DeletedUser40768
Guest
Was wondering what you guys thought about the Planned Parenthood videos and them selling aborted body parts. Should they lose there federal funding?
what videos? linkies?
PP should not lose funding - to a european my opinion is that it provides a needed service that is vital and justifiable.
However, selling that sort of thing is too far, and they should be disciplined for it. Cells being sold for research is fine, imo, but body parts & tissue or whatever is a step too far. Again, this is from a foreigner, so what do I know about your wacky health system.
Also, all the republican candidates are... simply bad this time around. I have not found a single one I agree with on anything. And the democrats aren't much better. It's practically two sides of the same coin, one slightly more liberal. Although, Bernie Sanders isn't too bad and is rather close to my views in politics, but I might be slightly more to the left
lol They can probably make enough dirty money without the funding. Got to find the stat I read a few hours ago but they make over 100 million a year in profit. That number doesn't even include the money they get from selling body parts and anything else illegal they may be doing. Who knows how many more videos will get released in the near future. Don't even get why the government funds them in the first place.
I wasn't intending to talk about politics...but I will say that Donald Trump gives me a good laugh
Was wondering what you guys thought about the Planned Parenthood videos and them selling aborted body parts. Should they lose there federal funding?
WHOA WHOA WHOA! Back the hell up.
That was the single most heavily editted video on the planet. Planned Parenthood DOES NOT sell aborted fetsus tissue. They donate tissue to science with permission from the family (and thank God they do cause the other options is throwing it away). The money they were talking about in the video was the shipping costs that comes with shipping the tissue as it's pretty fragile. Besides that abortion is around 3% of what planned parenthood does and the federal government isn't even allowed to fund that. Any federal funding goes to the other 97% of what they do. That other 97% is by the way for services such as breast cancer screenings, birth control, STD screenings, and other services that many people can't afford at a regular hospital.
According to Planned Parenthood’s own apologist, Media Matters, its “total revenue from abortion services was approximately $164,154,000,” a year. Accordingly, over 51 percent of Planned Parenthood’s clinic income comes from abortion.
the law was not broken and this was just a smear campaign by anti murderers
Read the article they actually provide the full video and show how crazy the claims are. Congress shouldn't even be wasting their time on this. The only reason they are is cause democrats are spinless and republicans are painfully idiotic or willfully ignorant.
CMP released the full video within 30 seconds of the edited one. Just look at the publish dates. There's no reason why being anti-abortion discredits the videos. PP execs said everything in the full video with proper context, which NY Times is too offended to watch, apparently. You end up condemning and deceiving yourselves by not looking at the primary sources. Thinking people should look with nuance and integrity, but I've lost my hope in that a while ago.
"Campaign of Deception"? Once upon a time, that was called "investigative reporting."
If abortion is just the removing of "a bunch of cells in a blob," why is it that PP can sell little arms, legs, kidneys, lungs and hearts from the babies they just murdered? How can people not see that this is infanticide? The slippery slope of Roe v Wade has lead us to this horrific point in our society. Let's hear from the Democratic candidates for president on this! How can anyone support this practice and still claim to be a compassionate human being?
Australian said:There is no real need for abortion, we have tubal ligation, the snip, diaphragms, morning after pill, the pill, the ''I forgot pill" and IUDs. All of these give you the abortion ''on demand'' without the controversial killing of a baby/foetus. There is no longer a valid reason for abortion on demand or no demand. Any nation that has the taxpayer paying for this now unnecessary procedure should begin to save itself a lot of money.
You know that Rome is beginning to fall when the response to this video is:
"It's all legal!"
"We don't know when life begins, anyway!"
"They didn't sell it for profit!"
"It's a woman's right to choose!"
"It's just fetal tissue, not an actual living being!"
I'm all for legal and safe abortion, within limits. But when you have a doctor talking openly about crushing the head and lower body of a fetus that had, up until that point, a beating heart and functioning organs, and then the doctor explains how she removes those organs to be used for scientific research, maybe it's not a bad idea to stop clinging so desperately to political lines and have an actual discussion about morality rather than legality.
"The full video of the lunch meeting, over two hours long and released by the Center for Medical Progress after complaints by Planned Parenthood"
This is straightforwardly false. The two videos were released simultaneously. No doubt a matter of indifference to the PP shills on the Times' editorial board.
Wow, what an incredibly distorted representation of the videos by the NYT. No mention of crushing parts, or "less crunchy" techniques, or haggling over prices, or joking about getting a Lamborghini, or changing the abortion procedure in order to obtain a better "specimen" (dead baby parts). But why should I be surprised.
It would be appropriate for the NYT to take a position on the legal and ethical issues raised by the videos but for it to punish the messenger and go on the attack to defend Planned Parenthood's questionable practices is really beneath the standards of responsible journalism. Most charitably it is advocacy, but at this point we don't even have all the facts? Why this knee- jerk reaction from The Times?
Watch the video there are not negotiating. The planned parenthood rep names a price range (cause that's how shipping works lol) and the activist say "no we want to pay you more". I'm not joking that actually happens.Tissues? Donations? Organs like the heart, stomach and liver are a bit more than clumps of tissue. Not to mention the arms and what appeared to be eyes in one of the videos. Wasn't aware there were big negotiations over shipping costs either, the price for shipping is a pretty set number so there is not much room to lower the price there. Especially if it is a necessary cost to use tissue for research, don't think being a tightwad is necessary over just a shipping fee.
having spoken with you early today you might understand me being so lazy as to not read this .Did I not post one of the articles about why the 3% number really is meaningless.
I'm sorry but i fail to see the point in all this.For one that is 11 million services but the average visit a woman gets two services. So that would be a 6% on any visit that results in an abortion. Then we see all these services go to 3 million women so there is about an 11% chance that any woman who goes to Planned Parenthood has an abortion. Meanwhile prenatal services make up 0.28% of the total number of services provided, but the average prenatal client gets 6 services. So the % of woman who get those are far less than that 0.28%. As for adoption well it made up 0.0076% of the total services, looks like they are pretty good at encouraging going through with pregnancies.
again i fail to see the point of this. Nothing you are saying they are doing is illegal. I'm pro-life but under current law there are no wrong doings here.^Just something I had to throw in to show how big it is for there business. Anyway so the abortion rate was at 11% for any woman who goes to Planned Parenthood. The rate is still higher as abortion pills make up over a million (1.4 to be more accurate in 2010) of those services and do not count to the abortion percentage. Most of those abortion pills are paid by government funding through Title X. So to 3 million women 1.7 million services are abortions. Now with the abortion pills I am unsure how many emergency contraception kits each person gets but the abortions services to women ratio is fairly high and almost 15 times the original 3%. Ok editor note in the article I just read says it accounts for 27% but that is still 9 times higher than the 3% propaganda number the media endorses. Like I said earlier though the ratio of abortions to adoptions and prenatal care speak for themselves, little is being done to extend life on the pregnancy side of its business.
*All numbers are 2010 numbers as the annual reports for earlier years aren't working for me right now But when I checked yesterday most of the percent values did not vary very much from year to year.
They donate them with the consent of the family which is pretty good thing as that is some pretty value stuff. It literally saves lives.I can't watch a 3 hour video given the amount of time I have in any give day, if I ever have the time I will make an attempt but no promise I make it past the first hour Other than that the only thing the article did was use the tissue excuse which I already covered before the abortion rate rant Arms, stomachs, livers, hearts, and eyes are a bit more than tissues. Those are body parts and complex organs that perform life functions and it is illegal to sell body parts and organs so Planned Parenthood does need to be investigated for that and for why they negotiate prices for shipping fees lol
Well personally i do blame republicans and do feel it's a political game but in all honest i found the article when i was working on two hours of sleep so some of the crazy propaganda part kind of went over my head. Sorry about that guys.Besides that is was a bunch of propaganda and blaming republicans and that political blame game kind of threw away any respect I had for the article. I must admit it is an art to use propaganda in such a way that the media does, just wish the bias wasn't so strong in the article. Then again were are in NY, no news here ever gets reported the way it happens...
Just a small note, body parts and tissue are cells, that's how they are distributed. Cells aren't shipped to researchers individually or something.However, selling that sort of thing is too far, and they should be disciplined for it. Cells being sold for research is fine, imo, but body parts & tissue or whatever is a step too far. Again, this is from a foreigner, so what do I know about your wacky health system.
They are a non-profit organization, and they seem to be a rather transparent and respectable one. So they don't make a profit per se, rather their excess is invested back into the foundation. I think it's funny how you're implying that making a profit is such a bad thing, especially when you take into consideration the US' completely and utterly broken healthcare sector; but that's an entirely different debatelol They can probably make enough dirty money without the funding. Got to find the stat I read a few hours ago but they make over 100 million a year in profit. That number doesn't even include the money they get from selling body parts and anything else illegal they may be doing. Who knows how many more videos will get released in the near future. Don't even get why the government funds them in the first place.
http://www.lifenews.com/2012/09/05/media-hides-fact-planned-parenthood-does-40-of-abortions/
^Not entirely related but found it interesting how the abortion percentage number is so drastically adjusted and lowered.
Also looking at Planned Parenthood's Annual Report which is made public, looks like they make about 300 million a year. Wow so many murderers must be upset they didn't just make a "healthcare" service like Planned Parenthood
Best post in the thread. Sirloin really hits the nail on the head and I fully agree with everything she has said. There seems to be a lot of material gathered and not nearly everything is public. The videos and information which have been made public are clearly edited to manipulate you to choose their side over the other. It is possible that there is enough material to justify a professional investigation, so let's wait until official authorities have gathered evidence and made a decision before we make any claims about guilt or lack thereof.Thanks Joseph. I was going to respond last night but that was a ton of stuff to take in.
The write-up that you agree with, I disagree with probably to an equal extent. I can respect the underlying belief ofc without holding it, however the rhetoric severely lets it down, leaving it really just a sermon for the choir.
As has been mentioned, the source of this information is extremely unreliable, and the evidence itself very heavily edited and spiced with text and graphics which colour the perception of the listener/watcher to think the actual footage contains what they are reading. Three years of undercover effort edited into around 40 minutes of cut and paste. The phlebotomist was persuasive, but obviously already onside..I wonder what her story is, has she reported the wrongdoing she alleges to the authorities? how long did it take for her to go from employee to star of the expose? Was she actually a plant all along? etc etc. the full story is nowhere near out yet.
Even with the editing, very little of the actual meetings videoed held anything they shouldn't, despite one side being there purely to try to lead the other side to say something worth posting. I wonder how many hours of how many meetings it took them to manipulate out as much as they did. So she jokes she wants a lambourgini...I wonder why it was important to include that? Perceptions.
Anyway, to the point. There are laws. Specifically on the subject of selling human tissue and choosing methods of abortion, these videos purport to show that these laws may be being broken, and there is certainly enough indication there that it should be investigated by the regulators. That's what regulators and police are for. If a law has been broken then appropriate measures should be taken. These would include fines against the company, and possibly criminal cases against some of those responsible and involved. Possibly also professional/medical licensing bodies may wish to review their member's involvement and consider censure or removal of licences. *IF* the regulators find wrongdoing, and not before that.
That's it really.
The things that are being done legally, which include performing abortions and supplying tissue for research should of course continue, unless and until they become illegal, and nothing here should change a thinking person's view on those laws either way.
On the one hand, this sort of thing is good for whistleblowing and getting the story out where it cannot be buried. On the other, unless the effort is put in by journalists for the sake of journalism and bringing a story then it will be made by people with an axe to grind.
Clearly the people who have put in 3 years work to find this indication of wrongdoing on one point of law have have made that effort because they disagree with many other things the organisation does which are within the law. They want to change the law on abortion full stop, and have targeted an abortion provider to find a chink to stick their sword in to further that cause. This is just another part of the war on legal abortion, which lets be fair has at time included shooting dead employees of clinics as well as harranguing women trying to enter for medical advice and procedures.
This will be a talking point on chat shows and for general small talk and gossip for a while till the next big thing comes along, and again when the regulator reports back. Hopefully by the time it comes to be settled, the vast majority of people will have worked out that either
a) the law was not broken and this was just a smear campaign by anti abortionists,
or alternatively
b)the law was broken and it was all about money, and really nothing to do with abortion at all.
We shall have to wait and see which it is.
You're on the other side of the spectrum of being too sure. Just like one (edited or not) video isn't enough to prove guilt it's not enough to prove innocence either. There could be much more to this story.the law was not broken and this was just a smear campaign by anti abortionists
Read the article they actually provide the full video and show how crazy the claims are. Congress shouldn't even be wasting their time on this. The only reason they are is cause democrats are spinless and republicans are painfully idiotic or willfully ignorant.
Organs really are not that far off of being 'clumps of tissue' and they are routinely donated to science for research purposes. The “sale” of organs, both adult and fetal, for transplantation is indeed illegal; however donation of tissue, both from aborted fetuses and from adults, is not. And payment for “reasonable” costs is also allowed under the law.Tissues? Donations? Organs like the heart, stomach and liver are a bit more than clumps of tissue. Not to mention the arms and what appeared to be eyes in one of the videos. Wasn't aware there were big negotiations over shipping costs either, the price for shipping is a pretty set number so there is not much room to lower the price there. Especially if it is a necessary cost to use tissue for research, don't think being a tightwad is necessary over just a shipping fee.
This is true the stats are definitely skewed towards a lower percentile for abortions by counting them as only one 'service.' Personally, I think this is due to the social stigma that is very prevalent in the US surrounding abortion.Did I not post one of the articles about why the 3% number really is meaningless. For one that is 11 million services but the average visit a woman gets two services. So that would be a 6% on any visit that results in an abortion. Then we see all these services go to 3 million women so there is about an 11% chance that any woman who goes to Planned Parenthood has an abortion. Meanwhile prenatal services make up 0.28% of the total number of services provided, but the average prenatal client gets 6 services. So the % of woman who get those are far less than that 0.28%. As for adoption well it made up 0.0076% of the total services, looks like they are pretty good at encouraging going through with pregnancies.
That quote is incorrect, you can check this for yourself in the annual report I linked earlier. It's 51% of their non-government health services revenue, which would translate to about 11.5% of their total revenue. Much less drastic, manipulating data is fun, no?^Just something I had to throw in to show how big it is for there business.
like I said earlier: The “sale” of organs, both adult and fetal, for transplantation is indeed illegal; however donation of tissue, both from aborted fetuses and from adults, is not. And payment for “reasonable” costs is also allowed under the law.Other than that the only thing the article did was use the tissue excuse which I already covered before the abortion rate rant Arms, stomachs, livers, hearts, and eyes are a bit more than tissues. Those are body parts and complex organs that perform life functions and it is illegal to sell body parts and organs so Planned Parenthood does need to be investigated for that and for why they negotiate prices for shipping fees lol
I was working on very little hours of sleep for those responses so that kind of explains the article lol.You're on the other side of the spectrum of being too sure. Just like one (edited or not) video isn't enough to prove guilt it's not enough to prove innocence either. There could be much more to this story.
Just a small note, body parts and tissue are cells, that's how they are distributed. Cells aren't shipped to researchers individually or something.