I fainted on my first day of work

shouldn't the, at minimum, rights of the fetus begin when it is agreed upon that it could live without the mother? For instance, if the mother is going to partial birth abortion they might just as well have the kid and put it up for adoption. Why? Because it is a human and no longer just a clump of cells if it can live by itself.(with current Affordable Care provided for all citizens) Price is no longer an issue since our Care is so Affordable so save the viable baby humans from the senseless slaughter.
 
Mr D
Well the Doc is on vid saying it. I guess she can try to deny it or say it was taken out of context.
Frankly I wish I had not watched that vid. There is no out of context for the cracking of the skull to get to the brain. or hearing that that the baby is so big they just stick their fingers in and grab the parts.
 
I'm not sure I understand the consternation with Premature Labor. It's an extension of miscarriages and can happen at any point in a pregnancy. I've said earlier that I have serious reservations about 3rd trimester abortions and would agree with Mr. Deez that borders on murder. Before that though I don't consider it viable thus "size" is inconsequential.

Here is a site that details premature labor. I also found the information below which seems to be the accepted industry norm as to viability (24 weeks).

http://americanpregnancy.org/labor-and-birth/premature-labor/
Premature labor does not always result in premature delivery. Some women with premature labor and early dilation of the cervix are put on bed rest until the pregnancy progresses. Most babies born prior to 24 weeks have little chance of survival.

Only about 50% will survive and the other 50% may die or have permanent problems. However, babies born after 32 weeks have a very high survival rate and usually do not have long term complications. Premature babies born at hospitals with neonatal intensive care units (NICU) have the best results.
Click to expand...
 
looks like a lib judge has heard/seen enough as well or is there any real reason other than damage control to stop these tapes from being shown the full light of day? (no link but it is out there)
 
Husker
So you prefer to believe this abortion Doc was referring to premature labor when she mentioned that she could get intact babies if the mothers delivered before the Doc could get in and crunch the baby for parts?
ok sure Yea that's the ticket.:rolleyes1: Did you enjoy her exclaiming > " It's another boy"?

Zork
what that Lib judge did was to block anymore vids that had people from that StemExpress on it or whatever it was called company. This vid did not
 
Well Zork The reporting didn't make it clear at all.
I know PP wishes the judge blocked all videos instead of just the ones with StemExpress employees
 
Horn6721 said:
So you prefer to believe this abortion Doc was referring to premature labor when she mentioned that she could get intact babies if the mothers delivered before the Doc could get in and crunch the baby for parts?
ok sure Yea that's the ticket.:rolleyes1: Did you enjoy her exclaiming > " It's another boy"?
Click to expand...

I haven't watched any of the videos but am pointing out there is logical explanations for the quotes from the Doc. The assumptions being made from the statements are loaded with bias.
 
Seattle Husker said:
I'm not sure I understand the consternation with Premature Labor. It's an extension of miscarriages and can happen at any point in a pregnancy. I've said earlier that I have serious reservations about 3rd trimester abortions and would agree with Mr. Deez that borders on murder. Before that though I don't consider it viable thus "size" is inconsequential.
Click to expand...

SH, the doctor could be talking about premature labor resulting in a miscarriage, but the context leaves that point ambiguous and slightly suggests otherwise.

Nevertheless, the million dollar question isn't how late the pregnancy this is occurring. It's whether or not the baby is being born alive. If the baby exits the woman's body alive and the doctor does something to end its life, he is a murderer. Furthermore, depending on the laws, if he doesn't affirmatively try to save it, he could be charged with a crime.
 
Mr. Deez said:
SH, the doctor could be talking about premature labor resulting in a miscarriage, but the context leaves that point ambiguous and slightly suggests otherwise.

Nevertheless, the million dollar question isn't how late the pregnancy this is occurring. It's whether or not the baby is being born alive. If the baby exits the woman's body alive and the doctor does something to end its life, he is a murderer. Furthermore, depending on the laws, if he doesn't affirmatively try to save it, he could be charged with a crime.
Click to expand...

I can agree with that.
 
Horns11 said:
recently-killed fetuses
Click to expand...
I respect you for calling it like it is. I appreciate that.
Thats the issue I guess, who are we allowed to kill for the sake of research? I'm all for medical science; science is a gift from God.
I just don't want your brother, mom, wife, grandfather, co-worker or child killed for it.
 
They're not killing for the sake of research. And I don't think anyone would ever advocate for that on either side of the spectrum, unless there's some nutty conspirators who think it's a good way for population control or something.

The women involved are ending their pregnancies. What the third party company is doing is getting involved in the effects of the termination of the pregnancy. It's distasteful work, even when they're not making jokes about it and talking about selling points. But right now, it's neither illegal, nor harming living beings.
 
Horns11 said:
They're not killing for the sake of research. And I don't think anyone would ever advocate for that on either side of the spectrum, unless there's some nutty conspirators who think it's a good way for population control or something.

The women involved are ending their pregnancies. What the third party company is doing is getting involved in the effects of the termination of the pregnancy. It's distasteful work, even when they're not making jokes about it and talking about selling points. But right now, it's neither illegal, nor harming living beings.
Click to expand...
Actually it is if they are paying for it.
 
It is if they're paying for it from the aspect of murdering a baby outside the womb for the purpose. Do any of the videos corroborate this?
 
Horns11 said:
It is if they're paying for it from the aspect of murdering a baby outside the womb for the purpose. Do any of the videos corroborate this?
Click to expand...

It is a steep jump to believe that live babies are being removed from the wombs then killed for the organ harvesting. I suspect that would be the end of Planned Parenthood and they'd know it.
 
The law prohibits any person to knowingly acquire, receive, or otherwise transfer any human fetal tissue for valuable consideration if the transfer affects interstate commerce, but does not exclude reasonable payments associated with the transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control or storage of human fetal tissue.

The videos only point to they are possibly breaking the law. I believe they should be investigated and prosecuted if they are breaking the law. I was just pointing out that you were incorrect in your last sentence that it was distasteful but not illegal. The law seems clear to me.
 
This is a remarkable article by Ruben Navarette, Jr. that I think illustrates the real impact of the PP videos. A lot of abortion rights people dismiss the videos because they at least arguably don't establish that PP is breaking the law, and as NJ, Larry, and I have all agreed, why not put the fetal tissue to good use if the abortion is taking place anyway? In legal contexts, those are valid points, but in the political scope, they're side issues. The videos do two things that are far more significant, and it's showing in Navarette's near-conversion.

First, they show the fetal remains and discuss clearly defined organs, which forces people to actually think about what's involved in detail. If a fetus has useful organs, that seems more life-like and human and less like a "glob of cells" that you might throw in the trash like toenail clippings or a mole that falls off. As Navarette points out, the abortion issue is a tug-of-war of rights between mother and unborn baby. To be pro-choice, you either ignore or dehumanize the unborn baby, and that gets a lot harder to do when it's clearly not a mere "glob of cells."

Second, it shows the cavalier and flippant attitude that the people inside the abortion industry have about what they're doing. Even Cecile Richards had to apologize for it. They're discussing it the way we'd picture Joseph Mengele discussing his "work." It's real sickness and disregard for human life, and most fair minded people can see that.

It's one of these issues on which the more people know about it in detail, the less comfortable they are with it and the more perverse the abortion rights advocates really sound. In addition, it makes it harder to justify sitting on the sidelines out of deference as many pro-choice men do.
 
Last edited:
not to thread hijack --- but does anyone else read this as "I farted on my first day of work"? Every. Single. Time.
 
amazing opinion piece.
he quotes the head of the Org releasing these videos and adds that he agrees.
powerful
from MrD's link
" Anyone who watches these videos knows that Planned Parenthood is engaged in barbaric practices and human rights abuses that must end.”

I ( Reuben the writer) agree with that assessment, and I’m pro-choice."

When you factor in all the many videos showing PP people deliberately NOT reporting cases of rape against minors IMO PP needs to not receive a penny more of taxpayer money.
 
NJlonghorn said:
Oh, the humanity!

To do effective medical research on organs, scientists need organ samples. For some types of research, fetal organs are ideal. Apparently, the best source for fetal organs is fetuses (go figure), and the only way to procure intact fetal organs is to dissect fetuses carefully (again, go figure).

This work isn't for everyone. It is undoubtedly gruesome, and I'm not surprised some people can't stomach it. I know I couldn't. But I'm glad there are people who can, so that researchers can do their thing.
Click to expand...
Intelligence officer on waterboarding - Oh the humanity! To do effective counterterrorism and save lives, you have to use enhanced interrogation methods. The work isn't for everyone. I know I couldn't do it, but I'm glad there are people who can.

Investment banker on credit default swaps - Oh the humanity! To have liquid capital markets that facilitate home purchases (and subsequently home equity and wealth) you have to sell risk to investors willing to buy it. The work is complex and risky itself. I couldn't do it, but I'm glad there are people who can so we don't have to live in Potterville.

NJ - Your perspective, which I'm sure is similar to many medical researches in this industry, has merit. But ultimately the law and public sentiment drive policies. And the public is disgusted (rightly so) by this.
 
theiioftx said:
I think the special names abortion rights groups have placed on the practice make it more tolerable for a dumbed down public. For example:

Reproductive rights - nothing to do about reproduction, but actually the termination of conception.
Click to expand...

Actually it DOES encompass a WHOLE lot more than termination issues. But if you believe the 'dumbed-down' explanation is ONLY about abortion, then the realities of female reproductive systems would likely be lost on you so why bother with the discussion of WHY reproductive rights is important to females.

Pro Choice - Pro abortion, pro convenience of "I do not want the burden of a kid."
Click to expand...

Again, you miss MANY of the issues that go into favoring the existence of an ability to have an abortion. The fact that you want a group of old men in robes to dictate the disappearance of female autonomy over their own bodies speaks volumes...
 
I probably should, but I really don't care what a woman does with her body. She can prostitute it if she wants, I guess. I'm more concerned for the innocent babies.
 
mb227 said:
Actually it DOES encompass a WHOLE lot more than termination issues. But if you believe the 'dumbed-down' explanation is ONLY about abortion, then the realities of female reproductive systems would likely be lost on you so why bother with the discussion of WHY reproductive rights is important to females.

Wait, you are saying abortion is actually about reproduction? Please, do tell how that is dumbed down version.

Again, you miss MANY of the issues that go into favoring the existence of an ability to have an abortion. The fact that you want a group of old men in robes to dictate the disappearance of female autonomy over their own bodies speaks volumes...[/QUOTE

I never said that, but do you believe that abortions should be freely allowed all the way up before delivery?
Click to expand...
 
An update to this story. A Texas DA (Harris County) has cleared Planned Parenthood and indicted 2 people associated with Center for Medical Progress based on the grand jury recommendation. http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/25/politics/planned-parenthood-activists-indicted/index.html

David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt were indicted for tampering with a governmental record, a second-degree felony, and Daleiden was also indicted on the count of prohibition of the purchase and sale of human organs, a class A misdemeanor, according to the Harris County district attorney.
Click to expand...

The quotes from both sides are predictable.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top