candidates.

Advertisements

Why pro-life candidates should be elected in the 2016 election and why Hillary Clinton should not be elected as President

Getting a pro-life president elected, electing more pro-life U.S. representatives, and electing more pro-life U.S. Senators in the upcoming 2016 election are all needed in order to get abortion-on-demand outlawed in the United States. These pro-life candidates for political office should let voters know that they will help women who are in crisis pregnancies by providing them easier access to prenatal medical care, obstetric medical care, and postpartum medical care through healthcare providers who are not in the business of performing abortions and in a loving and caring manner. In addition, these pro-life candidates should let voters know that they will ensure that low-income women will continue to have access to legitimate gynecological medical care that does not involve the killing of unborn children in the event that abortion providers lose government funding or in the event that abortion becomes illegal.

The pro-life strategy that should be undertaken by politicians in the United States should involve more than simply outlawing abortion, and should include the following components:

  • Ensuring that pregnant women have access to prenatal medical care and obstetric medical care through providers that are not in the business of performing abortions
  • Improving access to pro-life crisis pregnancy assistance, pro-life prenatal medical care, and obstetric medical care for women who are in crisis pregnancies
  • Providing pregnant women who are unable to work due to a complication of a pregnancy with access to unemployment benefits and medical coverage during the remainder of her pregnancy
  • Letting pregnant women who do not want to take care of their children after birth know that there are couples who really want to adopt these children and who will take care of these children in a loving and caring manner
  • Making it easier for pregnant women who do not want to take care of their children after birth to give up these children for adoption
  • Cutting government funding to abortion providers, including but not limited to Planned Parenthood
  • Increasing taxpayer funding to healthcare providers that provide prenatal medical care and obstetric medical care to women who are in crisis pregnancies and that are not in the business of performing abortions
  • Increasing taxpayer funding to pro-life crisis pregnancy centers who are not in the business of providing abortions

The above strategy will reduce the demand for abortion in the United States and will send the message that there is hope for pregnant women who are in desperate situations. In addition, the above pro-life strategy will also address the problem of the infanticide of newborn babies who are unwanted by their mothers. Furthermore, this approach will lead to an increased respect for human life in the United States.

Hillary Clinton, who has already announced that she will be running for President in 2016, clearly supports keeping abortion legal. While she has recently said that she will reduce the abortion rate in the United States by half, she will likely fail to implement the policies that are needed to reduce the demand for abortion in this country. Furthermore, Hillary Clinton has also recently said that religious beliefs that prohibit abortion need to be changed, but these religious beliefs cannot be changed because abortion by its very nature constitutes the killing of an innocent human being, is always an intrinsically evil act, is always gravely evil in the eyes of God, always offends against the sanctity of human life, and always violates natural moral law. Hillary Clinton should not be elected as President of the United States because she will promote policies that will keep abortion legal in the United States, because she will fail to take the measures that are needed to reduce the demand for abortion in the United States, and because she will attempt to impose her own personal beliefs on religions, religious denominations, and churches in the United States if she is elected President of the United States.

If a pro-life presidential candidate wins in the 2016 United States presidential election and if more pro-life candidates are elected into the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives in the 2016 Election, pro-life policies that would encourage women in crisis pregnancies to choose life instead of abortion will likely be implemented and more pro-life laws will likely be enacted at the federal level. In addition, a pro-life president will likely appoint additional pro-life justices to the United States Supreme Court that might be willing to reverse the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions. Furthermore, the 115th United States Congress must enact legislation that will help women in crisis pregnancies choose life for their unborn children, including providing these women with access to quality pro-life prenatal medical care, making it easier for women who do not want to take care of their children after birth to give up their children for adoption, and defunding abortion providers who are primarily in the business of performing abortions, including but not limited to Planned Parenthood.

There are few important things that voters who are eligible to vote in the upcoming 2016 Election need to know regarding the abortion issue, and here are some of the things that voters must know regarding the abortion issue:

  • Women are usually able to prevent unplanned, unwanted, or unintended pregnancies from occurring by choosing to completely abstain from sexual activity.
  • The vast majority of pregnancies that are aborted in the United States were conceived as a result of consensual sexual intercourse and these pregnancies could have been prevented in the first place if these women had chosen to completely abstain from sexual activity.
  • The vast majority of abortions that are being performed at abortion clinics in the United States are being performed for purposes other than the preservation of the life or health of the mother.
  • Many of the pregnant women who are seeking abortions are only willing to do so if it is legal and readily available.
  • If abortion is outlawed in the United States, most of the women who are in crisis pregnancies will not seek an illegal back-alley abortion, despite the popular claim that women will resort to illegal back-alley abortions if abortion is outlawed.
  • The majority of pregnant women who are choosing to end a pregnancy through an abortion are choosing to do so because they feel that they would be unable to take care of their unborn children after birth.
  • Most of the women who are seeking to end pregnancies through abortion would not have chosen to end a pregnancy through an abortion if they were provided with the necessary support to choose life for their unborn children.
  • Improving access to pro-life crisis pregnancy assistance, quality pro-life prenatal medical care that does not involve the performance of abortion, and unemployment benefits for women who are unable to work because of a complication of pregnancy will reduce the demand for abortion.
  • Some of the newborn children who are unwanted by their biological parents are being killed through infanticide in the United States, despite the availability of legal abortion-on-demand during all nine months of pregnancy in the United States.
  • Implementing pro-life policies that reduce the demand for abortion in the United States will also reduce the likelihood that newborn children who are unwanted by their biological parents are killed through after-birth infanticide.
  • Human embryos and human fetuses are unborn human beings and were so since the moment of fertilization, and as such should have a legally protected right to life, regardless of whether these unborn human beings are wanted by their parents.
  • Abortion should be outlawed in the United States, but it should be done through an approach that will encourage women who are in crisis pregnancies to choose life for their unborn children.

Infanticide of newborn babies is illegal in the United States

Even though late-term abortion procedures are usually legal in the United States, the infanticide of newborn babies is currently illegal in the United States. There are a few Americans who defend the infanticide of newborn babies by considering such acts as an “after-birth abortion” or “fourth trimester abortion”, but the infanticide of a newborn baby involves the killing of an newborn baby by an act or omission after birth whereas an abortion involves the killing of an unborn baby prior to or during the termination of pregnancy. The United States Supreme Court did rule in the Roe v. Wade case that unborn children were not considered to be persons under the 14th Amendment and that the right to life of unborn children are not protected under the 14th Amendment, but newborn babies are currently considered to be persons under the 14th Amendment and do have a constitutionally guaranteed right to life. The killing of an unborn child in the third trimester of pregnancy prior to birth is usually legal, but the killing of a newborn baby after birth is clearly illegal.

There are women who are willing to kill their newborn baby after birth because they do not want to take care of their newborn baby. These killings do arise from a mentality that is similar to that of women who choose to abort their unwanted unborn child prior to birth out of convenience. Even though it might be understandable that the mother of a child who was born after an unwanted pregnancy might be in a desperate situation, the killing of a newborn baby after birth can never be morally justified, nor should it ever be legally justifiable. Unlike legal abortions, the killing of a newborn baby after birth is considered to be murder in the eyes of the law. Megan Huntsman was recently charged with killing 6 of her unwanted babies after birth, Amanda Hein was recently sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for killing her newborn son after birth, and Kermit Gosnell and other employees of his former abortion clinic were convicted of the murders of newborn babies last year.

The infanticide of newborn babies should remain illegal without exception in the United States, and the United States Supreme Court should continue to uphold that newborn babies are persons who have a constitutionally guaranteed right to life. While there are some pro-abortion Americans who support the legalized infanticide of newborn babies, the majority of Americans are strongly opposed to the legalization of infanticide of newborn babies. Even though the right to life has already been stripped away from unborn babies as a result of the Roe v. Wade case, newborn babies do have a constitutionally guaranteed right to life that should never be taken away. The right of states to prohibit the infanticide of newborn babies and the right of unborn babies to life should be legally protected in every circumstance and should never be taken away by the courts.