DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Planned Parenthood and the Sale of Fetal Body Parts

As I stated before in this thread, the black population was at 13% after the Civil War. Today, it's still 13%. The black population has been as high as 14%, and that was only one census and could have been a statistical error.

And without abortion, they might be as high as 20%.

Quite a difference a "choice" makes.

And on a Religious note...

God said Christians and Jews are not to sacrifice their children to Idols or False gods.
In America that Idol is Money. 50+ Million children have been sacrificed in its name to date.

Fixed the link.

I don't believe I offered up my view on animal rights. Feel free to start another thread and I may respond. The rest of your post is just BS slippery slope fallacy.

You may want to do some actual research on Margaret Sanger and her work regarding this statement. The quotes frequently cited as evidence of racism are taken way out of context.

You might want to read that a few times. They can only use donated tissue from an abortion. I would put money on it that there is a check box on the form asking if you want PP to dispose of the fetus. That's an implied donation at best if they don't describe how they will dispose of the tissue.

StemExpress will 'also be contributing to the fiscal growth of your own clinic'? That sounds like they are paying to me. If they are paying, PP is selling. I'm curious to see how much StemExpress monetarily 'donates' to PP to keep their flow of baby parts going.

I believe I've stated multiple times that I'm against abortions, yet you keep trying to frame me as being for abortions. My argument is that while PP does perform abortions, they also provide medical services and unwanted pregnancy prevention procedures. If conservatives, i.e., those opposed to abortion in this case, actually cared about the issue, then they would support PP's efforts to prevent unwanted pregnancy through free and low cost contraceptives and other birth control measures that don't include abortions.

Unfortunately, you refuse to engage in that actual discussion and drone on about abortions. As I stated before, I would also argue that PP has done more to prevent unwanted pregnancies through pregnancy prevention services that don't include abortions than the "conservatives" on this matter as all the "conservatives" have done is drone on that "abortions are bad" without actually attempting to solve the problem and helping to provide pregnancy prevention measures outside of abstinence education which has shown to be ineffective (at best).

I think the term 'animal rights abuses' fully states your view on that. My post is less BS than your supposition of how they obtained the videos, and that they should be discounted as they were taken undercover. Do you think PP 'doctors' would have said those things if they knew they were being taped? You may as well support an arms treaty with a 24 day warning of inspections.

Yet, there is still no evidence that anyone is profiting from this practice. Fiscal growth doesn't necessarily mean "profit". It's actually more related to revenue.

The investigation in Indiana provided no evidence of anything illegal - http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/indiana-clears-planned-parenthood-wrongdoing-videos-32793066

Actually, it doesn't fully state my view on animal rights or animal rights abuses at all.

Considering the source of the videos and the history of those making the videos, I think there should be scrutiny of those making the videos as well as their use of editing.

As for 24 day inspections, again, you can start another thread on that topic. Of course, you may want to do some research as you can't just sweep radioactive materials under the rug, wait a few weeks, and voila, it's gone.

As for the inspections, it will always be a shut down site with residual radiation. After that, it's a 24 day wait for the next site to which they moved materials.

You can always go out on the internet and see the entire unedited video. I suggest you try it, unless you've already made up your mind.

You continue to say you are against abortion but, but but
but but...

But Conservatives.
But Religion.
But Gottcha Video's

Well no buts about it, Planned Parenthood Kills children and harvests their bodies for parts, right?

You mean, no evidence yet. There have barely been any investigations. You seem to have already made up your mind. Don't forget, they investigated Acorn for a long time and made no findings, other than destroyed and attempts to destroy documents. It was the cover up that killed them.

Well, no buts about it, Planned Parenthood also provides more services than abortions. If you want, you can find their services and the amounts of those services provided here - http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/4013/9611/7243/Planned_Parenthood_Services.pdf

Why do you keep ignoring the overwhelming majority of services that PP provides? You continue to drone on about abortions and I'm not even supporting abortions. I am arguing that PP has done far more than the right to life movement and "conservatives" to prevent unwanted pregnancies through the medical services (excluding abortions) that they provide such as contraception, education, etc.


-----




And what evidence is available and has been made public, shows that PP has done nothing wrong at this point. If any investigations come about that show actual violations of law, including profiting (not just revenue), then I'll reconsider my stance. As of yet, I don't need to do so.

What analytical research did you do to reach that conclusion?

Looks to me he read the talking point thoroughly.

What is it that "conservatives" are doing that may differ from the services that PP provides in regards to family planning, contraception, education, etc., that does not fall under the scope of an abortion? What services are offered to prevent unwanted and unplanned pregnancies by conservative organizations?

j/c

Senate Vote Fails to Defund Planned Parenthood

The Senate voted down a bill Monday that would take away more than $500 million in federal funding from Planned Parenthood after activists published a series of "sting" videos targeting the group.

The Senate voted 53-46, falling seven votes short of the 60 needed to pass the bill.

"We are very proud to have a bipartisan group of senators supporting us today," Planned Parenthood chief Cecile Richards said before the vote.

It wasn't the first effort to take funding away from Planned Parenthood, which operates around 700 health clinics that treat 2.7 million patients a year. But the series of videos published by the Center for Medical progress, an anti-abortion rights group, have unprecedented reach in a world where almost anyone can see them on YouTube.

The Center for Medical Progress admits the videos are edited and has released some full-length versions, as well as transcripts. The group claims the videos show Planned Parenthood illegally profits from selling tissue from aborted fetuses, although the full-length versions clearly show the Planned Parenthood staffers repeatedly denying this.

"We are 100 percent nonprofit. We make zero profit from any fetal tissue donation," Richards told NBC News.

"This wasn't an effort to discover wrongdoing. This was a three-year effort to create wrongdoing and it was unsuccessful."

Perhaps the bigger impact comes from seeing the activists, posing as buyers, speaking in joking terms with doctors and other Planned Parenthood staffers about using the tissue.

"It sickens me to see what's been going on with Planned Parenthood," Sen. Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican who is running for president, said during debate on the bill. "This debate isn't just about abortion. This debate is about little babies that haven't given their consent."

Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst, who sponsored the bill, said the videos "hit at the moral fabric of our society". "The American taxpayer should not be asked to fund an organization like Planned Parenthood that has shown a sheer disdain for human dignity and complete disregard for women and their babies," she said.

Despite the controversy, 45 percent of Americans polled by NBC and the Wall Street Journal said they viewed Planned Parenthood somewhat or very positively and 20 percent said they were neutral. Thirty percent of the 1,000 adults polled said they had a negative view of the group.

Supporters of Planned Parenthood say the group's clinics are the sole source of health care for thousands of women and say diverting federal funds to other clinics will leave them without any source of medical attention.

A study by Kari White at the University of Alabama, Birmingham supports the argument. They showed that when Texas restricted access to family planning clinics in 2011, 25 percent of the state's family planning clinics closed. "In 2011, 71 percent of organizations widely offered long-acting reversible contraception; in 2012-2013, only 46 percent did," they wrote in the American Journal of Public Health.

Abortions account for just 3 percent of the services provided by Planned Parenthood. Federal law prohibits the use of any federal money for these services. About 41 percent of the group's funding comes from government sources.

"This is all about politics," Richards told MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell Reports.

While two Democrats voted for the bill -- West Virginia's Joe Manchin and Illinois' Joe Donnelly -- most passionately opposed it. "Did you fall down, hit your head, and think you woke up in the 1950s?" Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, asked Senate Republicans.

"This legislation is going nowhere," Sen. Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat, said in arguments leading up to the vote.

"We will not tolerate this attack on women's health care in the guise of stopping abortion," Sen. Richard Blumenthal, a Connecticut Democrat, argued.

Separately, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, a Republican who is running for president, said the state would sever its Medicaid contract with Planned Parenthood. "It has become clear that this is not an organization that is worthy of receiving public assistance from the state," Jindal said.

Nathalia Holt, a microbiologist who wrote "Cured: The People Who Defeated HIV", says she has worked with tissue from aborted fetuses.

"Scientists can't control whether or not an abortion takes place, those decisions aren't made by scientists, and they are made by the women who go through this procedure," she told NBC News.

"And the women that go through this go through informed consent and decide to have this tissue donated to science."

Holt pointed out the abortions are taking place regardless of whether the tissue is used for research. "It can potentially save lives, or be incinerated in medical trash," she said. "And many researchers are using the analogy of organ donation," she added.

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-new...03441?cid=sm_fb

people always talk about what they hope and wish citizens would do, instead of talking about reality.

the reality was if PP got defunded, we would never here the end of the amount of people getting on welfare.

because the argument, and we've seen in on this very board, goes like this.

Pre-brith:

Abortion is wrong wrong wrong!!!

After birth:

Damn people ending up on the welfare system, people should be sterilized!!

you was right PIt, people aren't pro-life, they are only pro-birth.

they could give a damn what happens to the kids after birth, as the kids are immediately lumped into the entitlement/takers/leeches/poor people category, and are highly likely to stay on the system.

but whatever, people are gonna feel how they feel.

Not to worry, the Demoncrats will keep the slaughter going.

We don't need PP anymore, except for abortions. All the woman's care you talk about is now provided by obummercare. PP is little more than a redundant medical system that gets taxpayer money for abortion.

I can hear you now.

Why did she get preggers in the 1st place? Ummm because she had sex,

Why did she have sex?ummmm because she wanted to.

Why did she want to? ummm because it felt good.

Why did it feel good.

That sounds like a three year old child Why, why, why



Lets not forget that abortions went UP at PP last year not down, so PP did not decrease abortions.



Have I condemned PP as sinners? Nope not once. I have not brought up sin or religion once on this thread.

You made the statement that you would argue your point was true... you have gone on and on about your objectivity and your willingness to wait until facts are in to make up your mind...

Then when called on it, you try to put it back on ME to refute your conjecture which you offered with no basis, no facts, no rationale?

I'm sorry, that's not how debate works.

Maybe, maybe not. Considering that PP provides over 10 million total services in the United States through STD/STI screenings and treatment, contraception, cancer screenings and prevention, etc., it seems like they have a fairly large consumer base when not even counting abortions. Time will tell whether or not people will continue to choose PP or other providers.

http://plannedparenthood.org/files/4013/9611/7243/Planned_Parenthood_Services.pdf

-----



You have an incredibly myopic view of things. You are basically answering the question of "Why is the sky blue?" with the response of "Because it is!" Meanwhile, you ignore the actual reasons because you either refuse to find out the answers for yourself, you ignore the answer because it conflicts with your views, or you don't care about the answer and aren't interested in solving the problem to actually prevent abortions in the first place.

While PP performed more abortions, it still doesn't answer why they are performing more and why everyone else is performing less and the overall rate is down. Like I said, if you can't interpret the statistic, it is irrelevant to the conversation. "Because they did" isn't a reason, it only shows your lack of understanding within the conversation you are having.

The religion remark wasn't directed at you. It was directed at 40.

-----



Actually, that's how debate works when you use a rhetorical question to prove a point. The point that I was making, which you proved by your inability to provide an actual response to the question, was that all conservatives and organizations like Right to Life do is yell "abortions bad!" meanwhile, they don't actually help society to prevent unwanted pregnancies through free/low cost medical services such as contraceptives, education, screenings, etc.

If conservatives and organizations like Right to Life actually attempted to help people prevent unwanted pregnancies through support of PP or other similar organizations, we would probably be able to decrease abortions at an even greater rate through better education programs and greater access to free/low cost birth control. Unfortunately, that's not the case. Instead, all we hear, and it's echoed here, is "But abortions bad! Rabble rabble rabble!" without actually listening to the point being made.

Here is a list of the services PP provides as well as the number of each service provided - http://plannedparenthood.org/files/4013/9611/7243/Planned_Parenthood_Services.pdf

PP provided over 10 million services. Over 3.7 million of those procedures were in the area of contraception, i.e., preventing unwanted or unplanned pregnancies. How much assistance did Right to Life or other similar organizations offer in this manner?

J/C ..... I am still shocked that the 26 million or so abortions of Black babies (since 1973) is so easily washed over by so many, when the total Black population today in the US is only 42 million or so.

The racist origins of PP have won out, and the Black race has been exterminated in numbers that would make the Nazis blush. Look at how they have been minimized and marginalized. Mae it a choice and people flock to killing their own babies. This is so horrifying that I don't have words for it.

Without abortion, the Black race in the US would probably be over 20% of the total population. Think of the political power they could have had. Instead they gave it away by "choosing" to have their babies exterminated. This is sad beyond words.

The truly weird, obscene thing is that those of us who oppose this horrific practice are called the intolerant ones.

Just amazing. What a revolting example of the power of words, and how certain words, chosen carefully, can create a system where the extermination of a large part of a population can be called a choice. It is amazing that the current popular saying is "Black Lives Matter", yet these Black lives are forgotten, wiped away as completely unimportant.

How much can Black lives truly matter when Black women march off to destroy their children before they can ever be born? In truth, how much can any life matter?

So you are comparing people who actually seek abortions willingly to the extermination of the Jews?

And you wonder why people don't take that seriously?

So you are saying as long as people willingly march their children to their death by abortion, you have no problem with it?

Thank you. I made a simple statement and posted proof you keep yacking on like a bus full of women with PMS Now before you bash me for putting down women I had a tumor on my pitutary gland and my prolactin and estogen levels were as high as a nursing mothers and a woman with PMS so I am speaking from experience



I ignore the actual reasons because I don't give a flying firetruck about the reasons. I care about the results. I know the answers on how to avoid abortions "Just say no" to the damn abortion and live up to the mistake you made. If you can't do that then make sure you cover your backside with birth protection. If you want to solve the problem then do one of the two things I just mentioned or learn how to preform oral sex



And if liberals would learn to take responsibility for their own actions and stand on there own two feet we wouldn't have this problem. opps a taste of your own medicine there how does it taste?



I can honestly tell you I have no clue. But I can give you one FACT they preformed ZERO abortions.

You didn't ask a rhetorical question, you made a declarative statement and I asked you where your support for that statement was.. mine was not a rhetorical question, I actually wanted to know... but that's neither here nor there.


This is the first post in which you provided anything resembling a fact on your false assertion that faith based organizations do nothing... but you win because I didn't answer your question? Okie dokie..


You keep using the terms "abortions" and "unwanted pregnancies" interchangeably, the two are obviously linked but they are not the same.... not all unwanted pregnancies end in abortion.

I would argue that what faith based organizations do to help young mothers actually keep their babies goes well beyond what planned parenthood does. Read the list of services provided, looks like adoption or actually keeping the baby and how to deal with that are buried in the <1% of services provided.. In fact up under adoption it just says they refer you to other agencies.. get out of here with that nonsense...

Then there are places like the House of Hope in North Carolina (and there are many more like it).. which takes teen girls off the street and provides them a lot more than some birth control and an STD test... where is PP in helping the whole girl? Or is it really just about the sex?

Then there are organizations like Christian Connection for International Health, which has an extensive program in contraceptives...

I won't even get into what faith based organizations do in the arena of adoption...

And of course the faith-based groups don't provide free/low cost contraceptives and screenings, etc.. just like PP isn't in the business of adoptions or treating the whole person.. Perhaps if the government gave some of these faith-based groups $550 million a year, they could offer more cool "free" stuff or care for more girls.. but alas, they don't, faith-based groups live on the charity of individuals who care.

I guess I have not yet repeated myself enough for some to get it yet. I'm against abortion. Yet at the same time, I understand if abortion is outlawed, we need to fix our support system, education system and overall living conditions for those children without labeling them leeches.

We can't have it both ways. That's the difference in myself verses many others. I'm not just pro birth, I'm pro life too.

Just trying to understand your attack on YTown's sympathetic post with a twisting of his concerned words on the death of Blacks at the hands of the system. You twisted what he said and quickly dismissed it. Interesting reaction for someone who claims to care.

A little support for his post and finding some common ground would have been the Christian thing to do, if that even applies.

I agree that finding common ground would be the best way to discuss the problem. That's why I made the comment I did towards YTowns post.



Comments such as that will in no way bring constructive discussion or sympathy into such a discussion.

To find common ground, we can't use such inflammatory statements as a common way of discussing such issues. And while our current system does make abortion legal, the discussion should begin with changing the laws rather than blaming the people and organizations that follow the law in its current form.

The conundrum I find is that people wish to defund social programs rather than address fixing those programs to better serve the poor. If in fact we as a society wish to end abortion, we also must consider the added cost of caring for the poor we are looking at helping create life for.

I agree with you Pit, would just like to clarify one thing...


Most of the people that I'm familiar with do not wish to defund just to defund, they wish to use the money to make them more effective and more productive. I did not agree with all facets of Bill Clinton's welfare to work program but I really want to say how much I can get behind the concept.

For me it boils down to this... do you view welfare as an expense or an investment? If you are just feeding and housing somebody today so you can pay to feed and house them again tomorrow and the next day with no expectation that things will change, that's a cost, an expense. If you are feeding and housing AND moving toward self-sufficiency with an expectation on THEM to participate, then that is an investment. I'm willing to make the investment, I'm tired of absorbing the expense...

To many of us their is nothing inflammatory about TRUTH.
Your wish to wash out the importance and tragedy of this infanticide is why a discussion can not be had.
To talk over and around the killing of children and the harvesting of their body parts is a round about way of making excuses for supporting it.

And this was precisely what I was referring to though I didn't expound upon it. To break the cycle of poverty, we simply can't continue on our current path that endorses poverty and refuses to invest in offering more opportunity to advance. Giving people the incentive to work their way out of poverty is a much better investment than absorbing the cost of the current system.

There's a huge difference in discussing the importance and tragedy in abortion, to comparing it to Nazi Germany. The two are so far apart that any such reference incites people because the comparison is so ridiculous.

From your posting style over time, it appears to me you enjoy shock value far more than true discussion. So if that's your methodology, so be it.

But rounding people up into concentration camps against their will, torturing them and killing them in gas chambers, verses people voluntarily getting abortions are from two different trains of thought all together.

Yes, the outcome may be the same, but the methodology is like day verses night. Most anyone can comprehend that. I'm more about constructive debate than using shock value to further divide people.

I agree with you Pit... in normal discourse, comparing anything to Nazi Germany is just begging to derail the conversation... and you end up arguing about the validity of the analogy instead of the topic at hand.

I wonder if that is how the Christians of Nazi Germany talked
and discussed and lightened the language of discussion when
someone in the crowd stood up and said "For God's sake they
are gassing people and throwing their bodies into ovens!"

Stop the abomination of infanticide in this country and then
you can quietly discuss the problems of the world.

They are killing children and harvesting their body parts!

As usual you sidestep the point all together. Carry on....