Two takes on Planned Parenthood

A Facebook friend shared this article by Mark Steyn, portraying PP as a bully that guzzles taxpayer money to perform abortions and pay its executives exorbitant salaries. Steyn notes that these salaries place the executives in “the 1%.” Chuck Colson makes similar comments here. Of course, one of the big scandals is that PP doesn’t have mammogram equipment, only doctors to refer women for mammograms.

On the other hand, William Saletan believes that PP actually is far more concerned with contraception, to the point that if it had more money, it would distribute more contraceptives and perform fewer abortions.

All of the authors cite facts and figures to back up their points. Which do you think is a the more accurate portrayal? PP gives me the creeps, not only because they are the biggest abortion providers but also because of their historical connection to eugenics. That’s not going to change, but I do want to think through this particular issue fairly and honestly.



  1. Planned Parenthood wants to be the go-to organization for all your family planning needs, knowing that the most profitable aspect of their business is the abortion side. The contraceptive side of the business loses money because contraceptives are cheap commodities as drugs go. They depend on abortion to put the business in the black and set abortion goals for that reason. Can Planned Parenthood point to one community where they’ve gone in and lowered the abortion rate? Their business model is built on lies and subterfuge. You will never hear at a Planned Parenthood clinic that if you use a contraceptive with a 1% perfect use failure rate that your chances of getting pregnant are 70%… and that number was published in a journal by the abortion research institute that they founded. They sell women on the idea that they can control whether or not they get pregnant with high reliability, but that just isn’t the case over the long haul. Small risks when taken repeatedly add up to very large risks. That’s why half the women who get abortions in this country were on contraceptives at the time of conception. Giving PP more money will result in more abortion because their marketing plan is built on lies and falsehoods which they use to convince people that a) they can control their fertility very reliably over long periods of time and b) “if” something should ever go wrong, PP is always there to kill the fetus. PP doesn’t offer adoption services or anything else when contraceptives fail. At that point, their goal is to sell a woman on abortion because that’s where they make their money. If PP had a financial incentive to reduce abortion or a track record of reducing abortion, I would find their arguments much more convincing. As it stands, the financial incentives and their track record tell us that abortions increase in the communities where they set up shop. Abby Johnson, former Planned Parenthood clinic director and regional employee of the year has a good book where she talks about the financial incentives toward increasing abortions and the goals that clinics were supposed to meet to get those numbers up.

  2. “Where your treasure is, there will will you find your heart also.” These are the words of Jesus Christ and it’s wisdom to help us pinpoint the desires of a man’s heart. If PP’s greatest product is abortion, if that’s what they’re known for due to their resources upholding this aspect of their efforts, then it’s clear what they are really looking to accomplish. If were different we would be able to see a substantial effort in a different direction.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s