[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Uh huh. Engage long enough and a person's honest attitudes start to emerge.

To the meat of what you said- you mean 9000 community health clinics that do not have the staff or facilities to address an influx of people who need reproductive health care. Let's hear from an actual person who actually deals with actual reproductive health care, rather than right-wing GOP congress critters, shall we?

"If Planned Parenthood tomorrow went away, there's a good number of patients just in my service area that no longer have a doctor or no longer have a place to go for OB/GYN services," said Mark DeFrancesco, a physician in Waterbury, Connecticut, who is president of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and published an op-ed this month opposing efforts to end Planned Parenthood funding. "If they start calling my office, it's going to be, 'Well, we could take you but it might be two, three months down the road.' If they call other places, it might be, 'We can't even take you.'"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0e333e54b844e

Planned Parenthood is a vital source of health care for women and men in this country. Defunding it would be disastrous for hundreds of thousands of people.

As for them performing abortions:

and here's a take on what would occur, from the wash. post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/w...ment-spending/

The Congressional Budget Office said in a new report on Thursday that cutting off the women’s health organization from federal money would actually increase public spending by an estimated $130 million over 10 years.

The centers serve more than 40 percent of women who receive birth control from safety-net providers in 18 states, according to a recent report from the Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit reproductive health organization, and more than half of such women in 11 states.


The office’s math: Halting federal funds to Planned Parenthood would shrink spending by $520 million in the short run -- but, over the first decade, it would cost taxpayers an additional $650 million.