You might have, by now, seen pieces about Sen. Jon Kyl's inaccurate percentages regarding Planned Parenthood. He apparently alleged that 90% of PP's business is abortions. This was, it turns out, quite an exaggeration, and he's now getting skewered for spreading misinformation as a rationale to defund Planned Parenthood.
So, PP proponents would argue that abortions are a small percentage of what PP does and that defunding PP would deprive large numbers of families from the vital medical care and resources. PP would suggest that the pro-life lobby is urging the government to throw out the proverbial baby with the bathwater.
Maybe the irony of that cliche hits too close to home.
If these other resources really are so vital and abortions such a small part of their business, then shouldn't PP be willing to compromise on the issue? If the abortions are so insignificant in the larger scheme of things, then why doesn't PP offer to stop them in return for keeping government funding for the far more important and far more numerous non-abortion activities it conducts?
I'm not saying that PP's refusal to stop providing abortions means that the Senator's numbers are correct. I'm saying that if PP thinks pro-lifers want to throw out the baby with the bathwater, then PP is just as ready to never throw out any bathwater for fear of throwing out the baby.
But one wonders what happens to the baby if the bathwaters get too high...
Comments