Bachmann's "UN-GAYING" hubby's clinic got $160k in govt dollars

[Straw Man]

A 2009 report says that nearly 40% of their money came from abortions. That hardly sounds like "3%" to me. It would also explain why liberals get bent out of shape, when people talk about cutting PP's federal funding.

I doubt that such is the case with Bachmann's clinic.

source?

Even John Kyl admitted his statement (like yours) was not intended to be a factual statment

BTW - do you have any speculation on why the Bachmanns are lying about what they do at their clinic

Seems like lying might be a big part of being a christian

[MCWAY]

source?

I thought I posted that earlier. My fault!!

http://liveaction.org/blog/38-4-of-pp-health-center-income-is-from-abortions/

BTW - do you have any speculation on why the Bachmanns are lying about what they do at their clinic

Seems like lying might be a big part of being a christian

I don't think they're lying. The statement made by Marcus Bachmann is that his clinic does not engage in reparative therapy.

"If someone is interested in talking to us about their homosexuality, we are open to talking about that. But if someone comes in a homosexual and they want to stay homosexual, I don't have a problem with that,"

Reparative therapy, per the words of Dr. Nicolosi (who does use it), is claiming that homosexuality is actually an attempt to mask a deficit caused by some trauma in life (physical/sexual abuse, lack of bonding with a same-sex parent, etc) and fixing that by repairing those deficits.

Based on the scant footage thus far, Bachmann's clinic doesn't go as in-depth as what Nicolosi does.

[tonymctones]

only one person in this thread has addressed using 160k in tax dollars for religious purposes and that was tonymctones who said it is not important because it wasn't much

 

LOL didnt say it didnt matter magoo, i said if thats all then its better by far then what obama has done in the last month...

would you rather the lesser or more of 2 evils?

[Mr. Magoo]

LOL didnt say it didnt matter magoo, i said if thats all then its better by far then what obama has done in the last month...

would you rather the lesser or more of 2 evils?

I guess I misinterpreted your "pff". 

and yes, 160k is less than 80 million or whatever number it was, but I think thats irrelevant.

IF 160k (or any tax money) was used to fund a....I'm going to call it a religious community center (I think most would agree to that term) then I disagree with it. If no tax money was spent on it, then it is fine. I also disagree with her husband not admitting to it.

[tonymctones]

I guess I misinterpreted your "pff". 

and yes, 160k is less than 80 million or whatever number it was, but I think thats irrelevant.

IF 160k (or any tax money) was used to fund a....I'm going to call it a religious community center (I think most would agree to that term) then I disagree with it. If no tax money was spent on it, then it is fine. I also disagree with her husband not admitting to it.

I agree with them not admitting it, call it what it is

how do you feel about funding of planned parent hood?

[Dos Equis]

I guess I misinterpreted your "pff". 

and yes, 160k is less than 80 million or whatever number it was, but I think thats irrelevant.

IF 160k (or any tax money) was used to fund a....I'm going to call it a religious community center (I think most would agree to that term) then I disagree with it. If no tax money was spent on it, then it is fine. I also disagree with her husband not admitting to it.

What difference does it make they got some funding? 

[Straw Man]

I thought I posted that earlier. My fault!!

http://liveaction.org/blog/38-4-of-pp-health-center-income-is-from-abortions/

Ok - I looked at the link and all this guy does is take the estimated average cost of an abortion (from a 2001 study from something called the Guttmacher Institute) and then mulitiple that figure by the # of abortions done in 2009 and then divide that figure by total annual income.

So What

It's an irrelevent calcuation

PP is a non-profit organization and offers many of their services for FREE

As a % of actual services rendered abortions come in at 3%

To give you a comparison let's look at a for profit business such as a movie theater

Concession saless make on average ~ 40% of the total profit for theater (often much higher) but would anyone argue that it's 40% of the services they provide?

Of course not

[Mr. Magoo]

What difference does it make they got some funding? 

Tax dollars are not to be used to support, directly or indirectly, a specific religious belief/doctrine/etc

Just like how little jewish timmy cant be forced to listen to how he will burn in hell while sitting in his kindergarten class in a public school.

[blacken700]

[blacken700]

[tonymctones]

Tax dollars are not to be used to support, directly or indirectly, a specific religious belief/doctrine/etc

Just like how little jewish timmy cant be forced to listen to how he will burn in hell while sitting in his kindergarten class in a public school.

they also arent supposed to go towards abortion....

so again how do you feel about planned parenthood?

[Mr. Magoo]

they also arent supposed to go towards abortion....

so again how do you feel about planned parenthood?

I don't know enough about planned parenthood (I've heard the 3% stat before is all), but if tax dollars aren't suppose to be used for abortion and planned parenthood uses tax dollars for abortion then I disagree with it too.

But abortion isnt relevent when talking about the bachmann clinic misusing tax money.

(don't worry, I'm consistent  )

[tonymctones]

I don't know enough about planned parenthood (I've heard the 3% stat before is all), but if tax dollars aren't suppose to be used for abortion and planned parenthood uses tax dollars for abortion then I disagree with it too.

But abortion isnt relevent when talking about the bachmann clinic misusing tax money.

(don't worry, I'm consistent  )

I know you are, you just dont like talking about the other side is all ...

planned parenthood gets funds but says that they dont use any of the govt money to do abortions....a distinction without a difference...

bachmans husband could say the same thing...none of the govt money was used for this, it was used for other things, community outreach, charity etc...

At any rate the govt gives money to alot of religious organizations...please tell me why you believe the govt isnt supposed to give money to any religious group?

[Mr. Magoo]

I know you are, you just dont like talking about the other side is all ...

planned parenthood gets funds but says that they dont use any of the govt money to do abortions....a distinction without a difference...

bachmans husband could say the same thing...none of the govt money was used for this, it was used for other things, community outreach, charity etc...

At any rate the govt gives money to alot of religious organizations...please tell me why you believe the govt isnt supposed to give money to any religious group?

I believe the gov shouldn't give money to religious groups because I think of it as an implicit endorsement, and I don't believe it is the function of govt to implicitly endorse religious organizations. I think they should be separate, especially when it comes to tax dollars. It gets sticky and gray quick, but this is my belief in general.

[Soul Crusher]

I believe the gov shouldn't give money to religious groups because I think of it as an implicit endorsement, and I don't believe it is the function of govt to implicitly endorse religious organizations. I think they should be separate, especially when it comes to tax dollars. It gets sticky and gray quick, but this is my belief in general.

Many religious groups do a great job at a far cheaper cost than govt at delivering aid, and doing certain tasks than if given to govt agencies without the legacy costs.   Not that I agre with it, but much rather religious groups get block grants to give out aid, meals, etc, than it be done through govt agencies where we have to pay CSEA and AFSME workers union scale wages and benes for charity work. 

[tonymctones]

I believe the gov shouldn't give money to religious groups because I think of it as an implicit endorsement, and I don't believe it is the function of govt to implicitly endorse religious organizations. I think they should be separate, especially when it comes to tax dollars. It gets sticky and gray quick, but this is my belief in general.

what is that belief grounded in?

is the govt funding welfare its implicit endorsement of being a leach on society?

[240 is Back]

What difference does it make they got some funding? 

what diff does it make that PP got some funding? 

[Dos Equis]

Tax dollars are not to be used to support, directly or indirectly, a specific religious belief/doctrine/etc

Not really.  We have an Office of Faith Based Initiatives.  We use tax dollars to pay for military chaplains, churches, etc.  We have taxpayer funded chaplains on the Congressional payroll.  There are other "religious" organizations that get federal funding. 

[Dos Equis]

what diff does it make that PP got some funding?