Open Daily Quickfire Debates!

Joseph Nieves

Phrourach
Was wondering what you guys thought about the Planned Parenthood videos and them selling aborted body parts. Should they lose there federal funding?
 
I think the whole thing is being blown out of proportion based on those videos, and I don't think they should loose their funding. I also oppose in principle the selling of fetal body parts, although I recognize their potential importance in medical research. I would be willing to make an exception if the fetal body parts came from a pebble. After all, who doesn't want to own a piece of the rock? :p



PS: link is for those who don't understand the reference since it's no longer current
 

Joseph Nieves

Phrourach
Dr. Carson sums up by views pretty well. Though I will say the Planned Parenthood thing doesn't surprise me at all and anyone who needed those videos to finally realize that...well I am happy they woke up and learned what is reality. I think they should lose funding. And it will with the Students for Life for America creating the #womenbetrayed rallies in 65 cities and Rand Paul getting the Senate to vote on the federal funding before the August recess.


what videos? linkies?
Just a second have only seen two of them and I think there is 3 now. Let me find them :p


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/undercover-video-shows-planned-parenthood-exec-discussing-organ-harvesting/2015/07/14/ae330e34-2a4d-11e5-bd33-395c05608059_story.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/07/21/second_planned_parenthood_video_shows_price_haggling_over_fetal_body_parts.html

https://www.yahoo.com/health/3rd-planned-parenthood-sting-is-its-most-graphic-125273170172.html

Think that is all of them.
 
Last edited:

Greygnarl The Destroyer

Guest
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/tissue being sold for research is fine, imo.

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 :p


EDIT: I just read about Students for Life - what a stupid and useless organization. Can't believe that's actually a thing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Joseph Nieves

Phrourach
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 :p
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 :D
 

Greygnarl The Destroyer

Guest
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.
Again, I can't particularly comment on this. I don't know an awful lot about the American medical system - but a medical organization making a 'profit' is morally wrong to me.

I wasn't intending to talk about politics...but I will say that Donald Trump gives me a good laugh :D
Donald Trump's whole campaign seems to be a joke. Can't wait for it to join the rest of his failed ventures, like Trump Vodka or Trump: The Game
 

Joseph Nieves

Phrourach
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 :D

Edit: Just realized at the end of the third video it says Human Capital Episode 2: Inside the Planned Parenthood Supply Site.

So this is going to go on for a while, looks like the best has yet to come.
 
Last edited:
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.

 
Last edited:

Sirloin

Strategos
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.
 
Last edited:

Sirloin

Strategos
Ok, I read the full article which was merely an opinion piece for the other side, countering the opinion piece that Joseph posted. It had the benefit of being able to point to some of the more howling protagonists on the first side, but was still plenty howling itself.

I will certainly watch the "full" video when I have a moment or 120, though I had read on one of Joseph's links that it is not entirely certain that it is in fact the whole unabridged video, and certainly it will not contain the sum total of their filming.

That aside, I cannot imagine it possible that anything in this or any video could make me certain that no laws were broken. How could it possibly? Only a thorough investigation with full access to the site(s) records and all people involved could possibly hope to do that. I find your certainty somewhat disconcerting.

I already (probably and to an extent) agree with your views on those making the videos, but that meaning there is nothing for the regulator to look into and check on? That guaranteeing the innocence of the targeted company? Gosh, companies would be lining up to pay for that sort of public guarantee :D

Whether congress should be spending time on it, well, ya know, politicians will be politicians, and the same applies to them as to the chat shows, perhaps more so.
 
Watch the whole video because it debunks all of their claims. Doesn't matter if it's everything that they filmed cause it disproved all of their claims.

There is zero reason to investigate this. We have no reason to believe they are doing anything illegal. This entire is investigation is essential based on a group saying "hey I bet those people are doing something illegal, you should investigate". A three year old could do that and I'm starting to believe that the idiots involved in this aren't even that smart.

Find me a speck of actual evidence that they are doing something wrong then you can investigate.
 
Last edited:

Joseph Nieves

Phrourach
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.

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.

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.

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.
^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.

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.
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 :p Other than that the only thing the article did was use the tissue excuse which I already covered before the abortion rate rant :D 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

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... :D

As for the article some of the comments are pretty good so I will share some of them:

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?

Ok this post is long enough so let me cut it short.

PS: Not ignoring you Sirloin but this block of test is long enough so I will address it another time.
 
Last edited:
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.
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.

Did I not post one of the articles about why the 3% number really is meaningless.
having spoken with you early today you might understand me being so lazy as to not read this :p.

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.
I'm sorry but i fail to see the point in all this.



^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.
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.

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 :p Other than that the only thing the article did was use the tissue excuse which I already covered before the abortion rate rant :D 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
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.

"why they negotiate prices for shipping fees" watch the video. They were not negiotating. The woman says 30-100 dollars per speciem. The ring wing idiots then respond "no we want to pay you more money". First off idk how that wasnt a huge red flag that this whole thing is bs. Second, the shipping price varies because that's how shipping works lol.

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... :D
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.

Also you misspelled America in that last sentence.
 

Skullyhoofd

Guest
Whoo a somewhat heated debate. I did not have time to read/watch through everything posted here but I think I get the general gist of it... The problem is that planned parenthood allegedly is selling fetal tissue? Please do correct me if Im wrong, the rest of my post will be based on the assumption that I got that right. :p


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.
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. :p


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.
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 debate :p
I also assume they get funded to help remedy the rampant teen pregnancy problem you guys have across the pond.


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 :D
Didn't read the entire thing, because I didn't feel the need to after looking for some form of conclusion..


This sure looks like an article trying to join the discussion with a level-headed and objective approach.. /s

And I did look up their annual report. They had and excess of revenue (again not a profit) of $127 million in 2013-2014. It's the most recent thing available atm (as like your said their own resources are down atm unfortunately)



PS: I'm not defending PP indigenously, but you are just making some very unsubstantiated claims.


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.
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.

Especially the last paragraph of Sirloin's post is of vital importance imo. This is not a debate about abortion in any way, it's about money and allegedly illicit trading of fetal tissue.


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.
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.



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.
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.

Jim Vaught, president of the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories said that "$30 to $100 per sample is a reasonable charge for clinical operations to recover their costs for providing tissue.

"In reality, $30-100 probably constitutes a loss for [Planned Parenthood]. The costs associated with collection, processing, storage, and inventory and records management for specimens are very high. Most hospitals will provide tissue blocks from surgical procedures (ones no longer needed for clinical purposes, and without identity) for research, and cost recover for their time and effort in the range of $100-500 per case/block. In the realm of tissues for research $30-100 is completely reasonable and normal fee." - Sherilyn J. Sawyer, director of Harvard University and Brigham and Women’s Hospital’s biorepository.

"‘Profit’ is out of the question, in my mind. I would say that whoever opined about ‘profit’ knows very little about the effort and expense involved in providing human biospecimens for research purposes." - Carolyn Compton, Chief medical and science officer of Arizona State University’s National Biomarkers Development Alliance and a former director of biorepositories and biospecimen research at the National Cancer Institute.

Source for all: http://www.factcheck.org/2015/07/unspinning-the-planned-parenthood-video/


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.
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.


^Just something I had to throw in to show how big it is for there business.
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? :D



Other than that the only thing the article did was use the tissue excuse which I already covered before the abortion rate rant :D 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
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.
 
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.
I was working on very little hours of sleep for those responses so that kind of explains the article lol.

I'm not saying they are 100% innocent here. I'm looking at this from a legal mind set. To me there isn't nearly enough proof (or any proof) to show guilt. All that has been provided is a highly editted video that (although barely making sense on it's own) disproves its own points once the context of the whole video is added. Even by congress' standards it would be a waste of time and money to investigate anything based on that evidence.
 

Sirloin

Strategos
But politicians need to be seen to be doing these things, and quite possibly deciding against looking into it would be even worse for the company as it would be able to be blown up even further into accusations of cover-up and pandering.
 

Greygnarl The Destroyer

Guest
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. :p
i'm not good with biology :p

I was very tired when I wrote that, so i've edited it slightly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Joseph Nieves

Phrourach
Ok nice to see some discussion sadly I do not have the time at the moment to address it. For most of the stuff I don't want to comment until I have watched the full length 3 hour video (or longer since I will have to write things down as they happen or I will forget them lol). Here is the 4th video, let me know if anything good happens as I won't see it until tomorrow.

Edit: Just saw it and found it funny how the medical assistant said it was a baby and not a fetus. With that mindset it is hard to imagine how someone can be ok with killing a baby. Ooh intact kidneys and more

Dr. Grinde: No, and the, I think a per-item thing works a little better, just because we can see how much we can get out of it. So people do they want brain? What do they do with brain?

Later on...
Dr. Grinde: Here's some organs for you they're all attached. Here's a stomach, kidney, and heart...

Best Parts:

Dr. Grinde: It's a baby.

"And another boy!" (forget about putting a name to that quote that would be to embarrassing for that person)

Biggest thing I got asides from that was the discussion about how the attorneys could prevent there from being any repercussions for selling organs across states (which is illegal). Throughout the video they talk about keeping them intact to be sold and well looks like they did a good job with "that specimen". I can't wait to see all the great illegal things that can be seen in that 3 hour video.

Saw a youtube comment and it is somewhat worth mentioning:

In the video, actors posing as representatives from a human biologics company meet with Ginde at the abortion-clinic headquarters of PPRM in Denver to discuss a potential partnership to harvest fetal organs. When the actors request intact fetal specimens, Ginde reveals that in PPRM’s abortion practice, “Sometimes, if we get, if someone delivers before we get to see them for a procedure, then we are intact.”

“We’d have to do a little bit of training with the providers or something to make sure that they don’t crush” fetal organs during 2nd trimester abortions, says Ginde, brainstorming ways to ensure the abortion doctors at PPRM provide usable fetal organs.
 
Last edited: