The debate "Tax dollars to foster homes is preferable over planned parenthood" was started by
June 5, 2018, 12:42 pm.
10 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 6 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
Matthew354 posted 2 arguments to the agreers part.
Nemiroff posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
Matthew354, Simonderp and 8 visitors agree.
6 visitors disagree.
on a very fundamental level, I agree with you. there is no reason the government should be doing these stupid private public partnerships. let the private sector take care of it, and if it wont, then the gov will do it without middlemen.
I would be fine with the private sector doing this job, but the problem is they didnt.
funding PP is like funding foster care not for their abortion services but their contraceptives services. their contribution to stopping the spread of STDs is a bonus that is priceless.
replace it with an *adequate* government agency even without abortion, and bye bye pp. but as always yall just want to repeal and ignore.
Because even though their services such as abortions is a small percentage of what they do, they do not deserve state funding because of it. Foster homes should have all that state funding if parents cannot be responsible for their children, and it makes part of me want parenting require a license before conceiving a child.
I already know that, but I didn't say that because they don't deserve to exist, and I would be completely fine with them being funded by the private sector.
planned parenthood does alot more than just abortions, you know that right?
why? planned Parenthood does important work helping women. why would some other program be more important? and even if it is, we should fund both.