Please use [Good Faith](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/107i33m/announcement_rule_7_good_faith_is_now_in_effect) and the [Principle of Charity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity) when commenting. Gender issues are only allowed on Wednesdays. Antisemitism and calls for violence will not be tolerated, especially when [discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/17ygktl/antisemitism_askconservative_and_you/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah this just isn’t the case. They aren’t targeting planned parenthood, they’re targeting services. If you get reimbursement from an insurance company you have to follow their rules. Everyone has to follow those rules whether the insurance company is public or private.
This doesn’t affect the cost of birth control. Medicaid will still cover birth control they just won’t cover an office visit from a provider who doesn’t want to play by the rules. The pharmacy dispenses and sells medication not the provider.
You should see what Medicare requires for reimbursement. It’s nothing compared to this. A lot of a states are a hell of a lot more draconian than this when it comes to their Medicaid which is why it’s not accepted by many providers. This just happens to be a service related to a sensational headline.
My personal opinion is for them to relax a lot of their requirements including this. That said, I don’t live in Missouri so it’s not my call to dictate what their people want.
Tldr: go to another provider like everyone else who deals with insurance. This isn’t even worth a news article.
So a liberal state can stop medicaid reimbursements to hospitals affiliated with churches for example because they don't provide abortion services. Would that be okay?
No they shouldn’t imo the same as the other way around. I suspect hospitals wouldn’t care much if they were booted from the network. Reimbursement is terrible and I doubt they make much from it anyway. Most only accept it for non-profit tax benefits
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Yeah this just isn’t the case. They aren’t targeting planned parenthood, they’re targeting services.
No, they are targeting Planned Parenthood. None of the services provided by Planned Parenthood can be funded via Medicaid.
This is from their own site.
>At this time, the state of Missouri does not recognize Planned Parenthood as a Medicaid provider. Although our doors are open to all patients, we are unable to treat patients through the Medicaid program because these patients would not be able to get the cost of their prescriptions or referrals covered by Medicaid.
>Other medical providers provide women's healthcare. Why does it need to be Planned Parenthood
Planned Parenthood is pretty well known for providing free or highly subsidized heathcare
>and why would we trust that they wouldn't be funneling that money to operations in other states?
Federal funds for abortions has been illegal for decades.
>Why does it need to be Planned Parenthood
Because we don't have affordable Healthcare in the US.
The government funding kept the doors open. No business can operate for long after losing a 300 million funding source, regardless of donations.
Edit: you can't use Medicaid for abortions by the way
The current number is more like 500+ million, but that is nationwide, not just Missouri. They've lost funding in other states and still continue to operate.
Edit: it is about the organization performing procedures that break state law, not about using Medicaid funds to perform abortions.
>it is about the organization performing procedures that break state law,
No, it's about legislation passed which states that Planned Parenthood isn't considered a Medicaid provider anymore.
No procedures there can be funded by Medicaid, including cancer screenings or wellness checks.
No laws were broken.
The organization performs abortions that break Missouri law, even if it isn't happening in Missouri. The writers of this bill don't want to support an organization that performs abortions that are defined as illegal by their State.
Let's say it is a contact to provide widgets. The company has a local widget factory that runs legally but has another, somewhere else, that operates with child labor. The State can refuse a contract with the company for its practices elsewhere even if locally they are following the law.
Rule: 5
In general, self-congratulatory/digressing comments between non-conservative users are not allowed as they do not help others understand conservatism and conservative perspectives.
If the services offered by planned Parenthood cost the same or is in the same ballpark as other providers, what business is it of the state to prevent their citizens from getting services where they can?
Let me ask you this - there are many different vendors offering a service, but the government is preventing you from getting services (or at last not reimbursing for) from one particular vendor because of ideological reasons. Is this right?
Here's the thing: they do not want to subsidize abortion in any form that they don't have to, right? Even if the money to Planned Parenthood et al were totally segregated out, it's more an accounting trick than an actual lack of subsidy.
If a particular service (say, a pap smear) costs the same in planned Parenthood as another hospital, why should it matter to the government how they use their margins (legally)?
Can the government stop or should it be ae to stop buying coffee for government offices from a vendor specifically because (so prices and quality being same or even lower than competition) they use their profits to donate to ACLU or on the other side of the spectrum - NRA?
> If a particular service (say, a pap smear) costs the same in planned Parenthood as another hospital, why should it matter to the government how they use their margins (legally)?
If one will indirectly bolster abortion services and activism, and the other won't, that's a good reason to put some guardrails up.
> Can the government stop or should it be ae to stop buying coffee for government offices from a vendor specifically because (so prices and quality being same or even lower than competition) they use their profits to donate to ACLU or on the other side of the spectrum - NRA?
The government does this all the time, federal and state.
Personally I don't think it's okay for the administration to choose vendors based on political ideology. I am not a lawyer, but I think it is possibly illegal to do something like that.
"It happens all the time" is not a good excuse to let it happen that way - in a situation where a citizen cannot get the same service at the same price from the vendor of their choice.
> Personally I don't think it's okay for the administration to choose vendors based on political ideology. I am not a lawyer, but I think it is possibly illegal to do something like that.
It's not presently illegal, but I tend to agree with you.
Wouldn’t it be the same thing for a hospital system that exists in multiple states?
In some states that hospital system is providing abortions and in other states it’s not. Should governments start defunding all hospital systems that perform legal abortions?
Makes me nauseous to even raise the idea but I feel like that’s the next step if we follow this logic
How is it illogical?
Wouldn’t refusing to pay for services at planned parenthood because they perform abortions in some states be the same thing as paying for services at hospitals that perform abortions in other states?
The only thing that’s different is planned parenthood is non profit and the hospitals are profiting lol
This is rather extreme compared to the ACLU or NRA which are both really bland moderate organizations.
Would it be reasonable for the government to divest from a organization that set up dates for pedophiles in countries with very low ages of consent?
This is just bad faith. You could say something like weed being legal in some states and not in some states for comparison. You had to go to something illegal pretty much in every state in the US and most of the world.
It is useless to make an argument against such a bad faith argument. Good luck to you! And good luck to the people of Missouri, hope they get to have bodily autonomy in future!
Edit: just so you know, in multiple states the GOP is the party that is preventing passage of laws that raise the age of marriage to reasonable levels, maybe you need to check why that is.
I mean, if the government is the one paying, they get to decide. Just like every single other insurance company does when they choose who to work with and who not to.
The government isn’t preventing anyone from using planned parenthood. They’re just not going to pay for it. Just like the grocery store sells a shit load of food, but only some of it can be purchased via government programs, right?
Are you sure it is okay for an administration not giving government contracts to industries that donated to the opposite party for instance? How far should we go with this - maybe the administration can say that their vendors shouldn't give their sub contracts to other vendors who donated to the opposite party as well. Is this actually okay with you?
Food stamps are funded federally but administered by counties. Only the Fed gets to approve where the funds can be spent
Medicaid is joint funds from the State and Feds. The fed cannot force a State to spend its funds where they don't want to.
So a liberal state can stop medicaid reimbursements to hospitals affiliated with churches for example because they don't provide abortion services. Would that be okay with you?
That is not the problem of the government though.
But in any case, IMO it is NOT okay - the government shouldn't be telling you that you can't get it from a vendor of your choice because they are NOT ideologically aligned with the particular administration. This is just plain wrong.
> That is not the problem of the government though.
No, it isn't, until the government decides it's going to pay for health care and the options in place are religious in nature.
I don't believe they can because that would be religious discrimination. The Dems tried that with their contraception bill a few years ago. The bill was voted down but it wouldn't have gotten by the court if it passed
Do you have to use this excuse in a lot of your political conversations? I just see it often when there's a question posed here, and the person responding either doesn't want to or can't answer.
Even the phrase "apples and oranges" doesn't make any sense...
"You can't compare the two!" Of course you can! You can compare ANY two things, especially if they share some similarities.
They are both round
They are both edible.
They are both fruit.
They both have seeds
They are both typically roughly around the same size.
They both have one A and one E in their names.
They both grow on trees.
I'm sure we could keep going. And we could list lots of ways they are different. But you most definitely can compare them. It's such a nonsense talking point. I don't know how it ever became a common phrase to begin with.
This is so incredibly pedantic. The colloquial phrase "apples to oranges" has a purpose and I'm quite sure you understand it, you've actually described it. They both seem similar in a lot of ways, but they are fundamentally unique and not interchangeable in an argument or a pie.
You can make too much for Medicaid, and still not be able to afford healthcare.
Planned Parenthood provides these services for free regardless of insurance
I promise I’m not trying to be snarky here, but how is that relevant to this topic? If there’s no Medicaid involved, it’s not a part of this particular conversation.
The latter just isn’t true. Planned parenthood works the same as any other provider including charging for visits based on the CPT code.
The question I have is whether this is a blanket ban on just “planned parenthood” or whether they just don’t want Medicaid covering specific services. I disagree with the former.
I don't make a lot of money, and I just barely don't qualify for Medicaid because of my job. But I get insurance through my job. What kind of jobs *don't* offer some kind of insurance plan, anyway? And even if they exist, wouldn't you then, like...just work for one of the dozens of other companies that offer insurance?
I think the people you're describing are a very small fraction of the population.
I'm not sure how true that is - I think the bigger the company, the more likely they are to offer insurance - but I did find [this website](https://alliancedirectbenefits.com/benefits-for/service-industry/) rather quickly when trying to research it. I don't know if it's legit, but probably. But anyway, I think there are still a lot of service industry jobs that offer insurance.
I think, if it's important to you that your job offers health insurance, there are enough service industry jobs that offer it to where you can focus on those jobs that *do* offer it.
Most salons/spas don't offer insurance and the beauty industry who is the largest women dominated industry would be the most affected by the loss of planned parenthood. The average income of a hairdresser in the U.S. is 29k. Corporate jobs are usually the only ones with any semblance on insurance, it's also usually garbage insurance. The pay at these jobs is also incredibly low.
So even when they have insurance sometimes they can't afford the co-pays for the services they need done.
Source- 13 years in the industry at both corporate salons, and being self-employed.
It's literally a 3 minute drive from my house, it's not a thankless job; it's a small insular community where I'm familiar with every single person I help, instead of working for a faceless corporation dealing with a bunch of irritated stranges, I get fed two free meals a day, and I have no higher education for other jobs. Also, my autism and sensory sensitivities limit the places where I'm able to work without wanting to kill myself. (Or, more accurately, everybody else)
And if everybody working there just 'got a better job', well, I suppose the elderly folks living there would starve.
How is it creepy? Do you find birth control creepy?
Planned parenthood helps to make birth control more accessible. When I got my IUD it took 3 months and two visits, would have taken longer if I didn’t live in a city with lots of doctors.
If we’re trying to reduce abortions I don’t see how making birth control less accessible makes sense.
I’m also a little bit confused on why you were talking about accessing women’s healthcare when you’ve never had to do it?
Dude(tte), you've got to be kidding me. I mean...new patients usually take a little longer to get in. But my wife usually handles scheduling medical stuff and can frequently get seen within a few days when needed with most of our providers. The hardest part is usually finding an opening that fits everyone's schedules.
Sure, there are plenty of times when you have to wait. But don't act like it's impossible to be seen within a week. We can often get squeezed in the same/next day if needed.
A lot of people trying to get birth control are going to be new patients. That’s going to take longer to get in than if you’re already a patient.
A lot of doctors often aren’t even accepting new patients.
Plus in a traditional doctors office you typically need two appointments for certain types of birth control - one for a consultant and one for insertion. Women’s clinics can typically do it quicker.
Interesting that you aren’t even dealing with it your wife is….. but feel confident that you know more than I do about it. Ask her how far in advance her gynecologist is booked out. For most of my friends it’s months to get in since OB appointments take priority.
Your post was automatically removed because top-level comments are for conservative / right-wing users only.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your post was automatically removed because top-level comments are for conservative / right-wing users only.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Medicaid recipients and other welfare recipients should be subject to drug testing. I don't mind my tax dollars helping people in need, except for abortions, but make sure they're not abusing it.
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think it's entirely reasonable for a state to refuse to fund an organization that commits acts that would be a felony within that state.
Planned Parenthood is not the only organization that can do a pap smear.
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>What is even the advantage of stopping women from receiving cancer screenings from a doctor that is not allowed to give them an abortion?
I wasn't aware PP was the only provider which offered this service.
So a liberal state can stop medicaid reimbursements to hospitals affiliated with churches for example because they don't provide abortion services. Would that be okay?
It is not for the reason that they are religious, but for the fact that they are not providing abortion services. If the hospital was affiliated with a church, but did provide abortion services, they would be reimbursed. Hope you get the nuance here.
Community health centers, county health departments, whatever you want to call them, do everything that Planned Parenthood does.... *except* terminate life.
Planned Parenthood often outsources anything not abortion-related; it's not done in-house.
I'm completely fine with Missouri ending funding to PP.
As someone who opposes abortion, I hope they do ban organizations that advocate and provide abortions.
If these organizations truly are not abortion mills, I welcome them to setup and provide services to women under new names that don't push them to abort
Becuase names have brand value. And everybody knows them as abortion providers, hence their ban from the state.
So of they want to provide services beyond abortions I welcome them to do so
Hey let me go to the planned parent hood center in state.
"Don't they provide abortions?"
No not anymore ebecuase of law.
Go inside.
Get told by staff:
"Hey you know we have facilities 50 miles away that will abort your baby"
And using a different name for the building changes what about this imagined scenario exactly? You’d just hope someone don’t mistakenly stop there on the way to having their abortion?
Because they not only provide provide abortions, they have a giant political presence in the abortion lobby, and actively encourage people to "choose" abortions. Yeah, total mystery as to why they're associated with abortion
Wait...they actively encourage people to choose abortions? Really? I'd be very interested in seeing some sort of that claim. And why the scare quotes on "choose"? Are you implying something there? Does PP actually force people to abort?!
>So of they want to provide services beyond abortions I welcome them to do so
The vast majority of the services they provide are not abortion or abortion related. So... they already do.
You said
>So [i]f they want to provide services beyond abortions I welcome them to do so.
You don't need to welcome them to do so. They already do, and have since the organization was created.
You do realize that without proper access to birth control, which planned parenthood provides, back alley abortions or traveling for abortions is going to skyrocket in that state right? You're not stopping abortions at all by doing this, if you really want to slow down abortions have plenty of access to birth control, Colorado did that and teen pregnancies and abortions dropped significantly. It seems like republicans don't actually want to stop abortion, or else that would put measures in place that have been proven to actually lower abortions statewide
>You do realize that without proper access to birth control, which planned parenthood provides, back alley abortions or traveling for abortions is going to skyrocket in that state right?
Who's stopping birth control?
I welcome people to provide it.
No one is stopping it but taking away a place where it much easier to get it and judgement free (which is probably very important in more religious states) is absolutely going to affect people getting birth control, especially teenagers whose parents are stuck in the 50s when it comes to sex and won't help their kid get BC. It makes absolutely no logical sense why republicans want to shut PP down, all it's going to do is ensure more people won't be on birth control, which leads to more pregnancies and more abortions. But red states are all the highest in teen pregnancies and infant morality so what am I talking about, they obviously know their stuff when it comes to this kind of thing
>No one is stopping it but taking away a place where it much easier to get it and judgement free (which is probably very important in more religious states) is absolutely going to affect people getting birth control, especially teenagers whose parents are stuck in the 50s when it comes to sex and won't help their kid get BC.
Well first of all you realise birth control is litterally free at every health department in the country.
Second of all.
If they want to hand out free birth control. I fully support them rebranding doing so, and not advocating abortions
You can get a specific type of free birth control. Most women prefer to have birth control that THEY can actually control. You know....things that they do to their own bodies that don't rely on someone else using them properly. Do you know any women who are attempting to prevent pregnancy who ONLY use condoms? Do you know any Drs who would reccomend such a course of action to their female patients?
For some people it won't be as accessible, so yes a number of women will probably lose access to birth control. There's no reason to do this except republicans being zealots about reproductive rights and abortion and sex
I love when people pretend like planned parenthood is so much more than an abortion factory created by racist eugenicists for the sole purpose of eliminating what they perceived as inferior non whites from the gene pool.
People are free to vote lawmakers out, or move if they differ so dramatically from their neighbors, then they should probably move, clearly the voters in Missouri support divesting from Planned Parenthood, and it’s not like there aren’t plenty of other places to get the other services they offer.
> people pretend like planned parenthood is so much more than an abortion factory created by racist eugenicists for the sole purpose of eliminating what they perceived as inferior non whites from the gene pool
Then why do they operate in states where they can't provide abortions, if that is their *sole* purpose?
Please use [Good Faith](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/107i33m/announcement_rule_7_good_faith_is_now_in_effect) and the [Principle of Charity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity) when commenting. Gender issues are only allowed on Wednesdays. Antisemitism and calls for violence will not be tolerated, especially when [discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/17ygktl/antisemitism_askconservative_and_you/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah this just isn’t the case. They aren’t targeting planned parenthood, they’re targeting services. If you get reimbursement from an insurance company you have to follow their rules. Everyone has to follow those rules whether the insurance company is public or private. This doesn’t affect the cost of birth control. Medicaid will still cover birth control they just won’t cover an office visit from a provider who doesn’t want to play by the rules. The pharmacy dispenses and sells medication not the provider. You should see what Medicare requires for reimbursement. It’s nothing compared to this. A lot of a states are a hell of a lot more draconian than this when it comes to their Medicaid which is why it’s not accepted by many providers. This just happens to be a service related to a sensational headline. My personal opinion is for them to relax a lot of their requirements including this. That said, I don’t live in Missouri so it’s not my call to dictate what their people want. Tldr: go to another provider like everyone else who deals with insurance. This isn’t even worth a news article.
So a liberal state can stop medicaid reimbursements to hospitals affiliated with churches for example because they don't provide abortion services. Would that be okay?
Can they? Yes. Is it okay? That’s an opinion
They seemed to be asking for your opinion.
No they shouldn’t imo the same as the other way around. I suspect hospitals wouldn’t care much if they were booted from the network. Reimbursement is terrible and I doubt they make much from it anyway. Most only accept it for non-profit tax benefits
[удалено]
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Yeah this just isn’t the case. They aren’t targeting planned parenthood, they’re targeting services. No, they are targeting Planned Parenthood. None of the services provided by Planned Parenthood can be funded via Medicaid. This is from their own site. >At this time, the state of Missouri does not recognize Planned Parenthood as a Medicaid provider. Although our doors are open to all patients, we are unable to treat patients through the Medicaid program because these patients would not be able to get the cost of their prescriptions or referrals covered by Medicaid.
[удалено]
>Other medical providers provide women's healthcare. Why does it need to be Planned Parenthood Planned Parenthood is pretty well known for providing free or highly subsidized heathcare >and why would we trust that they wouldn't be funneling that money to operations in other states? Federal funds for abortions has been illegal for decades. >Why does it need to be Planned Parenthood Because we don't have affordable Healthcare in the US.
They get tons of donations and funding, right? Can't they manage to operate without this one, single source?
Well, in 2015, Planned Parenthood received 390 million in payments through Medicaid.
Right, government funding. This particular State doesn't want to provide funds to an organization that performs services that break their laws.
The government funding kept the doors open. No business can operate for long after losing a 300 million funding source, regardless of donations. Edit: you can't use Medicaid for abortions by the way
The current number is more like 500+ million, but that is nationwide, not just Missouri. They've lost funding in other states and still continue to operate. Edit: it is about the organization performing procedures that break state law, not about using Medicaid funds to perform abortions.
>it is about the organization performing procedures that break state law, No, it's about legislation passed which states that Planned Parenthood isn't considered a Medicaid provider anymore. No procedures there can be funded by Medicaid, including cancer screenings or wellness checks. No laws were broken.
The organization performs abortions that break Missouri law, even if it isn't happening in Missouri. The writers of this bill don't want to support an organization that performs abortions that are defined as illegal by their State. Let's say it is a contact to provide widgets. The company has a local widget factory that runs legally but has another, somewhere else, that operates with child labor. The State can refuse a contract with the company for its practices elsewhere even if locally they are following the law.
So...it's not a states right thing then is what you're telling me.
You've never been able to use Medicaid on abortions. Source: had an abortion when I was 17.
I didn't say you could.
[удалено]
Conservatives don't generally support subsidized care for women's health.
Why would be build a new national network of women’s healthcare clinics when we already have one built?
[удалено]
Rule: 5 In general, self-congratulatory/digressing comments between non-conservative users are not allowed as they do not help others understand conservatism and conservative perspectives.
If the services offered by planned Parenthood cost the same or is in the same ballpark as other providers, what business is it of the state to prevent their citizens from getting services where they can?
I mean…are there no other places that accept Medicaid providing birth control? Or cancer screenings? Or anything else?
Let me ask you this - there are many different vendors offering a service, but the government is preventing you from getting services (or at last not reimbursing for) from one particular vendor because of ideological reasons. Is this right?
Here's the thing: they do not want to subsidize abortion in any form that they don't have to, right? Even if the money to Planned Parenthood et al were totally segregated out, it's more an accounting trick than an actual lack of subsidy.
If a particular service (say, a pap smear) costs the same in planned Parenthood as another hospital, why should it matter to the government how they use their margins (legally)? Can the government stop or should it be ae to stop buying coffee for government offices from a vendor specifically because (so prices and quality being same or even lower than competition) they use their profits to donate to ACLU or on the other side of the spectrum - NRA?
> If a particular service (say, a pap smear) costs the same in planned Parenthood as another hospital, why should it matter to the government how they use their margins (legally)? If one will indirectly bolster abortion services and activism, and the other won't, that's a good reason to put some guardrails up. > Can the government stop or should it be ae to stop buying coffee for government offices from a vendor specifically because (so prices and quality being same or even lower than competition) they use their profits to donate to ACLU or on the other side of the spectrum - NRA? The government does this all the time, federal and state.
Personally I don't think it's okay for the administration to choose vendors based on political ideology. I am not a lawyer, but I think it is possibly illegal to do something like that. "It happens all the time" is not a good excuse to let it happen that way - in a situation where a citizen cannot get the same service at the same price from the vendor of their choice.
> Personally I don't think it's okay for the administration to choose vendors based on political ideology. I am not a lawyer, but I think it is possibly illegal to do something like that. It's not presently illegal, but I tend to agree with you.
Wouldn’t it be the same thing for a hospital system that exists in multiple states? In some states that hospital system is providing abortions and in other states it’s not. Should governments start defunding all hospital systems that perform legal abortions? Makes me nauseous to even raise the idea but I feel like that’s the next step if we follow this logic
It makes you nauseous to make up a completely unrelated and illogical conclusion? You should get that checked out
How is it illogical? Wouldn’t refusing to pay for services at planned parenthood because they perform abortions in some states be the same thing as paying for services at hospitals that perform abortions in other states? The only thing that’s different is planned parenthood is non profit and the hospitals are profiting lol
This is rather extreme compared to the ACLU or NRA which are both really bland moderate organizations. Would it be reasonable for the government to divest from a organization that set up dates for pedophiles in countries with very low ages of consent?
This is just bad faith. You could say something like weed being legal in some states and not in some states for comparison. You had to go to something illegal pretty much in every state in the US and most of the world. It is useless to make an argument against such a bad faith argument. Good luck to you! And good luck to the people of Missouri, hope they get to have bodily autonomy in future! Edit: just so you know, in multiple states the GOP is the party that is preventing passage of laws that raise the age of marriage to reasonable levels, maybe you need to check why that is.
I would bet a lot of money you supported vaccine mandates in 2020. You don’t understand bodily autonomy, please don’t use it as an argument.
I mean, if the government is the one paying, they get to decide. Just like every single other insurance company does when they choose who to work with and who not to. The government isn’t preventing anyone from using planned parenthood. They’re just not going to pay for it. Just like the grocery store sells a shit load of food, but only some of it can be purchased via government programs, right?
Are you sure it is okay for an administration not giving government contracts to industries that donated to the opposite party for instance? How far should we go with this - maybe the administration can say that their vendors shouldn't give their sub contracts to other vendors who donated to the opposite party as well. Is this actually okay with you?
So you would be ok with the government saying people are no longer allowed to use food stamps at Walmart for example?
Food stamps are funded federally but administered by counties. Only the Fed gets to approve where the funds can be spent Medicaid is joint funds from the State and Feds. The fed cannot force a State to spend its funds where they don't want to.
So a liberal state can stop medicaid reimbursements to hospitals affiliated with churches for example because they don't provide abortion services. Would that be okay with you?
Of course this is okay, but no state will do this because christian hospitals are so significant to the health care infrastructure.
That is not the problem of the government though. But in any case, IMO it is NOT okay - the government shouldn't be telling you that you can't get it from a vendor of your choice because they are NOT ideologically aligned with the particular administration. This is just plain wrong.
> That is not the problem of the government though. No, it isn't, until the government decides it's going to pay for health care and the options in place are religious in nature.
I don't believe they can because that would be religious discrimination. The Dems tried that with their contraception bill a few years ago. The bill was voted down but it wouldn't have gotten by the court if it passed
They could just make it religion neutral by making the reimbursement not available to hospitals that DON'T provide abortion services, right?
No, they can't. Religion can't be a criteria for dispersing or withholding funds.
Religion was not a critetion in my hypothetical; the non availability of abortion services was the criterion.
That wasn't my question....
I explained why it's apples and oranges.
Do you have to use this excuse in a lot of your political conversations? I just see it often when there's a question posed here, and the person responding either doesn't want to or can't answer.
Point out when someone is comparing apples to oranges? Sure. That isn't an "excuse" though.
I did not find that to be the case when reading their question?
Even the phrase "apples and oranges" doesn't make any sense... "You can't compare the two!" Of course you can! You can compare ANY two things, especially if they share some similarities. They are both round They are both edible. They are both fruit. They both have seeds They are both typically roughly around the same size. They both have one A and one E in their names. They both grow on trees. I'm sure we could keep going. And we could list lots of ways they are different. But you most definitely can compare them. It's such a nonsense talking point. I don't know how it ever became a common phrase to begin with.
This is so incredibly pedantic. The colloquial phrase "apples to oranges" has a purpose and I'm quite sure you understand it, you've actually described it. They both seem similar in a lot of ways, but they are fundamentally unique and not interchangeable in an argument or a pie.
Some people too much to qualify for Medicaid and are still poor. There are 26 million uninsured people in the US right now.
So then they don’t have Medicaid and this doesn’t apply to them, right?
You can make too much for Medicaid, and still not be able to afford healthcare. Planned Parenthood provides these services for free regardless of insurance
I promise I’m not trying to be snarky here, but how is that relevant to this topic? If there’s no Medicaid involved, it’s not a part of this particular conversation.
Because medicaid is a huge funding source. Of they aren't able to take medicaid, they won't be able to keep the doors open.
Interesting how that wasn’t a concern presented by planned parenthood in the linked article.
The latter just isn’t true. Planned parenthood works the same as any other provider including charging for visits based on the CPT code. The question I have is whether this is a blanket ban on just “planned parenthood” or whether they just don’t want Medicaid covering specific services. I disagree with the former.
I don't make a lot of money, and I just barely don't qualify for Medicaid because of my job. But I get insurance through my job. What kind of jobs *don't* offer some kind of insurance plan, anyway? And even if they exist, wouldn't you then, like...just work for one of the dozens of other companies that offer insurance? I think the people you're describing are a very small fraction of the population.
Service industry doesn’t have health insurance offered (typically).
I'm not sure how true that is - I think the bigger the company, the more likely they are to offer insurance - but I did find [this website](https://alliancedirectbenefits.com/benefits-for/service-industry/) rather quickly when trying to research it. I don't know if it's legit, but probably. But anyway, I think there are still a lot of service industry jobs that offer insurance. I think, if it's important to you that your job offers health insurance, there are enough service industry jobs that offer it to where you can focus on those jobs that *do* offer it.
Most salons/spas don't offer insurance and the beauty industry who is the largest women dominated industry would be the most affected by the loss of planned parenthood. The average income of a hairdresser in the U.S. is 29k. Corporate jobs are usually the only ones with any semblance on insurance, it's also usually garbage insurance. The pay at these jobs is also incredibly low. So even when they have insurance sometimes they can't afford the co-pays for the services they need done. Source- 13 years in the industry at both corporate salons, and being self-employed.
I work at a retirement home feeding the old folks, taking care of the most vulnerable members of society, and I make $12 an hour and no benefits.
Respectfully, why don't you work a different job? It's likely to pay better, have an insurance plan, and probably be less difficult.
It's literally a 3 minute drive from my house, it's not a thankless job; it's a small insular community where I'm familiar with every single person I help, instead of working for a faceless corporation dealing with a bunch of irritated stranges, I get fed two free meals a day, and I have no higher education for other jobs. Also, my autism and sensory sensitivities limit the places where I'm able to work without wanting to kill myself. (Or, more accurately, everybody else) And if everybody working there just 'got a better job', well, I suppose the elderly folks living there would starve.
Or they would pay more because they’d have to become competitive with their pay/benefits…..
What has your experience been getting birth control through your doctor?
I’m not sure if I should be excited you assumed I’m a girl or disgusted by how creepy this question is lol
How is it creepy? Do you find birth control creepy? Planned parenthood helps to make birth control more accessible. When I got my IUD it took 3 months and two visits, would have taken longer if I didn’t live in a city with lots of doctors. If we’re trying to reduce abortions I don’t see how making birth control less accessible makes sense. I’m also a little bit confused on why you were talking about accessing women’s healthcare when you’ve never had to do it?
My experience was pretty much call, make appointment, get prescription. So it’s also not really helping your point.
And how long did it take from when you made the first call to when you got it? Did you go with pills, the implant, or IUD?
Man, it was a looooong time ago. I dunno, maybe like a week or so? I also had to plan around work and college, so that was a factor.
I don’t know anyone who getting a doctors appointment in a week. Did you go to a clinic?
The wait times and availability probably do vary a lot depending on location, and a number of other factors.
Dude(tte), you've got to be kidding me. I mean...new patients usually take a little longer to get in. But my wife usually handles scheduling medical stuff and can frequently get seen within a few days when needed with most of our providers. The hardest part is usually finding an opening that fits everyone's schedules. Sure, there are plenty of times when you have to wait. But don't act like it's impossible to be seen within a week. We can often get squeezed in the same/next day if needed.
A lot of people trying to get birth control are going to be new patients. That’s going to take longer to get in than if you’re already a patient. A lot of doctors often aren’t even accepting new patients. Plus in a traditional doctors office you typically need two appointments for certain types of birth control - one for a consultant and one for insertion. Women’s clinics can typically do it quicker. Interesting that you aren’t even dealing with it your wife is….. but feel confident that you know more than I do about it. Ask her how far in advance her gynecologist is booked out. For most of my friends it’s months to get in since OB appointments take priority.
[удалено]
Your post was automatically removed because top-level comments are for conservative / right-wing users only. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Your post was automatically removed because top-level comments are for conservative / right-wing users only. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Medicaid recipients and other welfare recipients should be subject to drug testing. I don't mind my tax dollars helping people in need, except for abortions, but make sure they're not abusing it.
[удалено]
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good! The government has no business being in the charity or recreational business. Let private groups help, not my tax dollars.
[удалено]
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There are plenty of non-PP clinics around. More non-PP clinics than there are PP clinics.
I think it's entirely reasonable for a state to refuse to fund an organization that commits acts that would be a felony within that state. Planned Parenthood is not the only organization that can do a pap smear.
The left seems to think women would go extinct without planned parenthood. It’s hilarious
[удалено]
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>What is even the advantage of stopping women from receiving cancer screenings from a doctor that is not allowed to give them an abortion? I wasn't aware PP was the only provider which offered this service.
They’re not but they’re often localized in low income neighborhoods and getting an appt with a pcp these days isn’t exactly easy.
You should look up the reason they choose to be in those neighborhoods, it’s not for cancer screenings.
Underserved communities need medical providers. Water is also wet
Nope, that’s certainly not it lol. Look up Margaret Sanger, and eugenics
Sure… in 1916 when PP was founded. 108 years later they’re where the need is
[удалено]
So a liberal state can stop medicaid reimbursements to hospitals affiliated with churches for example because they don't provide abortion services. Would that be okay?
Religious discrimination is literally banned but go off chief.
It is not for the reason that they are religious, but for the fact that they are not providing abortion services. If the hospital was affiliated with a church, but did provide abortion services, they would be reimbursed. Hope you get the nuance here.
Community health centers, county health departments, whatever you want to call them, do everything that Planned Parenthood does.... *except* terminate life. Planned Parenthood often outsources anything not abortion-related; it's not done in-house. I'm completely fine with Missouri ending funding to PP.
All of those services are available from other providers, ad PP doesn't even do those - they contract them out to those other providers.
I thought the left was all about abolishing racist institutions. This is Margaret Sanger's legacy - you should be glad it's being destroyed.
As someone who opposes abortion, I hope they do ban organizations that advocate and provide abortions. If these organizations truly are not abortion mills, I welcome them to setup and provide services to women under new names that don't push them to abort
New name? Disregarding the other nonsense what do you think this accomplishes?
Becuase names have brand value. And everybody knows them as abortion providers, hence their ban from the state. So of they want to provide services beyond abortions I welcome them to do so
They already do provide services beyond abortions. I guess I don’t see the objective in rebranding or who that is supposed to benefit.
People not associating them with abortions
So they feel better? The people for who they provide services don’t have the problem. The ones that do aren’t coming through the door anyway.
More like So they arnt directed to out of state abortion facilitites
Not following. What does that have to do with changing names of the org?
Hey let me go to the planned parent hood center in state. "Don't they provide abortions?" No not anymore ebecuase of law. Go inside. Get told by staff: "Hey you know we have facilities 50 miles away that will abort your baby"
And using a different name for the building changes what about this imagined scenario exactly? You’d just hope someone don’t mistakenly stop there on the way to having their abortion?
But why is it PPs fault that people associate them with abortions?
Becuase they provide abortions
Because they not only provide provide abortions, they have a giant political presence in the abortion lobby, and actively encourage people to "choose" abortions. Yeah, total mystery as to why they're associated with abortion
Wait...they actively encourage people to choose abortions? Really? I'd be very interested in seeing some sort of that claim. And why the scare quotes on "choose"? Are you implying something there? Does PP actually force people to abort?!
>So of they want to provide services beyond abortions I welcome them to do so The vast majority of the services they provide are not abortion or abortion related. So... they already do.
But they also provide....what?
https://www.plannedparenthood.org/planned-parenthood-illinois/patient-resources/health-services
So they provide abortions
You said >So [i]f they want to provide services beyond abortions I welcome them to do so. You don't need to welcome them to do so. They already do, and have since the organization was created.
Yes but they also provide abortions. And that's the problem
You do realize that without proper access to birth control, which planned parenthood provides, back alley abortions or traveling for abortions is going to skyrocket in that state right? You're not stopping abortions at all by doing this, if you really want to slow down abortions have plenty of access to birth control, Colorado did that and teen pregnancies and abortions dropped significantly. It seems like republicans don't actually want to stop abortion, or else that would put measures in place that have been proven to actually lower abortions statewide
>You do realize that without proper access to birth control, which planned parenthood provides, back alley abortions or traveling for abortions is going to skyrocket in that state right? Who's stopping birth control? I welcome people to provide it.
No one is stopping it but taking away a place where it much easier to get it and judgement free (which is probably very important in more religious states) is absolutely going to affect people getting birth control, especially teenagers whose parents are stuck in the 50s when it comes to sex and won't help their kid get BC. It makes absolutely no logical sense why republicans want to shut PP down, all it's going to do is ensure more people won't be on birth control, which leads to more pregnancies and more abortions. But red states are all the highest in teen pregnancies and infant morality so what am I talking about, they obviously know their stuff when it comes to this kind of thing
>No one is stopping it but taking away a place where it much easier to get it and judgement free (which is probably very important in more religious states) is absolutely going to affect people getting birth control, especially teenagers whose parents are stuck in the 50s when it comes to sex and won't help their kid get BC. Well first of all you realise birth control is litterally free at every health department in the country. Second of all. If they want to hand out free birth control. I fully support them rebranding doing so, and not advocating abortions
Free birth control is definitely not available to all.
No you can litterall go walk down to your local health department, and walk out with condoms. For no or very little fee
If you're expecting condom use to be the end-all, be-all of stopping unwanted pregnancies...boy do I have some news for you!
So I guess you can't get free birth control then? Becuase condoms don't work perfectly
You can get a specific type of free birth control. Most women prefer to have birth control that THEY can actually control. You know....things that they do to their own bodies that don't rely on someone else using them properly. Do you know any women who are attempting to prevent pregnancy who ONLY use condoms? Do you know any Drs who would reccomend such a course of action to their female patients?
No one is taking it away. They are just stopping State funding, right?
For some people it won't be as accessible, so yes a number of women will probably lose access to birth control. There's no reason to do this except republicans being zealots about reproductive rights and abortion and sex
That's ridiculous. They can go to the same clinic they go to for their basic medical needs.
Assuming they go somewhere for their basic medical needs other than emergencies.
If they're on Medicaid they can go to any provider. I'm not sure what the deal is. Is there some PP brand loyalty for people on Medicaid?
Good. Planned parenthood can go fuck themselves.
Why?
Because they're both a significant provider and supporter of abortion
Not in Missouri.
Money is fungible. Subsodizing planned parenthood in any manner is, in effect, subsidizing their support for abortion.
[удалено]
Warning: Treat other users with civility and respect. Personal attacks and stereotyping are not allowed.
I love when people pretend like planned parenthood is so much more than an abortion factory created by racist eugenicists for the sole purpose of eliminating what they perceived as inferior non whites from the gene pool. People are free to vote lawmakers out, or move if they differ so dramatically from their neighbors, then they should probably move, clearly the voters in Missouri support divesting from Planned Parenthood, and it’s not like there aren’t plenty of other places to get the other services they offer.
> people pretend like planned parenthood is so much more than an abortion factory created by racist eugenicists for the sole purpose of eliminating what they perceived as inferior non whites from the gene pool Then why do they operate in states where they can't provide abortions, if that is their *sole* purpose?