Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Planned Parenthood digging its own grave

Guest Columnist

Published: Sunday, July 1, 2012

Updated: Monday, July 2, 2012 09:07

Planned Parenthood is a nonprofit organization that provides reproductive and women’s health services, one of which has landed it in the center of a storm of controversy. Abortions account for roughly only 3 percent of the services it provides, but the group receives 46 percent of it funding from American taxpayers. Needless to say, this creates some discontent among the 50 percent of taxpayers who consider themselves to be anti-abortion. In addition, the group’s blatant and exclusive support of far-left politicians, even though the group claims to be nonpartisan, angers taxpayers who do not want their money supporting left-leaning politicians and policies.

Even though Republicans in general are largely against Planned Parenthood, it is not as if they have zero Republican support. However, the Republicans who have voiced support for the group have not been well received. Even though Planned Parenthood endorsed Republican Sen. Susan Collins, who is a strong advocate for abortion rights and has fought to save Planned Parenthood’s federal funding, it quickly did an about-face in her 2002 campaign after she voted to confirm Justice Samuel Alito, whose record on women’s issues did not meet its strict criteria. It instead donated to her opponent in an attempt to defeat her, thereby alienating a potential friend who could have helped it gain much-needed Republican support.

It’s not just in Congress that Planned Parenthood is making enemies. Mitt Romney has promised to defund the organization should he be elected president, and many of his supporters applaud this promise. While this issue is unlikely to be a deciding factor for most voters this election cycle, the left-leaning policies of this organization do marginalize it and make it difficult for Republicans and some independent voters to support it, especially religious voters. Just like many people would not want their money going to fund a religious organization that they did not believe in, religious citizens do not want their money going to support a group that does things they do not believe in.

Even if Planned Parenthood does not use federal funds directly to perform abortions, many taxpayers are upset that their money goes to a group that not only performs this service but also spends money on promoting pro-abortion rights legislation. Whether it is for religious reasons or other personal reasons, Americans should not be forced to pay for things that they do not believe in. Because its funding comes from all American taxpayers — not just American taxpayers who support their political agenda — Planned Parenthood needs to drop its political aspirations and limit its activities to its stated purpose, which is providing specific health services to people who need it.

If Planned Parenthood wants to continue receiving federal funding, some changes to its political donation policies are in order. If it remains dead set on not compromising, the end of this story will likely be that it will have to come up with its own funding. While the group may feel that its fight is just about providing specific health services to men, women and children who would not otherwise be able to afford it, it is risking this goal by aligning itself against many people who are not 100 percent in agreement with how it goes about doing this. Accepting federal money comes with strings attached. The money is meant to serve the people who paid it, and if taxpayers do not believe that this is ultimately what is happening with their money, it is going to be cut off.

Anyone interested in writing a column for the Opinions section at the Central Florida Future can contact the Opinions Editor, Kaley LaQuea, at opinions.cff@gmail.com.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

5 comments

Anonymous
Wed Jul 4 2012 09:50
This article's facts/statistics are not cited, because they are made up. This wasn't even researched as previous comments have pointed out the many errors (lies) written about. Very disappointing that CFF publishes material with no citations or research and that lies to the readers. Where are the standards?
Anonymous
Tue Jul 3 2012 18:43
"Needless to say, this creates some discontent among the 50 percent of taxpayers who consider themselves to be anti-abortion."

Please cite where you got this statistic, otherwise it's just a WAG (Wild A** Guess).

Also, I'm not sure you understand the difference between PRO-CHOICE and PRO-ABORTION. It's a subtle change in wording, with former being more accurate. I don't know anyone who is actively PRO-ABORTION, ANTI-ABORTION maybe, PRO-CHOICE quite possibly, but PRO-ABORTION suggests people actively lobbying to kill unborn children. You may disagree with abortion being a choice, but your choice of words to describe those who do not hold your view is inaccurate and inflammatory.

Anonymous
Tue Jul 3 2012 12:04
The author clearly didn't do any research. If she did, she would have discovered that she is confusing Planned Parenthood (which does receive tax payer money) with the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (which supports political candidates and doesn't). Just because it is opinion piece doesn't mean you don't have to use facts. This is just irresponsible.
Anonymous
Tue Jul 3 2012 09:47
Funds go to providing cheaper birth control for women who otherwise could not afford it. PP also provides cheaper STD testing, breast cancer screenings, and counseling. Taxpayer's money is going to preventing abortions, not supplying them!!!!
Bryan
Mon Jul 2 2012 15:46
Great job stealing an opinion piece already written in the New York Times. Give this girl a Pullitzer!!




log out