■ 15 August 2009 | 5:00 AM
Planned Parenthood rebuttal
Re 'Disguised Purpose,' letters, Aug. 6: The assertion that Planned Parenthood is an 'abortion factory' is outrageous. The writer incorrectly claims that Planned Parenthood is not a health center. He also mixes up the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Virginia (PPSEV), our local affiliate. PPSEV is, in fact, a health center; ask the close to 10,000 clients it sees each year for preventative, reproductive health care.
PPSEV provides a wide range of services, including annual exams, breast and cervical cancer screenings, treatment for cervical dysplasia, testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections and all forms of birth control, which make up 95 percent of its services.
As for the statistic cited regarding the number of abortions performed, this number included abortions performed at all the Planned Parenthood centers around the country (850) and it's still a very small percentage of the more than 3 million patients Planned Parenthood health centers see for a whole host of reproductive health services each year.
One in four American women has utilized a Planned Parenthood health center at least once in her life. Planned Parenthood exists to put prevention first; prevention of teen and unplanned pregnancy, prevention of cancer and prevention of disease.
I recommend that author get educated with the mission and activities of Planned Parenthood before allowing his bias to cloud his perception of an organization that is desperately needed in our communities.
Brandi Blessett
Norfolk
COMMENTS ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here; comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its websites. Users must follow agreed-upon rules: Be civil, be clean, be on topic; don't attack private individuals, other users or classes of people. Read the full rules here.
- Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the report violation link below it.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
OK, let's take..
what's said at face value. When one talks about the 850 abortions performed nationwide in PP clinics, do they also include pregnancies aborted via abortion pills, or are they referring to just the in-clinic abortions? I ask this because I went to the PP website. I certainly want good advice made available to women, and if they can help prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place, I'm all for that as well. But I want all the relevant info available on this subject.
Well..
Events in the curent healthcare "debate" should prove that facts just get in the way of bias and idealogical faith. For some they know what they "know" and that is all they need to know. There is no room for the assimilation of information that runs contrary to what they want to believe is the "truth" And this phenomena can run in all peoples of all backgrounds. Ignorance is both a weapon that can be used by those in money and power to get others to do their bidding, and is an intellectual void that can stymie true reasoned discourse on important matters.
Hmmm....
I assume that this comment will also be applied to liar democrats that are jamming socialized medicine down our throats and blatantly misrepresenting what the health bills say. The bills are so general/lawyerese in nature that anything could come out of it but Obama and democratic congress will tell you "what it really means". For every "fact" in the bills, I can prove a different "fact" because "nothing" concrete is written on paper to dispell "bias or ideological faith". For one, show me where it says that illegals will be denied all medical services including emergency rooms, period. It doesn't so don't tell me it doesn't provide for illegals because it does at my expense. Marxist Obama says so so I believe?......NOT ON YOUR LIFE!!!!
Your anger is apparent. As
Your anger is apparent. As for the issue of illegals not getting help in Emergency Rooms, I do belive that any and every doctor serves those who come into the emergency room and they don't ask if they are legal? (I'm not even sure if I'd be able to "prove" my legal status in an emergency situation quite honestly.) I cannot imagine living in a world where a gun shot victim would be asked first if they are legal in this country before the bleeding is stopped.
Rhetoric like this does not help because there does need to be real reform and discussion on both sides of this issue. It's unfortunate that the "sides" have to be taken and that nothing done by a democratic administration will appease the right wing. They only way to win an election is to try to ruin the other side regardless of what is right for the country. Oh how I long for the days when the party in power said "I have a mandate and that means I can do what I want." (hmmm, who was that?) Look where those "good old days" got us.
I Would...
normally respond to another person's questioning IF I felt there could be a reasoned discussion, but by your name calling and obvious anger in the tone of your response I think that is out of the question. So with that in mind I will call it a day.
Well...
Name calling? Nope, only the truth.
Obvious anger? Yep, for very very good reason.
The Point Is...
I was mad as he-- during the Bush years (the son, not the Dad-who I supported and still respect to this day) due to his policies and decisions. I always thought name calling was uncalled for-on both sides. Why? Because it gets in the way of debating both the effectivness of policies/decisions, and the potential affects of proposed legislation. How can we rationally discuss issues when anger and blind hatred blocks or narrows our views? You can't is the answer. And that is counter productive to getting to a reasonable workable solution. Everyone has the right to be angry about a political decision, but ugly name calling is a bit much, and worse, by extension, is what we see out there now: effigies being hung of politicians, death threats, Nazi symbols being painted on buildings (a few laws being broken here); outright outragious lies, and so on. Debate healthcare piece by piece on its merits not on the character of the players-that is my desire.
As admirable....
As admirable as you may sound, there is still the problem of Marxism being in almost complete control of our government. Marxism is not an option. That may be name calling to some but it is the simple truth. Yes, let's tear apart this bill piece by piece and listen to those that decry it as a costly social mess that it is instead of portraying those that object as simple minded bucolic outcasts. Once again, as silly as it may seem from a liberal point of view, death panels, free everything for illegals, enormous costs to middle class for the lame entitlement minded, forced poor quality of care for the majority that currently have good care, rationing, bankrupting our economy for Obama, etc are very real arguments. Obama's argument of blindly buying into Marxism as better than doing nothing is quite simply "fear tactics" that he enjoys accusing republicans of.
CB..
First off, we have a mixed economy so parts are socialist and parts are capitalist, and so on. It works well for the most part. And I am not sure what plan will work but I am sure that the status quo is not an option. As for the current "debate" here are my issues: death panels are a lie-even the Repub lawmaker who co-wrote the proposal in question (Isakson) called the charge "nuts"; many R's have supported the very same end of life legislation for years; there is a bevy of anti-reformers peddling false info-too many to list; Wendell Potter-a retired Cigna VP of Communications has gone on record saying how Cigna would dump policy holders who got major illnesses (a 17 yr old girl died because the company denied paying for a liver transplant) and that the insurers pump huge $$ in big pr firms to peddle their propaganda talking points to business groups and conservative media outlets. This issue has gotten too emotional and when the political operatives can achieve emotional responses as we see, logic goes out the door.
Depends on how you read it...
It may be easy to say a proverbial death panel is nuts but the legislation "as written" supports it so change the wording and I won't have to face the government "cost/benefit analysis team" when I get to that point, right? I can agree on some points like preventing an insurance company from just dropping sick people and having to assume risk of pre-existing conditions. However, this legislation is far more about government takeover than regulating or reducing costs. The cost of "insurance" is the major factor that some people "can't afford" it, right? So if it is affordable, everyone will buy it and we are all happy? This 50 million uninsured is a huge farce perpetrated by the bevy of Pro-reformers as well so misinformation appears to be alive and well on both sides. What is worse, is Obama and Congress are really on a campaign to force middle class and above to pony up for those that made and continue to make bad choices. The only people that "deserve" public medical funding are disabled and elderly, period.