So are Republicans going to shut down the government over Planned Parenthood?

[jonks]

Well, you're flat-out wrong. http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx
Polling for approval of abortions under any circumstances shows support of just 29%

Support for abortions under certain circumstances is a mere 51%, not a "super majority".

IOW, 80% of the country thinks abortion should be legal in some or all circumstances (or worded differently, that abortion should not be outright banned.)

80% = super majority (who think abortion should not be outright banned)

19% believe abortion should be banned in all circumstances, which you can couple with the 51% who said it should sometimes be banned, (said differently, 70% believe abortion should be illegal in some or all circumstances), but, unlike the 80% above, that 70% does NOT think abortion should be totally banned, only the 19% does.

 

[werepossum]

By adjusting the way the abortion is preformed to preserve certain parts intact or holding off until a certain gestation. 1993 law specifically prohibits it....and I'm failing at finding a link. I'll keep at it.

Oh, I have no doubt that they are doing that, and I'm all in favor of government coming down hard on them when they can provide the evidence to support charges. I'm just saying if the problem is abortion providers behaving badly, let's use methods precisely targeted at them rather than carpet-bombing poor women. It's just like the military - sometimes you have to pass up hitting the target you really want to hit because of who or what you'll take out with them. I don't absolutely know that is the case here, but I very much suspect it is so. Look at Shane's link (admittedly from Mother Jones, a.k.a. nut central) on Texas. They've cut the number of abortions, but increased the number of unwanted pregnancies and women with STDs. Anything that increases the number of unwanted pregnancies tends to increase demand for abortions, and coupled with closing clinics probably also makes abortions tend to be later term.

 

[lopri]

That poll result is a lot more lopsided than my expectation. I never thought "Always legal" would outnumber "Always illegal." For the record I belong to "Legal under certain circumstances."

 

[highland145]

I'm all for forced sterilization.

 

[werepossum]

That poll result is a lot more lopsided than my expectation. I never thought "Always legal" would outnumber "Always illegal." For the record I belong to "Legal under certain circumstances."

May be a little biased by not specifically mentioning term. I could see someone interpreting "Always legal" to mean "not only for rape and incest" without specifically contemplating the horror of aborting a perfectly viable 32 week baby.

 

[ivwshane]

Ha! You should have seen the crap articles I had to pass up on just to find that one!

Oh, I have no doubt that they are doing that, and I'm all in favor of government coming down hard on them when they can provide the evidence to support charges. I'm just saying if the problem is abortion providers behaving badly, let's use methods precisely targeted at them rather than carpet-bombing poor women. It's just like the military - sometimes you have to pass up hitting the target you really want to hit because of who or what you'll take out with them. I don't absolutely know that is the case here, but I very much suspect it is so. Look at Shane's link (admittedly from Mother Jones, a.k.a. nut central) on Texas. They've cut the number of abortions, but increased the number of unwanted pregnancies and women with STDs. Anything that increases the number of unwanted pregnancies tends to increase demand for abortions, and coupled with closing clinics probably also makes abortions tend to be later term.

 

[theeedude]

Oh, I have no doubt that they are doing that, and I'm all in favor of government coming down hard on them when they can provide the evidence to support charges.

So you think if a woman comes down to get an abortion, they ask her if she wants to donate the fetus to medical research, and if she says yes, they tell her, well then you gotta wait till it's more gestated? I highly doubt it. If that longer gestation results in a higher risk procedure that goes wrong, they might get sued for a lot of money. Considering the peanuts they are paid to harvest, handle and ship those tissues, it's simply not worth it from pure economic point of view.

 

[highland145]

So you think if a woman comes down to get an abortion, they ask her if she wants to donate the fetus to medical research, and if she says yes, they tell her, well then you gotta wait till it's more gestated? I highly doubt it. If that longer gestation results in a higher risk procedure that goes wrong, they might get sued for a lot of money. Considering the peanuts they are paid to harvest, handle and ship those tissues, it's simply not worth it from pure economic point of view.

Hey, that one woman wanted a Lamborghini....or was it a Ferrari?:hmm: Fetal liver is bank. AMIRITE?

 

[werepossum]

Ha! You should have seen the crap articles I had to pass up on just to find that one!

lol No doubt. It's a highly emotional issue and neither side tends toward honesty over it. Which is understandable; we're talking about a fundamental conflict between the sanctity of human life and a woman's ownership of her own body. Stakes don't get much higher.

So you think if a woman comes down to get an abortion, they ask her if she wants to donate the fetus to medical research, and if she says yes, they tell her, well then you gotta wait till it's more gestated? I highly doubt it. If that longer gestation results in a higher risk procedure that goes wrong, they might get sued for a lot of money. Considering the peanuts they are paid to harvest, handle and ship those tissues, it's simply not worth it from pure economic point of view.

I was actually thinking about his first point, altering the method of terminating the baby to produce a more marketable product. I doubt many refuse to terminate on request. Hell, I can remember a reporter going to an abortion mill that told her she was pregnant (she had been tested before doing the story and was not pregnant) and was going to do an abortion right then and there.

 

[Jhhnn]

Well, you're flat-out wrong. http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

Polling for approval of abortions under any circumstances shows support of just 29%

Support for abortions under certain circumstances is a mere 51%, not a "super majority".

So what? It's not a popularity contest. Women have the Constitutional Right to abortion within parameters defined by SCOTUS rulings.

Which means that efforts to make them unobtainable (your true goal) are unconstitutional & should be recognized as such.

It's also stupid & cruel to demand that women least capable of providing for children be forced to bear them while women of better means can always obtain abortion, one way or another. You demand that poverty be maintained to serve some moralistic mumbo-jumbo & all the classist slut shaming baggage that comes with it.

It's also one of the stupidest blind spots for people who decry the welfare state, considering the demographics involved-

http://prospect.org/article/demographics-abortion-its-not-what-you-think

For my money, we should handle it the same way we handle representation in the courts- "You have the right to an abortion. If you cannot afford an abortion, one will be provided for you."

 

[ivwshane]

So you think if a woman comes down to get an abortion, they ask her if she wants to donate the fetus to medical research, and if she says yes, they tell her, well then you gotta wait till it's more gestated? I highly doubt it. If that longer gestation results in a higher risk procedure that goes wrong, they might get sued for a lot of money. Considering the peanuts they are paid to harvest, handle and ship those tissues, it's simply not worth it from pure economic point of view.

From what I understood from the transcripts was that there were different abortion procedures that would yield better results for fetal tissue. The PP rep said it was up to the doctor and that there needed to be a valid reason to change how the procedure was done. So while she could have been talking about time, it's unlikely.

 

[ivwshane]

So what? It's not a popularity contest. Women have the Constitutional Right to abortion within parameters defined by SCOTUS rulings.

Which means that efforts to make them unobtainable (your true goal) are unconstitutional & should be recognized as such.

It's also stupid & cruel to demand that women least capable of providing for children be forced to bear them while women of better means can always obtain abortion, one way or another. You demand that poverty be maintained to serve some moralistic mumbo-jumbo & all the classist slut shaming baggage that comes with it.

It's also one of the stupidest blind spots for people who decry the welfare state, considering the demographics involved-

http://prospect.org/article/demographics-abortion-its-not-what-you-think

For my money, we should handle it the same way we handle representation in the courts- "You have the right to an abortion. If you cannot afford an abortion, one will be provided for you."

Not only that but a lot of the same people who are anti PP are also the same ones complaining about blacks and their lack of a father figure to raise a family and these same people complain about black on black crime all while telling black people to get a job. So by being against PP and the services they provide they are helping to continue the very things they complain about!
It the 70's it was the white single woman who used abortion services, they were the ones getting pregnant out of wedlock, they were the ones contracting std's, they had abortion services available to them and they, as a whole, have been able to get out of that cycle, now black women face the same circumstances and what's the solution from the right? To take away services that are known to work!
Point blank, it's just retarded thinking.

 

[werepossum]

One other thing here: It's now beyond doubt that Planned Parenthood is illegally selling aborted babies. If one is trying to only recover one's expenses, one puts that forward. "Here is what it costs us to save the remains for you." Instead, we have seen multiple Planned Parenthood officials negotiating their best prices, even refusing to make the initial offer specifically to maximize their financial return. That said, Planned Parenthood also provides many legitimate services to very poor women. If we're going to drop funding for Planned Parenthood, then we owe it to those women to do so methodically and slowly enough that they aren't damaged. They should not have to pay for our outrage.

 

[fskimospy]

Riiight Hot Shot.

I've checked NC. According to PP their facilities are located ONLY in our largest cities. Some much for your claim about "in places without much access to other health care."

So much for your contention about "A really large percentage" since it's exactly 0% here.



You have a lot questions. Can't you use google?

Fern

Well that sure seems like a thorough refutation. "I looked in a state".

It's funny how confidently you declare people's arguments 'bogus' while relying on Heritage Foundation links and a cursory look at facilities in one abortion unfriendly state.

Use your brain, man. You have been duped so far but you don't need to keep being duped. Look at sources that aren't right wing advocacy groups. Look at things in the whole country.

I know you're smarter than this, you just need to let your brain overcome your partisanship.

 

[highland145]

One other thing here: It's now beyond doubt that Planned Parenthood is illegally selling aborted babies. If one is trying to only recover one's expenses, one puts that forward. "Here is what it costs us to save the remains for you." Instead, we have seen multiple Planned Parenthood officials negotiating their best prices, even refusing to make the initial offer specifically to maximize their financial return. That said, Planned Parenthood also provides many legitimate services to very poor women. If we're going to drop funding for Planned Parenthood, then we owe it to those women to do so methodically and slowly enough that they aren't damaged. They should not have to pay for our outrage.

Our outrage? A few's outrage. Even congress couldn't show up for the outrage.

However, I do agree with you 100% with the blue.

 

[ivwshane]

One other thing here: It's now beyond doubt that Planned Parenthood is illegally selling aborted babies. If one is trying to only recover one's expenses, one puts that forward. "Here is what it costs us to save the remains for you." Instead, we have seen multiple Planned Parenthood officials negotiating their best prices, even refusing to make the initial offer specifically to maximize their financial return. That said, Planned Parenthood also provides many legitimate services to very poor women. If we're going to drop funding for Planned Parenthood, then we owe it to those women to do so methodically and slowly enough that they aren't damaged. They should not have to pay for our outrage.

No, you've been duped again. If you read the actual transcript you will see that prices are dependent on several factors. Some of those factors are, will the procurer come to pick up the specimen, does it need to be shipped, who will provide the containment, etc. Thats why no specific numbers are given.

This is just another testament to how good propaganda works.

 

[Jhhnn]

lol No doubt. It's a highly emotional issue and neither side tends toward honesty over it. Which is understandable; we're talking about a fundamental conflict between the sanctity of human life and a woman's ownership of her own body. Stakes don't get much higher.


I was actually thinking about his first point, altering the method of terminating the baby to produce a more marketable product. I doubt many refuse to terminate on request. Hell, I can remember a reporter going to an abortion mill that told her she was pregnant (she had been tested before doing the story and was not pregnant) and was going to do an abortion right then and there.

The sanctity of life didn't seem to matter to the same folks when we were bombing Baghdad or when our Israeli pals blast Gaza, again. Doesn't matter when Americans are dying from preventable causes because there's no medicaid extension in their state. Doesn't matter when it comes to capital punishment or getting shot during a stupid marijuana raid, either.

It's not about "the sanctity of life" at all, which is just an emotionally appealing bit of pure propaganda.

 

[Jhhnn]

One other thing here: It's now beyond doubt that Planned Parenthood is illegally selling aborted babies. If one is trying to only recover one's expenses, one puts that forward. "Here is what it costs us to save the remains for you." Instead, we have seen multiple Planned Parenthood officials negotiating their best prices, even refusing to make the initial offer specifically to maximize their financial return. That said, Planned Parenthood also provides many legitimate services to very poor women. If we're going to drop funding for Planned Parenthood, then we owe it to those women to do so methodically and slowly enough that they aren't damaged. They should not have to pay for our outrage.

Please. The exchanges discussed were hypothetical, constructs of the video makers rather than anything that actually happened. The video makers are also dealing with PP staff at a casual level, staff who've obviously not encountered people who want what the video makers claim to want so they have no idea what their actual costs would be or the protocols involved.

Your outrage over what, exactly? That PP staff would even discuss such a thing?

That's all that the videos prove.

 

[lopri]

May be a little biased by not specifically mentioning term. I could see someone interpreting "Always legal" to mean "not only for rape and incest" without specifically contemplating the horror of aborting a perfectly viable 32 week baby.

That may as well be, but since there was no such qualification in either direction (pro-choice or pro-life), I have to take the wording of question as it is. It seems like my impression on 2015 America was completely wrong. Plus, according to the graph, "Always Legal" has outnumbered "Always Illegal" since 1976 and that has never changed.

 

[lopri]

Please. The exchanges discussed were hypothetical, constructs of the video makers rather than anything that actually happened. The video makers are also dealing with PP staff at a casual level, staff who've obviously not encountered people who want what the video makers claim to want so they have no idea what their actual costs would be or the protocols involved.

Your outrage over what, exactly? That PP staff would even discuss such a thing?

That's all that the videos prove.

I have no religious objection to abortion and I do think the videos were manipulated by the "Always Illegal" folks, but I have to admit that it is disturbing to see a doctor so callously discussing prices of fetal organs. If we start pricing fetal organs, then it is not out of imagination that the doctors might start thinking of them as commodities. And we know that money can change people's decisions. Money can also have coercive power. We want women to make autonomous decisions, free from not only government coercion but market coercion.

I think those who want to defund the Planned Parenthood are engaged in ideological battle, and their contention should be rejected. But at the same time, the Planned Parenthood should discipline the doctor, and make more effort to find better qualified doctors or to better educate the doctors. A greater oversight on fetal wastes and their disposal by the government might be warranted.

 

[HomerJS]

One other thing here: It's now beyond doubt that Planned Parenthood is illegally selling aborted babies. If one is trying to only recover one's expenses, one puts that forward. "Here is what it costs us to save the remains for you." Instead, we have seen multiple Planned Parenthood officials negotiating their best prices, even refusing to make the initial offer specifically to maximize their financial return. That said, Planned Parenthood also provides many legitimate services to very poor women. If we're going to drop funding for Planned Parenthood, then we owe it to those women to do so methodically and slowly enough that they aren't damaged. They should not have to pay for our outrage.

You are making a dishonest argument. The argument is "fetal tissue research must be made illegal"

 

[theeedude]

Seriously, Republicans like Mitch McConnell made it legal.

 

[Jhhnn]

I have no religious objection to abortion and I do think the videos were manipulated by the "Always Illegal" folks, but I have to admit that it is disturbing to see a doctor so callously discussing prices of fetal organs. If we start pricing fetal organs, then it is not out of imagination that the doctors might start thinking of them as commodities. And we know that money can change people's decisions. Money can also have coercive power. We want women to make autonomous decisions, free from not only government coercion but market coercion.

I think those who want to defund the Planned Parenthood are engaged in ideological battle, and their contention should be rejected. But at the same time, the Planned Parenthood should discipline the doctor, and make more effort to find better qualified doctors or to better educate the doctors. A greater oversight on fetal wastes and their disposal by the government might be warranted.

Well, if you want to make women free of the coercive power of money & markets then abortion should be free to women who can't afford it.

Closer oversight on fetal waste? Sure, if you just can't live without it. The whole thing is as trumped up as the ACORN scandal with the alleged "problem" as elusive as voter fraud.

 

[ivwshane]

I have no religious objection to abortion and I do think the videos were manipulated by the "Always Illegal" folks, but I have to admit that it is disturbing to see a doctor so callously discussing prices of fetal organs. If we start pricing fetal organs, then it is not out of imagination that the doctors might start thinking of them as commodities. And we know that money can change people's decisions. Money can also have coercive power. We want women to make autonomous decisions, free from not only government coercion but market coercion.

I think those who want to defund the Planned Parenthood are engaged in ideological battle, and their contention should be rejected. But at the same time, the Planned Parenthood should discipline the doctor, and make more effort to find better qualified doctors or to better educate the doctors. A greater oversight on fetal wastes and their disposal by the government might be warranted.

To the particular point that is bolded; exactly how did you want her to talk? Did you want her to start crying while talking about it? Did you want her to semi gag when discussing it? The fact is, she like any professional that see gory stuff day in and day out, no longer has that sensitivity you and I might have. Do you have the same mentality when you observe people watching those video/youtube clips that show people hurting themselves and everyone is laughing? No? That's because most people have been desensitized to such things, it doesn't make them bad people though.

 

[lopri]

I think you and I are talking about different kind of sensitivities here. I am not talking about goriness, but about human dignity. Imagine you need a kidney transplant. And luck would have it so that there is a volunteer who is willing to donate her kidney to save your life. She does so out of love (love for your or love for humankind in general), and does not care about compensation. You would of course be grateful for her incredible humanity, and even though she does not ask for anything else in return, you know you will do whatever you can when she is in need in the future.

Now, imagine a different situation where there is a doctor between you and a donor, and you and the donor do not get to see each other. The doctor does not seem to care whether you and the kidney donor have a meaningful communication, but seems more interested in extracting more money out of you and from your insurance. Moreover, the doctor tells you there are other kidneys available in different price ranges, and it is up to you and your size of wallet. You feel no choice but to choose the most expensive kidney you can afford so that is what you do. After the surgery you overhear the doctor bragging to his colleagues how much money he made by selling you a "premium" kidney that he would not waste his money on..

****

This is the kind of sensitivity I was talking about. Not goriness. I do not know how the Planned Parenthood doctor should have talked - maybe the doctors should not be put to such situation to begin with. I do not think commodification of fetal organs will help realize the ideal pro-choice folks seek.