🚀 go-pugleaf

Jennifer L. Monteith wrote:
> 
> > > : >Papa Jack comments:
> > > : >I agree with everything Chris says except the Planned Parenthood
> > > : >recommendation.  PPs are chop shops who are the nation's largest
> > > : >provider of abortions.  They pretty it up with superficial "coun-
> > > : >seling" -- but, the choices/alternatives they offer are limited.
> 
> I'm disappointed that you haven't done your homework...PP is the
> nation's largest provider b/c they encompass so many clinics under their
> PPFA umbrella.  If you choose any area of the country, there will be
> other clinics that offer abortions 5 days a week whereas many PP clinics
> only provide that service in some of their clinics and only one day a
> week.  You do them a disservice by calling them "chop shops" when you
> don't give even give them a fair judgement as far as stats.  FYI, 5% of
> what PP does is abortions, 95% is family planning, STD services, HIV
> testing and counseling, screening for cervical and breast cancer,
> prenatal care and general health care in some health clinics, and
> unbiased counseling about more than just pregnancy.  They also do
> education ("Growing up male/female" which is more and better info than I
> got in school) and speaking engagements etc.
> 
> > > : PJ, have you ever been pregnant, and gone into a PP, asking for
> > > : counseling/choices/alternatives?
> > > :
> > > : I didn't think so.
> > > :
> > > : Until you reach that situation, you have no credence.
> > > :
> >
> > This is nothing more than the tired and totally brain-dead
> > argument that valid opinions regarding an issue may only be
> > held by those that have been involved with that issue. An
> > equally valid (or invalid) case could be made in the
> > opposite direction: E.g., being involved in the issue makes
> > you emotionally "caught-up" in it and unable to rationally
> > and objectively evaluate the facts of the issue.
> 
> You are off track.  It is perfectly legitimate to ask someone who is
> judging someone on the basis of what they have "heard" if they have ever
> had any contact with the person they accuse or have any factual
> experience on which to base their accusations.  Yes, you can turn it
> around but people are much more likely to believe a debate between two
> people with opposite views who have had the same experience i.e. been in
> to speak with a PP counselor.
>

I was responding more to the fact that Papa Jack has probably never
been, nor ever will be pregnant.  You should certainly not discount
a person's opinion because he/she is physically unable to participate
in some way with the issue at hand.
 
> > Let's just listen for the pertinent facts in each person's
> > presentation of their view and avoid trying to discredit
> > someone because they're not the right sex (or, in this
> > discussion, the right age!!!)
> 
> The pertinent facts can definitely include whether or not someone has
> actually ever spoken with whom they are accusing (BTW if you let him
> answer, PJ has had this discussion before and did not feel so violently
> about PP.  I don't know what has changed his mind; perhaps he HAS gone
> in and spoken with someone there.)  And who cares how old PJ is?  I
> certainly don't and I know how old he is.
> 

Sorry, I guess I was a little ambiguous.  I was actually referring to
the age of the aborted human beings.

Rob