Un-Planned Parenthood’s Heller Hissy Fit

The cluck-cluckers over at the comically misnamed “Planned” Parenthood organization are squealing like stuck pigs over a vote recently cast by Nevada’s Republican Rep. Dean Heller which would deny the abortion provider additional taxpayer funding. Where to begin?

First, whether pro-life or pro-choice, all of us should agree that tax dollars shouldn’t be used to fund abortions.

If you’re pro-choice…fine. You choose…you pay. The proverbial exceptions to the rule could be extended for instances of rape or incest. But the “choice,” as my friend Doug Bandow would point out, was in having sex. The pregnancy was the consequence of that choice. Why should taxpayers pick up the tab for the consequences of someone else’s freely-chosen actions?

And what’s the deal with this “planned parenthood” nonsense anyway? “Planned” parenthood is when you “plan” to become a “parent.” What these people represent, however, is UN-planned parenthood. The folks this group exists for are people who DIDN’T plan and take precautions…or DON’T want a family or an addition to a family.

PP touts itself in the email as “the nation’s leading reproductive health care provider.”

No, it’s the nation’s leading reproductive TERMINATION provider.

Planned Parenthood is the “Delete” key on your computer. “Make a mistake? We’ll wipe it out.” Let’s at least call a spade a spade in this argument.

Anyway, “Planned” Parenthood got its knickers in a knot last week and sent out a screeching sky-is-falling email call-to-arms alert to their supporters urging them to rake Rep. Heller over the coals for a vote he cast just before the congressional summer recess.

“Congressman Dean Heller voted with hardliners to prevent Planned Parenthood from receiving family planning funds to serve women and their families,” the alert breathlessly warned. “We need you to tell Congressman Heller you are disappointed in his outrageous vote against Nevada’s women and families.”

Here’s the message they urged supporters to leave at Heller’s office:

“My name is ___________, and I am a constituent in Nevada. Please let the Congressman know that I am outraged by his vote to prevent Planned Parenthood from receiving essential family planning funding.”

“Family planning”? Planned Parenthood’s mission is to prevent and terminate potential families. How in the world do they construe that to mean “family planning” and voting against “families”? I mean, Planned Parenthood’s very reason for being is to STOP families from happening in the first place. World-class chutzpah.

Interestingly, the entire PP e-rant…some 635 words long…never once mentions the word “abortion.” Go figure.

It talks about “preventive health care services, including: breast exams and instructions on breast self-examination, PAP tests for early detection of cervical cancer or precancerous conditions, testing for high blood pressure, screening and appropriate treatment for sexually transmitted infections, HIV screening, and referrals to specialized health care” - but not one word about PP’s core mission as pregnancy’s “Delete” key. Go figure.

And now, for the rest of the story…

The Heller vote that PP had a cow over was an amendment sponsored by Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) which would have prohibited Title X family planning funds in the fiscal year 2008 Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Act (H.R. 3043) from going to Planned Parenthood. The amendment didn’t cut one dollar from family planning funds or deny family planning services – it simply stated that taxpayer-funded family planning money should go to public and private agencies that offer family planning, but not abortions.

Funny how the fine folks over at Planned Parenthood failed to mention the niggling little fact that not a dime was being cut from family planning funding; that the only thing the amendment did was stop such funding from going to Planned Parenthood. PP is only mad because someone other than themselves would get all the taxpayer money.

“Planned Parenthood supports partial birth abortion, opposes waiting periods, parental consent laws, informed consent laws, clinic standards, and would force doctors, hospitals and insurance companies to participate in and provide abortions,” writes Don Nelson of Nevada LIFE.  “Money to Planned Parenthood will be used to lobby and litigate for their extremist positions on these issues.  Whatever Americans think about abortion, the public does not support taxpayer funding of abortion.  Planned Parenthood should not receive one cent of public funding.”

Indeed, Don.

If Planned Parenthood wishes to continue being the nation’s leading pregnancy “delete” key…fine. But all Reps. Pence and Heller were saying is that they should do so on their own dime, not the taxpayers’ dime. And that’s something we all should be able to agree upon.

That Planned Parenthood sought to attack Rep. Heller in Nevada, and misrepresent the facts in the process, says a whole lot more about Planned Parenthood’s dishonest nature than the congressman’s representation of his district. Another thoughtful and responsible vote by the freshman Republican. Kudos, Mr. Congressman.

3 Responses to “Un-Planned Parenthood’s Heller Hissy Fit”

  1. If a fetus is a life that anti-abortionists have fought so hard to protect, then I don’t understand why an exception should be made for rape or incest. I just don’t get it. If the life of a fetus is so precious, does it make sense to terminate it because of the circumstances under which it was conceived? Is that life less valuable? Who are we to judge?

  2. Well, Dave, for some it is the issue of choice. I know it doesn’t necessarily justify the abortion, but imagining for a moment you were female, if someone impregnated you by forcibly raping you it would be rather clear that you did NOT have a choice in the matter at that stage. I would not be comfortable having the STATE then mandate the further impairment of choice by dictationg that you MUST carry the product of this horrible experience to term. Besides, if death ensues when brain activity ceases, then conversely human life could be presumed to begin when brain activity begins (about 12 weeks?). Following this logic, this would give a reasonable period in which to allow the victim to retain their choice without terminating an actual human life.

  3. er…that should be ‘dictating’, not ‘dictationg’. I don’t even know what that is!! Mea culpa.

Leave a Reply