Just following the rules...
Posted on 06/01/2011 7:04:13 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Add supermodel Kathy Ireland to the list of people wanting Congress to de-fund the Planned Parenthood abortion business by cutting the millions of dollars it receives to promote its agenda.
“I think Planned Parenthood needs to reassess and look at what their values are, what their mission is, what their goals are, and do they deserve government funding? For example, there are non-profits that I’m involved with, and we don’t get government funding,” Ireland told FOX411’s Pop Tarts program. “We go out there, and if you really believe in this strongly enough to fight it for it, go get the funding.
“To force people who don’t agree with some of the practices, I don’t believe in that. I don’t think tax payers need to fund something as controversial as [Planned Parenthood],’ she added. . .
Good for her
“I think Planned Parenthood needs to reassess and look at what their values are, what their mission is, what their goals are...”
...I support de-funding too but she wants to for all the wrong reasons. She doesn’t get it. PP already knows their “values, mission and goals”. Abortion. Period. She’s a fool.
Some issues of “politics” can be easily understood by the rabble, and government (ie., taxpayer) funding of infanticide is one such issue. Good for Kathy Ireland. I hope her message is heard loud and clear.
What she has to say on the subject either makes sense, or it doesn’t, and that’s regardless of who she is. We hear from Hollywood more often than we hear from us peon folk, but the truth of their words and ideas should stand (or fall) on it’s own. Like with anyone else.
“funny Italian men”
Like Danny DeVito?
I’ll probably get flamed for this, but I’m against abortion but have no problem with birth control. To the extent that an institution supports birth control, I think it’s a good idea. I’ve seen too many cases where unplanned pregnancies have placed such financial burdens on a family that the family unit disintegrates and they become a wards of the state and I honestly think that helps no one.
Once again Miss Irelend steps up to the plate for the unborn. And I think she has paid a career price for doing so. I applaud her and thank her for her efforts.
personally, i don’t care what they do. as long as it’s not taxpayer funded. as long as we live in a free country, any organization should be free to provide or promote any legal service- HOWEVER, any company that provides or promotes morally abhorrent services should be self or privately funded.
She’s super in my book.
+1
... because anytime a celebrity comes out publicly with a conservative position, that position is publicized, and it becomes more socially acceptable for those who follow celebrity to agree with celebrities’ conservative position, thus influencing others who have a tendency to follow the socially accepted norms.
I have always thought that she looked super pretty, but now she looks even better!! I wish her all the best.
Back in the ‘60s, that was their mission. The sowre up and down that they aimed to end abortion. The Pill, they said, was the magic bullet that wouldmake abortions rare. The problem is that taking contraceptives requires personal discipline, and a lot of people don’t associate having sex with personal discipline. So as soon as abortion was made legal everwhere in the United States, it became the “final solution” for a lot of women who could not control themselves or their “boyfriends.” So the missions changed. Nowe it was: be responsible but if you slip we know how to avoid the consequences.
PP was founded by Margaret Sanger, no?
The PP agenda has always been abortion and eugenics of what she deemed lesser races -— originally Jews and blacks.
I’m unaware of it ever being strictly birth control.
Regardless, sex is a voluntary act that does not require taxpayer support.
Celebrities have a lot of clout in our society.
I concur; it’s a minor point of contention between me and my born-and-raised Roman Catholic wife.
She is a long time Christian. I recall a tv item (might have been back in the 80s...yikes times flies) showing her reading the bible daily.
C'mon Jack, You say you've got a PhD yet you can't figure this out?
Put that econ hat back on and reacquaint yourself with principles of determining market value: similar to the principles one reasonably supposes you tried to drill into the heads of students for how ever long you did it.
Who really cares whether a stodgy old retired econ professor is pro-life, and has no potential for sustaining real economic loss from career marginalization for speaking out boldly on their pro-life views?
Add to that, perhaps you have been pro-life all your life. Ireland came to her pro-life conviction in the middle of a high powered career. She has been quite outspoken at least for the past 9 years.
When interviewed about abortion on a Hannity and Colmes on FOXNEWS in September 2002, she is quoted as saying the following:
“Is it all right for the government to allow the murder of an innocent human being? The evidence I see tells me the unborn is a human being. From the moment of conception, a new life comes into being with a complete genetic blueprint. The sex is determined. The blood type is determined The moment that I learned that the unborn was a human being, not part of the woman’s body but its own individual human being, I have no choice but to defend the most vulnerable among us.”
Kathy Ireland has been blessed with opportunity. She has also made sacrifices and stuck her neck out to promote the pro-life issue, as well. Given the decidedly pro-abortion tenor of Hollywood, do you think her position likely economically helped or hurt those career prospects?
Do you fail to see the value-added by such a high-profile spokesperson for life? Inspite of all your education, her value as a spokesperson is greater due to her higher profile and life story, driving a higher demand for her opinion, over what my be yours and whatever your own opinion about her is.
Might her opinion be one which has delivered more to benefit the bottom line of the pro-life cause from both a fund-raising perspective as well as an inspiration and moral leadership perspective than say what has been delivered by your own somewhat-less-than-higher-profile status over the same 9 year period?
Economically speaking, it really shouldn't be all that hard for a former economics professor to understand.
Even this MBA (Int'l economics) can figure this one out.
FReegards!
Ahhhh... The good old days.
I agree with you.I am Ctholic andhate that we have our tax dollars used for soemthing that is immoral to me.If you want birth control I should not have to pay for it for you.Besides PP has been found to purposely use low dose BC to make women need abortions so why would you ever trust someone to give provide something to prevent when they make so much more money from abotions they also provide?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.