I Sell Dead Babies

[HomerJS]

Don't be silly. As long as you don't take any action to end a possible pregnancy no one is responsible! It doesn't matter how many spontaneous abortions, still births you have its only a dead baby if you have an abortion!

That's what being responsible for having sex means. Just allow what ever happens to happen and your not responsible! But take responsibility and your being irresponsible.

 

[ivwshane]

Looks like there is an update!

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/28/us/abortion-planned-parenthood-videos.html?referrer=

“A thorough review of these videos in consultation with qualified experts found that they do not present a complete or accurate record of the events they purport to depict,” the analysis of a private research company said.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Looks like there is an update!

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/28/us/abortion-planned-parenthood-videos.html?referrer=

Interesting, so even the longer videos were hinky. Who'd a thunk it.

 

[CitizenKain]

Looks like there is an update!

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/28/us/abortion-planned-parenthood-videos.html?referrer=

No way, a pro-life group is full of liars. Who could have ever seen that coming.

 

[Blue_Max]

Looks like there is an update!

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/28/us/abortion-planned-parenthood-videos.html?referrer=

Nothing in that article actually proved them wrong though, only that there was "substantial editing". That's it. Certainly not your "proof positive" that they were perfectly innocent of selling spare parts. But, hey, if it's all you've got to cling to...

...and speaking of selling "spare" parts, can we stop doing this as well? http://knowledgenuts.com/2013/09/23/the-bizarrely-profitable-business-of-baby-foreskins/

 

[CitizenKain]

Nothing in that article actually proved them wrong though, only that there was "substantial editing". That's it. Certainly not your "proof positive" that they were perfectly innocent of selling spare parts. But, hey, if it's all you've got to cling to...

...and speaking of selling "spare" parts, can we stop doing this as well? http://knowledgenuts.com/2013/09/23/the-bizarrely-profitable-business-of-baby-foreskins/

Anyone with an above room temperature IQ can see they aren't selling parts. Also other investigations have shown they were doing nothing wrong.

If all you have to cling to is poorly edited videos that tell you what you want to hear despite reality, well I guess there is no helping people like you.

 

[fskimospy]

Nothing in that article actually proved them wrong though, only that there was "substantial editing". That's it. Certainly not your "proof positive" that they were perfectly innocent of selling spare parts. But, hey, if it's all you've got to cling to...

...and speaking of selling "spare" parts, can we stop doing this as well? http://knowledgenuts.com/2013/09/23/the-bizarrely-profitable-business-of-baby-foreskins/

The burden of proof is on the accuser. We now have evidence that not only did they deceptively edit the video they released, but they lied about the fact that the other video they released was unedited.

If you're fine being repeatedly lied to by people because it supports what you want to believe that's your business. It seems awfully stupid and naive, but it's your right. Since this is a woman's rights issue though I sincerely doubt you are capable of objectively analyzing the evidence as you will be overcome by emotional hatred.

 

[Blue_Max]

The burden of proof is on the accuser. We now have evidence that not only did they deceptively edit the video they released, but they lied about the fact that the other video they released was unedited.

If you're fine being repeatedly lied to by people because it supports what you want to believe that's your business. It seems awfully stupid and naive, but it's your right. Since this is a woman's rights issue though I sincerely doubt you are capable of objectively analyzing the evidence as you will be overcome by emotional hatred.

Funny... I've stated several times I'm not against abortion, but by not giving you 100% unquestioned support, I'm still given the usual labels of "woman-hater". Good little zealot! *pat*pat*

I'll let the accuser/accused's own words from your article say it for me:

Mr. Daleiden, in a statement posted on the Center for Medical Progress’s website, said, “Planned Parenthood’s desperate, 11th-hour attempt to pay their hand-picked ‘experts’ to distract from the crimes documented on video is a complete failure.”

He added, “The absence of bathroom breaks and waiting periods between meetings does not change the hours of dialogue with top-level Planned Parenthood executives eager to manipulate abortion procedures to get high-quality baby parts for financially profitable sale.”

So am I convinced in either direction? Not entirely - but considering how the American medical system has NO qualms about selling those foreskins I mentioned earlier, I lean towards the accusation more likely being true than false.

But I always, ALWAYS side with the truth based on factual evidence which is why I don't support your feminist agendas. I don't hate women at all - I hate BULLSHIT.

 

[thraashman]

Funny... I've stated several times I'm not against abortion, but by not giving you 100% unquestioned support, I'm still given the usual labels of "woman-hater". Good little zealot! *pat*pat*

I'll let the accuser/accused's own words from your article say it for me:

Mr. Daleiden, in a statement posted on the Center for Medical Progress’s website, said, “Planned Parenthood’s desperate, 11th-hour attempt to pay their hand-picked ‘experts’ to distract from the crimes documented on video is a complete failure.”

He added, “The absence of bathroom breaks and waiting periods between meetings does not change the hours of dialogue with top-level Planned Parenthood executives eager to manipulate abortion procedures to get high-quality baby parts for financially profitable sale.”

So am I convinced in either direction? Not entirely - but considering how the American medical system has NO qualms about selling those foreskins I mentioned earlier, I lean towards the accusation more likely being true than false.

But I always, ALWAYS side with the truth based on factual evidence which is why I don't support your feminist agendas. I don't hate women at all - I hate BULLSHIT.

TLDR translation: "I side with 'facts', I just don't choose to define facts the same way as those of you who live in reality. Also I don't hate women, I just hate them having equal rights and anyone who thinks they should have equal rights."

 

[Blue_Max]

TLDR translation: "I side with 'facts', I just don't choose to define facts the same way as those of you who live in reality. Also I don't hate women, I just hate them having equal rights and anyone who thinks they should have equal rights."

Those are your words in a desperate spin. And pure bullshit. Well done!

 

[nakedfrog]

Funny... I've stated several times I'm not against abortion, but by not giving you 100% unquestioned support, I'm still given the usual labels of "woman-hater". Good little zealot! *pat*pat*

I'll let the accuser/accused's own words from your article say it for me:

Mr. Daleiden, in a statement posted on the Center for Medical Progress’s website, said, “Planned Parenthood’s desperate, 11th-hour attempt to pay their hand-picked ‘experts’ to distract from the crimes documented on video is a complete failure.”

He added, “The absence of bathroom breaks and waiting periods between meetings does not change the hours of dialogue with top-level Planned Parenthood executives eager to manipulate abortion procedures to get high-quality baby parts for financially profitable sale.”

So am I convinced in either direction? Not entirely - but considering how the American medical system has NO qualms about selling those foreskins I mentioned earlier, I lean towards the accusation more likely being true than false.

But I always, ALWAYS side with the truth based on factual evidence which is why I don't support your feminist agendas. I don't hate women at all - I hate BULLSHIT.

Wow, are you ever being disingenuous! Those words from the article are from the people responsible for the very videos in question.

And I suppose you'd rather they just toss the foreskins in the trash?

 

[fskimospy]

Funny... I've stated several times I'm not against abortion, but by not giving you 100% unquestioned support, I'm still given the usual labels of "woman-hater". Good little zealot! *pat*pat*

I'll let the accuser/accused's own words from your article say it for me:

Mr. Daleiden, in a statement posted on the Center for Medical Progress’s website, said, “Planned Parenthood’s desperate, 11th-hour attempt to pay their hand-picked ‘experts’ to distract from the crimes documented on video is a complete failure.”

He added, “The absence of bathroom breaks and waiting periods between meetings does not change the hours of dialogue with top-level Planned Parenthood executives eager to manipulate abortion procedures to get high-quality baby parts for financially profitable sale.”

So am I convinced in either direction? Not entirely - but considering how the American medical system has NO qualms about selling those foreskins I mentioned earlier, I lean towards the accusation more likely being true than false.

But I always, ALWAYS side with the truth based on factual evidence which is why I don't support your feminist agendas. I don't hate women at all - I hate BULLSHIT.

Well if you hate bullshit go look at the breaks in time for the cameras and realize that saying all they omitted was that and other irrelevant stuff is total bullshit.

You didn't bother to look into it though, as usual. You're too emotionally invested in this to care.

 

[bradly1101]

She is referring to reimbursement rates that are given to providers when transporting tissue for medical research. This is not only legal, it's nothing new. It is not limited to fetuses and has led to lifesaving discoveries.

This is another James OKeefe video, or a video by someone linked to him. When will people learn?

Obviously since abortion is legal, there will be organs (ie: "body parts") that would be helpful to research. So I guess the crux of their argument is that the organs should be wasted? Or that doctors and transportation companies shouldn't be reimbursed?

I know their goal is to infringe on this legal right, so I guess freedom doesn't matter to them.

 

[HomerJS]

Funny... I've stated several times I'm not against abortion, but by not giving you 100% unquestioned support, I'm still given the usual labels of "woman-hater". Good little zealot! *pat*pat*

I'll let the accuser/accused's own words from your article say it for me:

Mr. Daleiden, in a statement posted on the Center for Medical Progress’s website, said, “Planned Parenthood’s desperate, 11th-hour attempt to pay their hand-picked ‘experts’ to distract from the crimes documented on video is a complete failure.”

He added, “The absence of bathroom breaks and waiting periods between meetings does not change the hours of dialogue with top-level Planned Parenthood executives eager to manipulate abortion procedures to get high-quality baby parts for financially profitable sale.”

So am I convinced in either direction? Not entirely - but considering how the American medical system has NO qualms about selling those foreskins I mentioned earlier, I lean towards the accusation more likely being true than false.

But I always, ALWAYS side with the truth based on factual evidence which is why I don't support your feminist agendas. I don't hate women at all - I hate BULLSHIT.

For the record do you want a ban on fetal tissue research in the US? That's the honest argument not all the PP stuff.

 

[CitizenKain]

But I always, ALWAYS side with the truth based on factual evidence which is why I don't support your feminist agendas. I don't hate women at all - I hate BULLSHIT.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahah.

 

[werepossum]

Wow, are you ever being disingenuous! Those words from the article are from the people responsible for the very videos in question.

And I suppose you'd rather they just toss the foreskins in the trash?

Whereas an "analysis commissioned by Planned Parenthood" is obviously just the unbiased, unvarnished truth from a disinterested observer.

As someone who doesn't support defunding Planned Parenthood, the unedited segments of tape are certainly enough for me to reach the conclusion that Planned Parenthood is interested in maximizing profits from aborted babies to the point of altering procedures to something "less crunchy", but not sufficiently interested as to abandon abortifacients.

 

[JSt0rm]

Those are your words in a desperate spin. And pure bullshit. Well done!

Look how dumb you are.

 

[fskimospy]

Whereas an "analysis commissioned by Planned Parenthood" is obviously just the unbiased, unvarnished truth from a disinterested observer.

As someone who doesn't support defunding Planned Parenthood, the unedited segments of tape are certainly enough for me to reach the conclusion that Planned Parenthood is interested in maximizing profits from aborted babies to the point of altering procedures to something "less crunchy", but not sufficiently interested as to abandon abortifacients.

I would agree that an analysis commissioned by Planned Parenthood is inherently suspect, however if they are describing it accurately the people who actually conducted the analysis did not know who their client was and PP had no input into how it was done.

 

[nakedfrog]

Whereas an "analysis commissioned by Planned Parenthood" is obviously just the unbiased, unvarnished truth from a disinterested observer.

As someone who doesn't support defunding Planned Parenthood, the unedited segments of tape are certainly enough for me to reach the conclusion that Planned Parenthood is interested in maximizing profits from aborted babies to the point of altering procedures to something "less crunchy", but not sufficiently interested as to abandon abortifacients.

Your response to me saying "Look how round that orange is!" is "But apples are red!"
The sole point of my comment was that poster saying "Look, I'm using these words from the article you posted", but those words were just more drivel from the people that released the video in the first place. I was not making any comment on the matter itself.

 

[DrPizza]

Nothing in that article actually proved them wrong though, only that there was "substantial editing". That's it. Certainly not your "proof positive" that they were perfectly innocent of selling spare parts. But, hey, if it's all you've got to cling to...

...and speaking of selling "spare" parts, can we stop doing this as well? http://knowledgenuts.com/2013/09/23/the-bizarrely-profitable-business-of-baby-foreskins/

I'll leave this as a simple mental exercise, rather than bothering to do it: I could cut and paste snippets of your text to say that you like abusing babies. Then, we'll post the actual text that you've posted, in context, at which point, I'll say, "that still doesn't prove that Blue Max doesn't fondle babies." That's exactly what you seem to be doing.

Independent investigations have shown that they've done nothing wrong. And, what is actually in the video - not the pieces thrown together - also shows they've done nothing wrong, or rather, doesn't show that they've done something wrong. You appear to have some sort of agenda, even though you claim you don't.

 

[shira]

Summary: PP is apparently acting entirely within the law. But the Republican party wants to defund PP because . . . well, just because.

Actually, we KNOW what the "just because" is: We're at the beginning of an election cycle, and it's time for Republican politicos to begin firing up their base.

 

[JSt0rm]

They think they can kill PP like they killed acorn. It would be funny if it wasnt so dishonest.

 

[brycejones]

Summary: PP is apparently acting entirely within the law. But the Republican party wants to defund PP because . . . well, just because.

Actually, we KNOW what the "just because" is: We're at the beginning of an election cycle, and it's time for Republican politicos to begin firing up their base.

They can't beat the gay marriage drum anymore so its back to abortion this election cycle with some illegal immigration mixed in.

 

[sandorski]

Re: Government funding of PP(someone can correct me if I am wrong)- From what I understand, Government does not provide x amount of $ to PP. What Government does fund are particular Services that PP provides to Patients then Bills the appropriate Government entities for reimbursement. So if a Law is passed not to "fund PP", it would specifically target PP as not being eligible to receive reimbursement for otherwise funded by the Government Services. IOWs, other organizations could still receive Funding for the same services offered by PP, just not PP itself.

If that be accurate, it would seem a number of possibilities exist as to why PP would be targeted this way:

1) PP is just the most organized institution for providing those Services. Destroying PP would hinder greatly the availability of such Services.

2) PP's existence is common knowledge so defunding it certainly has great Political capital for certain Voting blocks.

3) Destroying PP will create a large vacuum in Services that in combination with other recent moves within Government Non-Profit funding policies could end up being provided by Religious or similar organizations with a far more Conservative view of Women's Health issues.

4) Destroying PP will make replacing those Services in certain States extremely difficult as various roadblocks can be erected to thwart small players from replacing those Services.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Re: Government funding of PP(someone can correct me if I am wrong)- From what I understand, Government does not provide x amount of $ to PP. What Government does fund are particular Services that PP provides to Patients then Bills the appropriate Government entities for reimbursement. So if a Law is passed not to "fund PP", it would specifically target PP as not being eligible to receive reimbursement for otherwise funded by the Government Services. IOWs, other organizations could still receive Funding for the same services offered by PP, just not PP itself.

If that be accurate, it would seem a number of possibilities exist as to why PP would be targeted this way:

1) PP is just the most organized institution for providing those Services. Destroying PP would hinder greatly the availability of such Services.

2) PP's existence is common knowledge so defunding it certainly has great Political capital for certain Voting blocks.

3) Destroying PP will create a large vacuum in Services that in combination with other recent moves within Government Non-Profit funding policies could end up being provided by Religious or similar organizations with a far more Conservative view of Women's Health issues.

4) Destroying PP will make replacing those Services in certain States extremely difficult as various roadblocks can be erected to thwart small players from replacing those Services.

Good assessment.