Page 3 of 3

Re: 30.06 posted at Planned Parenthood, Sherman

Posted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 6:53 pm
by Hoi Polloi
Russell wrote:every service they provide is still *LEGAL* makes my libertarian-leaning self happy :thumbs2:
It would be too far outside the purposes of this forum to engage this discussion, so I will simply state that numerous court and investigative actions show that all of their activities are not legal. A search of the words 'Planned Parenthood illegally' would turn up a representative sample from sources that are mainstream through extreme (as one would expect online).

To wrap back around to the OP, I think we've covered that the sign almost assuredly is intended to be valid and that by the letter of the law it is not valid, but Russell brings up a point that has not yet been discussed.

Planned Parenthood is a very controversial figurehead for abortion as they are the greatest single provider of them in the US. Their largest facility is in Houston, TX. As such, whatever one's political opinions about the services they provide, one must take into account the politics associated with them when deciding what one will do when dealing with them. If you were made inside a PP, as opposed to inside a grocery store, how might things unravel differently? I'd suspect that the police responding would be more sensitive to your having a firearm there (similar to how some are sensitive to seeing them in churches or at schools). Would you be more likely to be dubbed an extremist? Would the police, who notoriously know nothing about CHL laws, be more likely to take the word of the secretary when she explains that the sign on the door is valid? Would you be more likely to take a ride for being made in a PP than being made at a grocery store? My guess would be yes, that all sorts of factors would combine such that if you were made in a PP, no one would want to take the chance of giving you the time to explain yourself before they got you and your gun out of there in the safest and most expedient way possible, which would most likely be the back of a police car.

Re: 30.06 posted at Planned Parenthood, Sherman

Posted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 7:10 pm
by Oldgringo
Hoi Polloi opined:

...It would be too far outside the purposes of this forum to engage this discussion...
But you did editorialize on Planned Parenthood?

I reiterate, family planning is the business of the couple involved and no one else - not you, not me, not the government nor anyone/anything else.

The sign is either legal or it isn't.

Re: 30.06 posted at Planned Parenthood, Sherman

Posted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 7:23 pm
by Hoi Polloi
Oldgringo wrote:
Hoi Polloi opined:

...It would be too far outside the purposes of this forum to engage this discussion...
But you did editorialize on Planned Parenthood?

I reiterate, family planning is the business of the couple involved and no one else - not you, not me, not the government nor anyone/anything else.

The sign is either legal or it isn't.
I commented on the political roots of PP as it directly addressed the topic of their intent in posting a legal (though invalid) sign. This was directly related to the topic of the thread.

I commented on the political position of PP in society as it directly addressed the topic of how a CHL holder might be handled if discovered. This was directly related to the topic of the thread.

I stated that I did not believe a part of someone's post was completely accurate and suggested places he or others who were interested in the topic could go if they were interested to read more. I did not go further than that statement and offer any editorializing or commentary as such commentary was not related to the thread.

The only time someone's family planning has been discussed in this thread was by the OP herself and by those offering encouragement to her. No one has in any way, shape, or form negatively editorialized or her family planning. Discussing the institution's history and public efforts is very different from discussing a person's private life.

Re: 30.06 posted at Planned Parenthood, Sherman

Posted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 7:52 pm
by rm9792
randomoutburst wrote:
Oldgringo wrote: SALUT!
Thanks. We just want to make sure that we are financially stable before we start a family. We're also trying to plan ahead and help our kids save for college - something we didn't have from our parents, but could have really used. About 6 years down the road we'll see how our plan is looking, and go from there. .
Hmmm, thats the plot beginning of Idiocracy (movie). I wish all people would consider their future like this.

Re: 30.06 posted at Planned Parenthood, Sherman

Posted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 8:11 pm
by Oldgringo
Russell wrote:

PP provides many essential services at great discounts to many families that need them. The fact that they provide abortion services, or the background of their founder, is irrelevant to purpose of this thread or the other services they provide. On top of that the fact that they continue to provide these services in the face of the anger thrown at them daily since every service they provide is still *LEGAL* makes my libertarian-leaning self happy

The 30.06 posted isn't valid, continue carrying and enjoying the discounts you receive while you still can.
Well said! That folk, is the bottom line.