Bitcoin Forum
July 10, 2024, 04:03:56 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: “God bless Planned Parenthood” – PP Uses Abortions to Sell Baby Parts  (Read 13196 times)
MakingMoneyHoney
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 22, 2015, 11:01:44 PM
 #81

"According to press reports, the Center for Medical Progress created a fake limited liability corporation in advance of the meeting it recorded with a Planned Parenthood doctor. The video was captured by actors using fake identification to pose as buyers from that fake human biologics company. This elaborate scheme raises serious questions about whether any federal or state laws were violated in securing the LLC or the personal identification that were part of its execution.

The video was also filmed without the consent of the Planned Parenthood doctor, which may violate California law."

I don't like the way these people went about it, because it leads to things people can pick at.

However, an example, if you illegally obtain a video of someone committing murder, should people really be this focused and pissed at the one who illegally obtained the video and just ignore the murderer going free?
Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001


minds.com/Wilikon


View Profile
July 22, 2015, 11:22:22 PM
 #82

"According to press reports, the Center for Medical Progress created a fake limited liability corporation in advance of the meeting it recorded with a Planned Parenthood doctor. The video was captured by actors using fake identification to pose as buyers from that fake human biologics company. This elaborate scheme raises serious questions about whether any federal or state laws were violated in securing the LLC or the personal identification that were part of its execution.

The video was also filmed without the consent of the Planned Parenthood doctor, which may violate California law."

I don't like the way these people went about it, because it leads to things people can pick at.

However, an example, if you illegally obtain a video of someone committing murder, should people really be this focused and pissed at the one who illegally obtained the video and just ignore the murderer going free?


Was there a problem when Romney was taped illegally for that "47%" during the campaign?

Do you believe this is how you catch the mafia, by asking them politely how they do business?

How would you force anyone to tell the truth to millions of people?

It does not matter if you are but just one around millions of sheep.

You own your speech, until your last breath. They own the guns and jail to keep you quiet...

This is the game you need to play if you are ready to go all the way, the non violent way, with your speech.

I say good for them, even if the whole DOJ and the White House will prosecute them. And they will, to keep them quiet.

They will try to make them stop releasing the next videos

They will try force youtube to stop doing business with them
 
The more they will push, the more the no-sheep of the world will witness what total corruption looks like...


This will never go away. People will know they are helping a delicatessen called planned parenthood... It is more honest like that.


Have a taste...



MakingMoneyHoney
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 22, 2015, 11:45:37 PM
 #83

Was there a problem when Romney was taped illegally for that "47%" during the campaign?

Do you believe this is how you catch the mafia, by asking them politely how they do business?

How would you force anyone to tell the truth to millions of people?

It does not matter if you are but just one around millions of sheep.

You own your speech, until your last breath. They own the guns and jail to keep you quiet...

Yes, it's not surprising, but it's sad nonetheless.
CEG5952
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500

Buy and sell bitcoins,


View Profile
July 23, 2015, 12:11:22 AM
 #84

This woman got some strong stomach to eat her salad and talks about liver (yikes!) I wonder what they'll do with those parts? Fetus parts... I heard stories about chinese people eating fetus but I hope this has nothing to do with the buyers.

Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001


minds.com/Wilikon


View Profile
July 23, 2015, 12:14:46 AM
 #85




13 Things You Probably Don’t Know About Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger


Planned Parenthood, engulfed in a scandal following the release of two undercover videos, is the largest abortion provider in the United States.

On its website, the organization compliments Margaret Sanger as one of the pro-choice movement’s “great heroes.” Sanger started the American Birth Control League in 1921; it became part of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America in 1942.

Planned Parenthood praises Sanger for “providing contraception and other health services” and “advancing access to family planning in the United States and around the world.”

In addition to Planned Parenthood, Sanger also founded the Birth Control Review, a journal about contraception and population control.


Here are 13 things Sanger said during her lifetime.

1) She proposed allowing Congress to solve “population problems” by appointing a “Parliament of Population.”

“Directors representing the various branches of science [in the Parliament would] … direct and control the population through birth rates and immigration, and direct its distribution over the country according to national needs consistent with taste, fitness and interest of the individuals.” —“A Plan for Peace,” Birth Control Review, April 1932, pages 107-108

2) Sanger called the various methods of population control, including abortion, “defending the unborn against their own disabilities.” —“A Plan for Peace,” Birth Control Review, April 1932, pages 107-108

3) Sanger believed that the United States should “keep the doors of immigration closed to the entrance of certain aliens whose condition is known to be detrimental to the stamina of the race, such as feebleminded, idiots, morons, Insane, syphilitic, epileptic, criminal, professional prostitutes, and others in this class barred by the immigration laws of 1924.” —“A Plan for Peace,” Birth Control Review, April 1932, pages 107-108

4) Sanger advocated “a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.” —“A Plan for Peace,” Birth Control Review, April 1932, pages 107-108

5) People whom Sanger considered unfit, she wrote, should be sent to “farm lands and homesteads” where “they would be taught to work under competent instructors for the period of their entire lives.” —“A Plan for Peace,” Birth Control Review, April 1932, pages 107-108

6) She was an advocate of a proposal called the “American Baby Code.”

“The results desired are obviously selective births,” she wrote.

According to Sanger, the code would “protect society against the propagation and increase of the unfit.” —“America Needs a Code for Babies,” March 27, 1934, Margaret Sanger Papers, Library of Congress, 128:0312B

7) While advocating for the American Baby Code, she argued that marriage licenses should provide couples with the right to only “a common household” but not parenthood. In fact, couples should have to obtain a permit to become parents:

Article 3. A marriage license shall in itself give husband and wife only the right to a common household and not the right to parenthood.

Article 4. No woman shall have the legal right to bear a child, and no man shall have the right to become a father, without a permit for parenthood.

Article 5. Permits for parenthood shall be issued upon application by city, county, or state authorities to married couples, providing they are financially able to support the expected child, have the qualifications needed for proper rearing of the child, have no transmissible diseases, and, on the woman’s part, no medical indication that maternity is likely to result in death or permanent injury to health.

Article 6. No permit for parenthood shall be valid for more than one birth.

“All that sounds highly revolutionary, and it might be impossible to put the scheme into practice,” Sanger wrote.

She added: “What is social planning without a quota?” —“America Needs a Code for Babies,” March 27, 1934, Margaret Sanger Papers, Library of Congress, 128:0312B

Cool She believed that large families were detrimental to society.

“The most serious evil of our times is that of encouraging the bringing into the world of large families. The most immoral practice of the day is breeding too many children,” she wrote.

“The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it,” she continued. —“Woman and the New Race,” 1920, Chapter 5: The Wickedness of Creating Large Families

9) She argued that motherhood must be “efficient.”

“Birth control itself, often denounced as a violation of natural law, is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives,” Sanger wrote. —“Woman and the New Race,” 1920, Chapter 18: The Goal

10) Population control, she wrote, would bring about the “materials of a new race.”

“If we are to develop in America a new race with a racial soul, we must keep the birth rate within the scope of our ability to understand as well as to educate. We must not encourage reproduction beyond our capacity to assimilate our numbers so as to make the coming generation into such physically fit, mentally capable, socially alert individuals as are the ideal of a democracy,” Sanger wrote. —“Woman and the New Race,” 1920, Chapter 3: The Materials of the New Race

11) Sanger wrote that an excess in population must be reduced.

“War, famine, poverty and oppression of the workers will continue while woman makes life cheap,” she wrote.

Mothers, “at whatever cost, she must emerge from her ignorance and assume her responsibility.” —“Woman and the New Race,” 1920, Chapter 1: Woman’s Error and Her Debt

12) “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,” Sanger wrote. —Letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble on Dec., 10, 1939

13) In an interview with Mike Wallace in 1957, Sanger said, “I think the greatest sin in the world is bringing children into the world, that have disease from their parents, that have no chance in the world to be a human being practically.”

“Delinquents, prisoners, all sorts of things just marked when they’re born. That to me is the greatest sin—that people can—can commit,” she said.


http://dailysignal.com/2015/07/22/13-things-you-probably-dont-know-about-planned-parenthood-founder-margaret-sanger/


Mike Wallace Interviews Margaret Sanger

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrkrkSiFApA


Not the first I talk about sanger and the abortion rate in NYC:
Mission Accomplished for Margaret Sanger




jaysabi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2044
Merit: 1115


★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!


View Profile
July 23, 2015, 03:24:28 PM
Last edit: July 23, 2015, 03:36:22 PM by jaysabi
 #86




The House Energy and Commerce Committee has sent a letter to Planned Parenthood requesting Dr. Deborah Nucatola brief the committee on all of the issues she discusses in the video.




http://energycommerce.house.gov/sites/republicans.energycommerce.house.gov/files/114/Letters/20150717PPFA.pdf




These are legitimate questions that I would like to see answered, at this point, just to eliminate doubt that is being manufactured, as evidenced by the increasing hysteria displayed in the headlines being posted in an attempt to create a reality that doesn't exist.  Why are the questions coming from the House Energy and Commerce Committee though?


Another legitimate question, from a comment on youtube:

I'm a bit confused. If they don't do this, and don't sell the stuff, why did the good doctor agree to meet with folks posing as buyers looking for organs a medical biotech start up looking for research tissue?

No hysteria.




I fixed your quote to remove all the hysteria and spin and return it to reality.


And I will NEVER edit anything from you in my replies...

 Wink

Not hysteria.




Would it be easier for you if I just recopy the text in a new message and strike it out to show which part I was objecting to? It would effectively be the same, but I was being lazy. In either event, no one would confuse the fact that you did not say the words, so any fear of that is misplaced, and I cannot think of another reason to object except you don't like the contents of my post.

jaysabi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2044
Merit: 1115


★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!


View Profile
July 23, 2015, 03:26:30 PM
 #87

i see no problem with this. Why let fetus parts go to waste? Fetuses aren't people anyways


Not people... But have value for life for other people, ready to buy this "waste"... Illogical. Waste has no value. If it does then it is not waste. Why creating a law forbidding people from buying or selling baby body parts?

Do it openly if it is waste.




Anything can have value. Do you throw away garbage or recyclables that have no value? They have value to the companies that sort and sell it, or to the dumps that harvest methane from decomposing garbage.


When does this garbage stops being garbage and have value for a buyer? 10 weeks? 15 weeks? 20 weeks? Or is it after the garbage took its first breath on its own?

http://news.nationalpost.com/health/end-of-life-debate-turns-to-newborns-postnatal-abortion-morally-acceptable-in-some-cases-ethicist-says



You're the one who defined it as waste. I don't know what you're asking me for.

jaysabi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2044
Merit: 1115


★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!


View Profile
July 23, 2015, 03:29:15 PM
Last edit: July 23, 2015, 03:40:10 PM by jaysabi
 #88

Democrats Seek Federal Investigations of Group Behind Planned Parenthood Videos


--------------------------------------------------
As expected...


Republicans are engaging a political a witch hunt, turnaround is fair play.


"According to press reports, the Center for Medical Progress created a fake limited liability corporation in advance of the meeting it recorded with a Planned Parenthood doctor. The video was captured by actors using fake identification to pose as buyers from that fake human biologics company. This elaborate scheme raises serious questions about whether any federal or state laws were violated in securing the LLC or the personal identification that were part of its execution.

The video was also filmed without the consent of the Planned Parenthood doctor, which may violate California law."

I don't like the way these people went about it, because it leads to things people can pick at.

However, an example, if you illegally obtain a video of someone committing murder, should people really be this focused and pissed at the one who illegally obtained the video and just ignore the murderer going free?

I don't put any stock into the criticism of how the footage was obtained. It serves a public interest as furthering the debate on a fiercely controversial issue, and for that reason and discussion of wiretapping laws is misplaced in my opinion. The same would be for an illegally obtained video of a murder, not to remark on the legitimacy of the analogy. People may be pissed about how the video was obtained, but ultimately the public service the video provides towards the administration of justice should override the "legality" of how the video was obtained. And note there is marked difference for illegally obtained video by the government as opposed to individuals.

Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001


minds.com/Wilikon


View Profile
July 23, 2015, 03:44:10 PM
Last edit: July 23, 2015, 07:20:30 PM by Wilikon
 #89




The House Energy and Commerce Committee has sent a letter to Planned Parenthood requesting Dr. Deborah Nucatola brief the committee on all of the issues she discusses in the video.




http://energycommerce.house.gov/sites/republicans.energycommerce.house.gov/files/114/Letters/20150717PPFA.pdf




These are legitimate questions that I would like to see answered, at this point, just to eliminate doubt that is being manufactured, as evidenced by the increasing hysteria displayed in the headlines being posted in an attempt to create a reality that doesn't exist.  Why are the questions coming from the House Energy and Commerce Committee though?


Another legitimate question, from a comment on youtube:

I'm a bit confused. If they don't do this, and don't sell the stuff, why did the good doctor agree to meet with folks posing as buyers looking for organs a medical biotech start up looking for research tissue?

No hysteria.




I fixed your quote to remove all the hysteria and spin and return it to reality.


And I will NEVER edit anything from you in my replies...

 Wink

Not hysteria.




Would it be easier for you if I just recopy the text in a new message? Same effective, but I was being lazy I suppose.


It is not about me. It is not about you. If this is how you express yourself. Do it. Lazy. Not lazy. Does not matter. I use images a lot to make a point. But 10 years from now who knows if any image hostings will still be alive, making a lot of my replies gone. The rust is already happening in the denier thread for example...

So my promise to you, not to edit your replies, does not imply contractual reciprocity...

 Cool

EDIT: a courtesy to add the word "EDIT" when you make an EDIT later, or people could believe I was EDITING, shortening your reply...

Of course you don't have to.

 Cool


Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001


minds.com/Wilikon


View Profile
July 23, 2015, 03:50:29 PM
 #90

Democrats Seek Federal Investigations of Group Behind Planned Parenthood Videos


--------------------------------------------------
As expected...


Republicans are engaging a political a witch hunt, turnaround is fair play.


"According to press reports, the Center for Medical Progress created a fake limited liability corporation in advance of the meeting it recorded with a Planned Parenthood doctor. The video was captured by actors using fake identification to pose as buyers from that fake human biologics company. This elaborate scheme raises serious questions about whether any federal or state laws were violated in securing the LLC or the personal identification that were part of its execution.

The video was also filmed without the consent of the Planned Parenthood doctor, which may violate California law."

I don't like the way these people went about it, because it leads to things people can pick at.

However, an example, if you illegally obtain a video of someone committing murder, should people really be this focused and pissed at the one who illegally obtained the video and just ignore the murderer going free?

I don't put any stock into the criticism of how the footage was obtained. It serves a public interest as furthering the debate on a fiercely controversial issue, and for that reason and discussion of wiretapping laws is misplaced in my opinion. The same would be for an illegally obtained video of a murder, not to remark on the legitimacy of the analogy. People may be pissed about how the video was obtained, but ultimately the public service the video provides towards the administration of justice should override the "legality" of how the video was obtained. And note there is marked difference for illegally obtained video by the government as opposed to individuals.


Yep. Murder + dismemberment for $ is what those videos are showing, imho. It is fair for the democrats to counter attack people shinning a light on their lucrative delicatessen business, as long as it is not used as a tool from keeping the facts in the shadow...


zenitzz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560
Merit: 500


View Profile
July 23, 2015, 05:49:55 PM
 #91

If we are really serious about reducing the number of abortions in this country then we should support increased access to contraception
Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001


minds.com/Wilikon


View Profile
July 23, 2015, 07:25:36 PM
 #92

If we are really serious about reducing the number of abortions in this country then we should support increased access to contraception

Both are on the right path: First, access to contraception (except for sandra fluke, obviously) is easy, second, the number of abortion is going down on average

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2015/06/08/number-of-abortions-nationwide-declining


Does that mean baby body parts will be a rarer commodity and cost more to buy?


Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001


minds.com/Wilikon


View Profile
July 23, 2015, 07:28:27 PM
 #93




HHS Rejects Planned Parenthood FOIA Request Because It’s ‘Not Newsworthy’




Earlier this week, Mary Hasson broke the news here at the Federalist that federal funds went to Planned Parenthood’s salad-munching, wine-sipping, organ-harvesting Dr. Deborah Nucatola for advice on “healthy baby” births.

Hasson requested all communications and documents relevant to any payments to or compensation of fees, consultant fees, reimbursements, etc. to Deborah Nucatola, MD, a Planned Parenthood employee. And she requested that the documents be sent as soon as possible.

The Freedom of Information Act requires the federal government to be transparent, but successfully receiving information from the Obama Administration has gone so poorly — even more poorly than previous administrations — that many media outlets have resorted to suing the federal government to get them to respond to FOIA requests.

In March it was announced that the Obama administration had set new records for censoring information, outright denying access to information, and length of time to fulfill requests. They also, “refused a record number of times to turn over files quickly that might be especially newsworthy,” according to the Associated Press.

Since FOIA requests can routinely take years to fulfill, if they’re ever filled, Hasson requested that the Health and Human Services FOIA office expedite her request. She wrote:

“The public has a right to know of any federal monies going to Dr. Nucatola in light of the video, released by the Center for Medical Progress, that includes remarks by Dr. Nucatola that raise questions about whether federal laws may have been violated regarding patients’ informed consent for fetal tissue, and conflict of interest. Expedited processing required because of planned or pending Congressional hearings and the public’s demand for transparency on this issue.”
You’ll never guess what happened next.

HHS denied her request for expedited information on the compensation and payments given to Nucatola. They claimed it didn’t fit the public’s “urgent” right to know:

“Further, in order to meet second prong of the compelling need standard, the requested information must be the type of information that has a particular value that will be lost if not disseminated quickly, and ordinarily refers to a breaking news story of general public interest.”
HHS is arguing that the Planned Parenthood scandal, the very same one that has Planned Parenthood honcho Cecile Richards panicking and running every public relations response in the book, is not a “breaking news story of general public interest!”

To be sure, while HHS denied Hasson’s expedited FOIA request, they could at some point in the years to come respond to Hasson’s simple information request. Or, then again, maybe not.


http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/23/hhs-rejects-planned-parenthood-foia-request-because-its-not-newsworthy/



Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001


minds.com/Wilikon


View Profile
July 23, 2015, 08:13:17 PM
 #94




Pelosi urges DOJ probe into group targeting Planned Parenthood







House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Thursday joined calls for a federal investigation into the California-based anti-abortion group that sparked the Planned Parenthood hidden camera controversy.

“Let’s have an investigation of those people who were trying to ensnare Planned Parenthood in a controversy that doesn’t exist,” Pelosi said Thursday in her first public remarks about Planned Parenthood since the first undercover video surfaced last week.

A long-time abortion rights champion, Pelosi dismissed accusations that Planned Parenthood has raked in profits from its fetal tissue donation program.

“Planned Parenthood has said that they have done nothing illegal,” she said. “They do not ever charge, which would be illegal, for fetal tissue. They have only defrayed the cost of mailing that to someone, which is not breaking the law.”

She also criticized the selectively edited videos released by the Center for Medical Progress, pointing to the “disparities” between actual film and edited versions.

Her remarks come one day after White House press secretary Josh Earnest also defended the women’s health provider.


http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/248946-pelosi-joins-call-for-doj-probe-into-group-targeting-planned-parenthood




Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001


minds.com/Wilikon


View Profile
July 25, 2015, 01:00:40 AM
 #95




TNR docsplains Planned Parenthood organ harvesting: Fetus parts are nothing but “products”


I … don’t think this helps the cause, frankly:

These are not “baby parts.” Whether a woman has a miscarriage or an abortion, the tissue specimen is called “products of conception.” In utero, i.e. during pregnancy, we use the term “embryo” from fertilization to ten weeks gestation and “fetus” from ten weeks to birth. The term baby is medically incorrect as it doesn’t apply until birth. Calling the tissue “baby parts” is a calculated attempt to anthropomorphize an embryo or fetus. It is a false image—a ten to twelve week fetus looks nothing like a term baby—and is medically incorrect.

Hearing medical professionals talk casually about products of conception may seem distasteful to some, but not to doctors. Medical procedures are gory by nature. Surgeons routinely cut skin, saw bones, and lift the uterus out of the abdominal cavity and then put it back in. We stick our hands inside people and it is messy. We handle broken limbs, rotting flesh, and cancers that smell. We talk about this calmly because this is what we are trained to do. It doesn’t mean that we are heartless; it means we are professionals and this is our norm for a clinical conversation. There is no reason a conversation about products of conception requires more or less reverence than one about a kidney or a biopsy specimen.


For a quick explainer about the Orwellian nature of the phrase “products of conception,” here’s former Planned Parenthood “products of conception technician” and now pro-life activist Abby Johnson in a talk I recorded in October 2011:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcJmwoRJI3c


“You can’t say ‘baby’ in an abortion clinic,” Johnson said. That’s the same kind of dodge that Dr. Jen Gunter tries to use in this piece, and it fails for the same reason that the videos horrify. Planned Parenthood and Gunter want to dehumanize the fetus while commodifying the “products” because they are human. If they were not human, they would not provide value to Planned Parenthood in the marketplace.

Gunter tries another sleight of hand by equating the aborted child to a biopsy specimen or a kidney, presumably for a transplant, although Gunter doesn’t clarify that. Removing a kidney or a biopsy specimen doesn’t necessitate the termination of the human being from which they come. If removing those human parts from a patient resulted in its death, it would be actionable malpractice, if not criminal. The sale of such tissue would definitely be criminal. It would, in fact, reduce human beings to a collection of “products” for others to manipulate — which is exactly what the Planned Parenthood videos demonstrated.

TNR presents Gunter as an OB/GYN, but one has to wonder about the expertise of such a specialist if she writes that “a ten to twelve week fetus looks nothing like a term baby.” Kirsten Powers expressed shock over that claim:

http://www.babycenter.com/6_your-pregnancy-12-weeks_1101.bc


Actually, as this from Consumer Health Digest and many other resources explain, the baby is very much recognizable as a human being at 12 weeks. Its structures have all developed, and the child will increase its activity at this stage, even though it weighs about half an ounce (the graphic does not have the decimal in the “.49 ounce” label):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9tMRKd0PBM

If this looks “nothing like a term baby” to an OB/GYN, then she’s in the wrong profession — or at least may need a vision check stat. But of course Gunter and her fellow abortion apologists know that a human being at 12 weeks of gestation not only looks human, but is human. That’s dictated by science and observation. It’s absurd beyond belief, and an offense on both humane and linguistic considerations, to use the phrase “anthropomorphize the fetus.” The fetus cannot be anthropomorphized because it is already human. If it wasn’t, Planned Parenthood wouldn’t get any interest in the “products” for which it transacts.

By the way, if abortion for 12-week-old fetuses OK only because it supposedly doesn’t look like a “term baby,” then what’s the rationale for abortions at 16 weeks? 20 weeks? Beyond?

As D. C. McAlister correctly deduces, they’re flailing for rationalizations to explain away the inhumanity of abortion in general, and Planned Parenthood’s executives specifically:

Despite Gunter’s arrogant scolding, the fact of the matter is you can call something by any name you like, but it doesn’t change the fact of what it is. A human liver is a human liver. A human brain is a human brain. It doesn’t matter if it’s inside the uterus one minute (call it a fetus) or outside the next (presto, it’s a preemie baby); it’s still human.

But Gunter and the butchers at Planned Parenthood don’t want to use that term or any designation that will prick their darkened consciences. They don’t want to “anthropomorphize the fetus.” Of course, that makes perfect sense. If they were ever honest about the humanity they’re crushing, crunching, grinding, and dissecting, they’d be monsters. They’d be psychopaths. But they’re not psychopaths. They’re stable, normal human beings. To remain that way, they have to use terms like “products of conception.” They have to, in a word, dehumanize. …

The road to atrocity is paved with dehumanization. It’s necessary. It’s a normal part of all genocide, and it’s exploited and propagated by propaganda, by the use of seemingly harmless terms like products of conception. ­“All political and nationalist propaganda aims at only one thing,” Aldous Huxley wrote, “to persuade one set of people that another set of people are not really human and that it is therefore legitimate to rob, swindle, bully, and even murder them.”
It goes against our nature to kill a person like ourselves, so we have to dehumanize others to overcome the normal human aversion to murder. “Most people would hesitate to torture or kill a human being like themselves,” Huxley wrote. “But when that human being is spoken of as though he were not a human being . . . we lose our scruples.”

Gunter cannot confront the humanity of the fetus, so she and her allies at Planned Parenthood call it a “product,” and set up markets to trade the product for compensation. It’s ghastly enough to do this, but it’s even more so to read Gunter’s scolding over attempts to recognize the humanity extinguished by abortion while defending Planned Parenthood’s machinations to profit off of that humanity.

This might be even more disgusting than the video’s casual discussion of prices from their organ harvesting. And oddly, more revealing.



http://hotair.com/archives/2015/07/24/tnr-docsplains-planned-parenthood-organ-harvesting-fetus-parts-are-nothing-but-products/


Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001


minds.com/Wilikon


View Profile
July 25, 2015, 02:50:08 PM
 #96




California AG to Investigate Group That Exposed Planned Parenthood Baby Parts Harvesting Program


They exposed Planned Parenthood’s aborted baby parts harvesting program.
Now they must be punished.




The Center for Medical Progress released video this week showing Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s Medical Directors’ Council President, Dr. Mary Gatter, haggling over payments for intact fetal specimens.

In the video Dr. Mary Gatter haggles over aborted baby parts.

California Democratic Attorney General will investigate the group that exposed Planned Parenthood’s ghoulish baby organ harvesting program.
But Planned Parenthood will get a pass.
FOX News reported:

California Attorney General Kamala Harris announced Friday she plans to review two undercover videos released by anti-abortion activists aimed at discrediting Planned Parenthood’s procedures for providing fetal tissue to researchers to see if any law was broken in the filming.

Harris made the announcement in a letter to four Democratic members of Congress who had requested the investigation, saying she’ll use her office’s authority to regulate charity organizations to see if the organization that made the videos violated registration or reporting requirements, or broke any other rules.

“We will carefully review the allegations raised in your letter to determine whether there were any violations of California law,” Harris said in the letter to four members of the U.S. House of Representatives.

She said her office will look into “allegations that individuals impersonated corporate officials from a fake biologics company, resulting in the release of secretly filmed videos of Planned Parenthood physicians without their consent.”

Harris, a Democrat, plans to run for the U.S. Senate in 2016.

The videos show Dr. Mary Gatter, a Planned Parenthood medical director in Southern California, meeting with people posing as possible buyers of intact fetal specimens. The conversation is centered of the cost of the specimens.

David Daleiden of the Center for Medical Progress, the group that released the videos, contends it follows all applicable laws when making videos that he called investigative journalism.


http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/07/california-ag-to-investigate-group-that-exposed-planned-parenthood-baby-parts-harvesting/


Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001


minds.com/Wilikon


View Profile
July 25, 2015, 06:11:42 PM
 #97




The price of fetal parts



Planned Parenthood’s reaction to the release of a clandestinely recorded conversation about the sale of fetal body parts was highly revealing. After protesting that it did nothing illegal, it apologized for the “tone” of one of its senior directors.

Her remarks lacked compassion, admitted Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards. As if Dr. Deborah Nucatola’s cold and casual discussion over salad and wine of how the fetal body can be crushed with forceps in a way that leaves valuable organs intact for sale is some kind of personal idiosyncrasy. On the contrary, it’s precisely the kind of psychic numbing that occurs when dealing daily with industrial scale destruction of the growing, thriving, recognizably human fetus.

This was again demonstrated by the release this week of a second video showing another official sporting that same tone, casual and even jocular, while haggling over the price of an embryonic liver. “If it’s still low, then we can bump it up,” she joked, “I want a Lamborghini.”

Abortion critics have long warned that the problem is not only the obvious — what abortion does to the fetus — but also what it does to us. It’s the same kind of desensitization that has occurred in the Netherlands with another mass exercise in life termination: assisted suicide. It began as a way to prevent the suffering of the terminally ill. It has now become so widespread and wanton that one-fifth of all Dutch assisted-suicide patients are euthanized without their explicit consent.

The Planned Parenthood revelations will have an effect. Perhaps not on government funding, given the Democratic Party’s unwavering support and the president wishing it divine guidance. Planned Parenthood might escape legal jeopardy as well, given the loophole in the law banning the sale of fetal parts that permits compensation for expenses (shipping and handling, as it were).

But these revelations will have an effect on public perceptions. Just as ultrasound altered feelings about abortion by showing the image, the movement, the vibrant living-ness of the developing infant in utero, so too, I suspect, will these Planned Parenthood revelations, by throwing open the door to the backroom of the clinic where that being is destroyed.

It’s an ugly scene. The issue is less the sale of body parts than how they are obtained. The nightmare for abortion advocates is a spreading consciousness of how exactly a healthy fetus is turned into a mass of marketable organs, how, in the words of a senior Planned Parenthood official, one might use “a less crunchy technique” — crush the head, spare the organs — “to get more whole specimens.”

The effect on the public is a two-step change in sensibilities. First, when ultrasound reveals how human the living fetus appears. Next, when people learn, as in these inadvertent admissions, what killing the fetus involves.

Remember. The advent of ultrasound has coincided with a remarkable phenomenon: Of all the major social issues, abortion is the only one that has not moved toward increasing liberalization. While the legalization of drugs, the redefinition of marriage and other assertions of individual autonomy have advanced, some with astonishing rapidity, abortion attitudes have remained largely static. The country remains evenly split.


What will be the reaction to these Planned Parenthood revelations? Right now, to try to deprive it of taxpayer money. Citizens repelled by its activities should not be made complicit in them. But why not shift the focus from the facilitator to the procedure itself?

The House has already passed a bill banning abortion after 20 weeks. That’s far more fruitful than trying to ban it entirely because, apart from the obvious constitutional issue, there is no national consensus about the moral status of the early embryo. There’s more agreement on the moral status of the later-term fetus. Indeed, about two-thirds of Americans would ban abortion after the first trimester.

There is more division about the first trimester because one’s views of the early embryo are largely a matter of belief, often religious belief. One’s view of the later-term fetus, however, is more a matter of what might be called sympathetic identification — seeing the image of a recognizable human infant and, now, hearing from the experts exactly what it takes to “terminate” its existence.

The role of democratic politics is to turn such moral sensibilities into law. This is a moment to press relentlessly for a national ban on late-term abortions.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-price-of-fetal-parts/2015/07/23/13cb5668-316d-11e5-8353-1215475949f4_story.html


Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001


minds.com/Wilikon


View Profile
July 25, 2015, 06:22:54 PM
 #98



Damage control: United Way Issues Statement On Backing Planned Parenthood…






United Way Worldwide said Friday (July 24) that it has never given money to Planned Parenthood, but that a few independent local chapters do. It released the statement after a number of blogs and social media posts asserted that “The United Way” funds Planned Parenthood, a national non-profit organization that provides reproductive health, maternal and child health services.

Michael Williamson, president and chief executive of United Way of Southeast Louisiana, said separately that his chapter has “never provided funding to Planned Parenthood, and we do not now.” The 1,200 United Ways in the United States are each independent entities, with their own volunteer boards that determine funding needs, Williamson said. He said local United Ways do not take directions on funding from United Way Worldwide, the sole purpose of which is to assist local entities with marketing and training.

The worldwide organization said less than 6 percent of local United Ways provide support to Planned Parenthood—”less than 1/10th of 1 percent of total United Way revenue.” Its statement continued: “No United Way funds are currently used, or have ever been used to support abortion services.”


http://www.nola.com/business/index.ssf/2015/07/united_way_worldwide_rebuts_cl.html


---------------------------------------------
More to follow if more videos are dropped in the up coming weeks... Can't put that genie back in the bottle.


MakingMoneyHoney
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 26, 2015, 05:36:05 AM
 #99

Apparently this is from May, and has been "debunked' a bit. But it's pretty disgusting.

Dead Babies In Your Food, Drinks & Makeup Illuminati Exposed! 2015

Which Companies Are Using Aborted Human Fetuses in Their Food?

"Last week, Oklahoma State Senator Ralph Shortey introduced a bill that would ban "the manufacture or sale of food or products which use aborted human fetuses." But which foods or products use aborted human fetuses? Let's investigate.

NPR speculates that Shortey's bill has to do with a recent boycott aimed at PepsiCo for working with a company called Senomyx that "has been accused of using proteins derived from human embryonic kidney cells in its research.""

Snopes tried to debunk it, saying, "neither Pepsi nor any other U.S. food company is actually manufacturing or selling any consumable products "that are actually made using the cell tissue of unborn babies that were murdered through abortion." What we're talking about here is a cell line derived from a single (healthy, aborted) fetus over forty years ago"

Either way, I don't like these companies using fetus's cells at all. Why do we need that around food and drink that's been ok to eat for years beforehand?

Why do bills like this need to exist?

Bill Would Ban Aborted Fetuses in Food

" "There is a potential that there are companies that are using aborted human babies in their research and development of basically enhancing flavor for artificial flavors," he told KRMG Radio. "I don't know if it is happening in Oklahoma, it may be, it may not be. What I am saying is that if it does happen then we are not going to allow it to manufacture here."

Shortey may be acting on claims that the San Diego-based company Semonyx used proteins derived from human embryonic kidney cells to test artificial sweeteners, NPR reported. The cell line, known as HEK 293, was created from a human embryo in 1970 and has become a staple in biochemistry labs around the world."
Wilikon (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001


minds.com/Wilikon


View Profile
July 26, 2015, 04:01:46 PM
 #100

Apparently this is from May, and has been "debunked' a bit. But it's pretty disgusting.

Dead Babies In Your Food, Drinks & Makeup Illuminati Exposed! 2015

Which Companies Are Using Aborted Human Fetuses in Their Food?

"Last week, Oklahoma State Senator Ralph Shortey introduced a bill that would ban "the manufacture or sale of food or products which use aborted human fetuses." But which foods or products use aborted human fetuses? Let's investigate.

NPR speculates that Shortey's bill has to do with a recent boycott aimed at PepsiCo for working with a company called Senomyx that "has been accused of using proteins derived from human embryonic kidney cells in its research.""

Snopes tried to debunk it, saying, "neither Pepsi nor any other U.S. food company is actually manufacturing or selling any consumable products "that are actually made using the cell tissue of unborn babies that were murdered through abortion." What we're talking about here is a cell line derived from a single (healthy, aborted) fetus over forty years ago"

Either way, I don't like these companies using fetus's cells at all. Why do we need that around food and drink that's been ok to eat for years beforehand?

Why do bills like this need to exist?

Bill Would Ban Aborted Fetuses in Food

" "There is a potential that there are companies that are using aborted human babies in their research and development of basically enhancing flavor for artificial flavors," he told KRMG Radio. "I don't know if it is happening in Oklahoma, it may be, it may not be. What I am saying is that if it does happen then we are not going to allow it to manufacture here."

Shortey may be acting on claims that the San Diego-based company Semonyx used proteins derived from human embryonic kidney cells to test artificial sweeteners, NPR reported. The cell line, known as HEK 293, was created from a human embryo in 1970 and has become a staple in biochemistry labs around the world."


"Debunked" or not, there is only one question one should ask:
How come there is such valuable and profitable huge market for what planned parenthood calls "discarded clumps of cells"...?


Actually there is another one:
‘Not just a clump of cells?’ Why is Cosmo troubled by this, but not abortion?
http://twitchy.com/2015/03/24/not-just-a-clump-of-cells-why-is-cosmo-troubled-by-this-but-not-abortion-photo/




Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!