Defend Planned Parenthood Saturday Feb. 11

**JonWylie** · March-18-24, 12:56 PM

Originally Posted by Rocket

Pretty much, though I may have exaggerated slightly. It's actually 97.2% non-healthcare, depending on the year and the survey done.

For sure Southen has zero data supporting the statement "Women's healthcare". That's just a lie the left uses to justify their actions. Is there a reason you didn't ask him for data to support such a laughable statement?

Because he gave his opinion on the subject and didn't make up a statistic without any support and pass it off as fact, like you.

**Rocket** · March-18-24, 02:31 PM

Because he stated his feelings, instead of quoting facts like you.

There, FIXED.

You can google surveys if you like where they ask abortion clinic customers what their reasons were for terminating their baby, and 97 - 99% say it was for reasons other than their health.

Reasons given. Many women have multiple reasons for getting one;

1. Having a child would interfere with a woman's education, work or ability to care for dependents [[74%)

2. Can not afford a baby now [[73%)

3. Did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems [[48%)

4. Nearly four in 10 women said they had completed their childbearing.

5. Almost one-third were not ready to have a child.

https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/...e-perspectives

Notice, "The mother's health" doesn't even make the list. There is a category for Health, [12%], but most of the reasons in that category involve the fetus's health, because the mother is an alky, or is using prescription or illicit drugs etc. VERY little of that 12% is related to protecting the mother's actual health. Instead, way up in the high 90's is protecting the mother's lifestyle.

My apologies if the well- known facts disagree with your beliefs. But it's helpful to at least be aware of the facts, even if you fully plan to ignore them.

PP wasn't started to protect women's health. [The actual reason has been mentioned before]. They just use that as an excuse to get free taxpayer money.

**JonWylie** · March-19-24, 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by Rocket

Because he stated his feelings, instead of quoting facts like you.

There, FIXED.

You can google surveys if you like where they ask abortion clinic customers what their reasons were for terminating their baby, and 97 - 99% say it was for reasons other than their health.

Reasons given. Many women have multiple reasons for getting one;

1. Having a child would interfere with a woman's education, work or ability to care for dependents [[74%)

2. Can not afford a baby now [[73%)

3. Did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems [[48%)

4. Nearly four in 10 women said they had completed their childbearing.

5. Almost one-third were not ready to have a child.

https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/...e-perspectives

Notice, "The mother's health" doesn't even make the list. There is a category for Health, [12%], but most of the reasons in that category involve the fetus's health, because the mother is an alky, or is using prescription or illicit drugs etc. VERY little of that 12% is related to protecting the mother's actual health. Instead, way up in the high 90's is protecting the mother's lifestyle.

My apologies if the well- known facts disagree with your beliefs. But it's helpful to at least be aware of the facts, even if you fully plan to ignore them.

PP wasn't started to protect women's health. [The actual reason has been mentioned before]. They just use that as an excuse to get free taxpayer money.

Doubling down on your incorrect statement with citations that don't even back it up, crazy...

110-118_Finer.qxp [[guttmacher.org)

**Rocket** · March-19-24, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by JonWylie

Doubling down on your incorrect statement with citations that don't even back it up, crazy...

110-118_Finer.qxp [[guttmacher.org)

Yes it does.

12%in the right column is EXACTLY the number I quoted.

But that represents an entire category of health concerns, which include;

1. Fearing for the baby's health because I don't wanna give up drinking lots of booze.

2. Fearing for the baby's health because I don't want to stop doing drugs.

etc.

It's unclear from guttmacher's reports exactly what percentage are actual "Mother's health / life may be at risk", but surveys done at clinics suggests it's about 2.7%. [As I also stated].

You should really read the entire report before slandering someone for being correct.

**JonWylie** · March-19-24, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by Rocket

Yes it does.

12%in the right column is EXACTLY the number I quoted.

But that represents an entire category of health concerns, which include;

1. Fearing for the baby's health because I don't wanna give up drinking lots of booze.

2. Fearing for the baby's health because I don't want to stop doing drugs.

etc.

It's unclear from guttmacher's reports exactly what percentage are actual "Mother's health / life may be at risk", but surveys done at clinics suggests it's about 2.7%. [As I also stated].

You should really read the entire report before slandering someone for being correct.

You provided the source, and the source doesn't back up what you said. First it was 99%, then it was 97.3%, and now it's that other sources support you, but not the one you provided. You got defensive and tried to deflect to others comments simply because I asked for a source on the number, which you still haven't provided.

All I wanted was a source to back up the claim of "It's not healthcare 99% of the time" and I'm happy to look at anything you have to provide, because that number seems very high from the literature that I've seen.

If it's a debate about what constitutes healthcare, that's a whole different conversation, but I simply want to source your statement. Further, the study cited allows for multiple responses from individuals as to reasons for having an abortion, so it's really difficult for it to support your original statement.

Based off the study, you could say a majority don't have an abortion for health concerns, or that it's not a leading reason, or even that it is one of the smallest percentages of reasons [[although it's not the smallest). But not healthcare 99% of the time is not factually supported.

**Rocket** · March-19-24, 02:30 PM

Originally Posted by JonWylie

You provided the source, and the source doesn't back up what you said. First it was 99%, then it was 97.3%,

It definitely takes effort to find what you're looking for. You have to really WANT it.

I'll take one last crack at it.

The 12% category of "Health" for example includes the mother's health, and that of others. It also includes mental health, drug and alcohol use, etc. There isn't one line item labeled "Reasonable concern for the mother's health if she carries the child to term".

More importantly, few if any of the women studied gave just one reason. Often there are many reasons. Ex, I'm still in school, can't afford it, boyfriend broke up, I like to drink and use drugs a lot, and because of that, the baby's health would suffer.

For these and other reasons, distilling out an exact percentage for JUST the mothers health is tough.

The example above would then be included under "health", and 3 other categories, none of which are actually health risks to the mother. There's also no reason to suspect that HER health is the primary reason. Certainly as she didn't even mention it in the above hypothetical example.

So would that example above count as "Protecting the health of the mother" as pro-abortionists would argue? Is it as high as 12%? Lets dive deeper.

Here's a study of 1,209 women at clinics from 2004.
https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/...e-perspectives

If we look in Par 3 under "Data Analysis", we see "Of the 1,209 respondents, 4% gave no reasons and were excluded from most analyses. "

OK, so 1,205 women gave one or more reasons for having an abortion.

Are you with me so far?

Then at the bottom of Par 4, under Reasons for Abortion we find "Nine women cited health concerns for themselves, possible problems affecting the health of the fetus or both as a reason for terminating the pregnancy."

So, 9 of 1,205 gives us what? 3/4 of one percent? That means 99.25% did it for reasons other than their own, or even their fetus's health.

And really, the fetus's health is probably most of that. The maternal death rate in the USA runs around 0.0004 most years. [32 / 100,000], not that there aren't less than lethal health concerns that might warrant it.

So perhaps I should have said that 99.5% of them aren't healthcare? 99.8% perhaps? But as I can't find a percentage breakdown in that final category, I can't tell if it's 99.5% or 99.8% that aren't healthcare for the mother. Best we can tell, it's some number greater than 99.25%.

So 99% is close enough.

**JonWylie** · March-19-24, 06:46 PM

Originally Posted by Rocket

It definitely take effort to find what you're looking for. You have to really WANT it.

I'll take one last crack at it.

The category of "Health" for example includes the mother's health, and that of others. It also includes mental health, drug and alcohol use, etc.

More importantly, few if any of the women studied gave just one reason. Often there are many reasons. I'm still in school, can't afford it, boyfriend broke up, I like to drink and use drugs a lot, and the baby's health would suffer, etc.

The example above would be included under "health" and 3 other categories, none of which are actually health risks to the mother. There's also no reason to suspect that HER health is the primary reason. Certainly as she didn't even mention it in the above hypothetical example.

So does that count as "Protecting the health of the mother" as pro-abortionists would argue? Is it as high as 12%? Lets dive deeper.

Here's a study of 1,209 women at clinics from 2004.
https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/...e-perspectives

If we look in Par 3 under "Data Analysis", we see "Of the 1,209 respondents, 4% gave no reasons and were excluded from most analyses. "

OK, so 1,205 women gave one or more reasons for having an abortion.

Are you with me so far?

Then at the bottom of Par 4, under Reasons for Abortion we find "Nine women cited health concerns for themselves, possible problems affecting the health of the fetus or both as a reason for terminating the pregnancy."

So, 9 of 1,205 gives us what? 3/4 of one percent? That means 99.25% did it for reasons other than their own, or their fetus's health.

And really, the fetus's health is probably most of that. The maternal death rate in the USA runs around 0.0004 most years. [32 / 100,000]

So really, I probably should have said that 99.5% of them aren't healthcare. But as I can't find a percentage breakdown in that final category, I can't tell if it's 99.5% or 99.8% that aren't healthcare, and I'm out of time, so I'll just stick with the 99% number [>99.25% technically].

I appreciate the time you took to break this down. However, as I read it, you're missing a critical part of the methodology which states "In 2004, a structured survey was completed by 1,209 abortion patients at 11 large providers, and in-depth interviews were conducted with 38 women at four sites."

The portion you cite referring to the 9 women is only referencing those who participated in the "in-depth interview", which was 38 total women across 4 sites.

It would be incorrect to use the percentage of those 9 women against the 1,209 total participants in the study, because not all participants were given in depth interviews. It would be more accurate to compare those 9 responses against the 38 women who did in fact do the in-depth interview, not just the structured survey of all 1,209 women, as outlined in the methodology.

**Honky Tonk** · March-19-24, 12:26 PM

Originally Posted by JonWylie

Doubling down on your incorrect statement with citations that don't even back it up, crazy...

110-118_Finer.qxp [[guttmacher.org)

The first thing that pops up when I click on your link is "Page Not Found".
The second thing, asks me to "accept all cookies", though it doesn't specify what flavor they are.
The third thing, tells me my "Reproductive Rights" are under attack, and asks me to send them money.

Shouldn't it say my "Termination Rights" are under attack?

**Rocket** · March-19-24, 01:56 PM

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

"Reproductive Rights" are under attack, and asks me to send them money.

Shouldn't it say my "Termination Rights" are under attack?

Isn't it crazy how deceitful the Left is? They can hardly type a single sentence without a lie.

Especially in the titles of things. As you noticed, they mis-label 'killing others' as 'Their own right to reproduce'. How could one honestly get killing someone mixed up with creating someone?

i guess you can do that when you have no morals and don't feel shame.

For decades people WITH morals thought they would shame the Left into doing the correct thing. But they were naive. What they failed to realize was, the Left does not feel shame.