Arizona Takes A Big Step Back. WARNING, GRAPHIC!

[HairOfTheDog]

Not all of course but it's usually a certain "class" of women who utilize Planned Parenthood, these are the same women who left on their own will breed like bunnies and that money will be spent on welfare for her and all her little bastards. I say nip it in the bud, I don't care if my taxes go for abortion.

Ok let's explore that, how do you compel these stupid bitches to have abortions instead of getting 450.00 a month raise on their welfare?

If you can guarantee that women will have to have abortions rather than having the baby and us tax payers get a say in the decision based on how many kids they already have,their ability to support the new baby,and their abilities as a parent, I say go for it spend the tax dollars.

But if any one of those is out then I say fuck it, if they want an abortion let them pay for it themselves.

Dick, you are talking about two different groups of women, imo. The women who use Planned Parenthood for birth control, female testing, and abortions are not the welfare mothers who breed for cash (probably some small intersection using PP for different services, but largely two different groups, I surmise).

Cash breeders choose to have children, as you noted, to get government funding on a per per-child basis. It's their income. Cash breeders aren't aren't interested in birth control and abortion. If PP tax funding is cut altogether, SOME of those that don't have the ability to get the birth control and abortion services that they now get from PP will likely transition to the category of being mothers who require tax funding to take care of their children; they will become cash breeders/welfare mothers.

So, while cutting abortion and birth control services may reduce the short term tax cost for for "birth related" government assistance in the the "preventative" category, it will almost certainly push some segment of PP users into the welfare mother category thereby increasing the TOTAL cost of funding birth related services (or "low income" family services) to the tax payer for a much longer duration, imo.