Rooster7 Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Prairie_Scouter, Planned Parenthood doesn't "advocate" abortion. Surely, you can't be serious. How many women walk into a Planned Parenthood office, and come out deciding to keep their child? You'd have more credibility if you claimed Bin Laden doesn't advocate violence against Americans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prairie_Scouter Posted August 5, 2005 Share Posted August 5, 2005 The fact that women will go to Planned Parenthood clinics for abortions doesn't mean that they are advocating them, it just means that make them available. Do many women go there with the intent of getting an abortion? I'm sure they do. But, PP staff do, in fact, do a counseling session with each woman to make sure that they understand their options. They're not there to convince them one way or the other, just to educate. Now, if PP employees went to OB-GYN offices and solicited business there (Yoe, Get Your Abortion TODAY; We've got a Special going....), that would be another story. You mean that after all we did educating Bin Laden on how to use the capitalist system to make his money to fund his activities, he isn't our friend? Darn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packsaddle Posted August 5, 2005 Share Posted August 5, 2005 Getting back to the actual topic... I know of numerous examples where public lands are leased to churches, etc. by my agency. In all cases, the leases are reviewed periodically (annually in some cases) and re-evaluated to ensure that the lease amount is in line with the actual value. There are other restrictions as well. This process is viewed negatively by some of these organizations because they claim (rightly) that their leases reflect the retail market (also rightly). And that the restrictions require broader access than they would allow if they had the freedom to set their own limitations. In some cases the churches can no longer afford the leases and the properties are open to other groups, public or private. The only improvement that I could make to this system would be to open these properties to public bids on an annual basis or at the end of each lease term. This would put the properties in a position for greater public access over the long term, subject to market forces. With regard to the sailing club: my club would reject the idea of accepting a public grant for an addition to the clubhouse. However, the club would accept a grant (for example) for funds to help stabilize the shoreline, thus benefitting the public resource as well as the club. However, the conclusion that BSA's acceptance of public funds is not a "huge evil" is an interesting example of the end justifying the means - the result of moral relativism, perhaps, since it evidently IS a 'minor evil'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now