Patterico's Pontifications

10/5/2015

The Tactics Of The Liberal Anti-Life On Display

Filed under: General — Dana @ 6:44 am



[guest post by Dana]

This week, the tactics of the anti-life Planned Parenthood crowd were on display to further the “women’s health care” line and keep the taxpayer dollars flowing to the organization.

One tactic used is to never give the baby a “face”. Do not allow any humanization to take place and do not say “baby” when talking about the subject. Another tactic used is to push a false narrative. As we have learned, relentlessly push a falsehood long enough, and eventually it becomes an accepted “truth”.

Two examples of these tactics recently occurred.

First, when asked by a reporter about whether an unborn baby with a human heart and a human liver is a human being, Nancy Pelosi, clearly irked at being confronted by real journalist unafraid to do their job, played the gender card and shamefully hid behind her uterus to avoid answering. Weaker sex, indeed. Thanks, Nancy:

CNSNews.com asked Pelosi: “In reference to funding for Planned Parenthood: Is an unborn baby with a human heart and a human liver a human being?”

Pelosi responded: “Why don’t you take your ideological questions–I don’t, I don’t have—”

CNSNews.com asked: “If it’s not a human being, what species is it?”

Pelosi said: “No, listen, I want to say something to you. I don’t know who you are and you’re welcome to be here, freedom of this press. I am a devout practicing Catholic, a mother of five children. When my baby was born, my fifth child, my oldest child was six years old. I think I know more about this subject than you, with all due respect.”

CNSNews.com asked: “So it’s not a human being, then?”

Pelosi said: “And I do not intend to respond to your questions, which have no basis in what public policy is that we do here.”

Had Pelosi not wimped out and actually watched the Planned Parenthood videos, she could have learned that even Planned Parenthood personnel understand that it is human hearts, human livers, human brains and other human organs they are extracting to sell. They’re not cutting open those babies looking for armadillo parts, Nancy. Too bad she didn’t heed her own admonition: you’ve got to watch the videos to know what’s in the videos, but we understand that in spite of her I’m the mother of five babies, how dare you question me! line, she really doesn’t care about who is being butchered – all the way up through the ninth month.

And given our liberal pro-abortion media, instead of compelling Pelosi to answer the reasonable question, the MSM came to Pelosi’s aid and attacked the reporter, referring to him as an anti-abortion protester .

An example of pushing a falsehood tactic was once again demonstrated by Cecile Richards this weekend in an interview with Chuck Todd. In spite of Planned Parenthood (and the MSM’s) talking points about the videos being completely debunked, Richards continued the narrative lies as she, ironically, called Carly Fiorina a liar:

“Planned Parenthood is aborting fetuses, alive, to harvest their brains and other body parts. That is a fact,” said Fiorina in the clip.

“Ms. Richards, how do you respond to Ms. Fiorina?” asked Todd.

“It is extraordinary that someone running for president would lie in that way,” Richards told Todd. “That has been completely discredited by every reputable news source, and yet Carly Fiorina seems to continue to repeat the same lie.”

“I think it also shows how using distortive and deceptive videos, as the ones that have been used against Planned Parenthood, they’re not credible,” said Richards. “And it’s not a basis upon which to make decisions about an organization or a public policy.”

Richards continually asserted that the videos were “highly edited,” distorted and “deceptive,” a claim that went unrebutted by Todd, who never brought up the forensic evidence of the tapes.

–Dana

35 Responses to “The Tactics Of The Liberal Anti-Life On Display”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (86e864)

  2. I, as a believer in legal abortion, watch in horrified fascination as the people who drive the Pro-Choice side lob high explosive shells straight up, and stand unconcerned on the bullseye. They need this story to die. They need this story to die, even if it means gutting Planned Parenthood and vilifying everyone who ever worked for it. Their position of “organs harvested from blobs of tissue magically become human organs because we say so” is an arsenic and botulism coctail. And Pelosi’s “I have five (white) babies, so how dare you ask about these (mostly brown) ones.” is going to blow up like 500 lbs of sweating dynamite sooner or later.

    I don’t think an INFANT is human. I think humanity is learned, gradually, amd that some people never do learn. I think that explains ‘people’ like serial killers and Nancy Pelosi. I also don’t think I have a right to impose my beliefs on anyone else.

    So, we will see abortion widely banned in my lifetime, and women who want one will have to take a bus to Vegas. Not the worst of all possible outcomes.

    C. S. P. Schofield (ab2cdc)

  3. “and shamefully hid behind her uterus”…thanks, Dana, now I need to go find 50 gallons of bleach to wash that image out of my mind

    champ (56cd04)

  4. A human life evolves from conception to a natural, accidental, or premeditated death.

    Pelosi is not Christian. She is a member of the pro-choice cult that has resumed the ancient pagan practice of sacrificial rites. They have normalized or promoted elective abortion under the color of science and appeal to emotion in order to construct a male-female congruence, and Blood and Green money, environment, etc.

    n.n (9e771a)

  5. Imagine if a group of devout Christian Scientists decided that since medical surgery was against their beliefs, the government shouldn’t give Medicaid money to any hospital that performs surgeries. They’d show “graphic” videos of human beings being cut open and their organs removed; completely devoid of the context of how much it benefited the patient. They’d definitely be against any legalization of organ donations as well.

    You’d probably call these people fanatics who have no right to control what you do with your body.

    This is how we see you.

    moral (8b99c1)

  6. I am a devout practicing Catholic, a mother of five children.

    I’m so tired of people being described as “devout” Catholics, especially when they are self-described that way. Only God gets to determine the true measure of your devotion, and if I had to lay a wager I would bet that Nancy Pelosi falls well short or the mark.

    JVW (c95135)

  7. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops isn’t too impressed with Rep. Pelosi’s understanding of the catechism, by the way.

    JVW (c95135)

  8. So, we will see abortion widely banned in my lifetime, and women who want one will have to take a bus to Vegas.

    Oh come now, stop the outlandish characterizations. Surely by then we’ll have a nation-wide network of high-speed rail lines to Las Vegas.

    JVW (c95135)

  9. Moral,

    I’d call them citizens exercising their right of free speech. And I’m pro-choice. You have no right to not have people dosagree with you.

    C. S. P. Schofield (16b992)

  10. Pelosi is a lying, as usual. I’d bet my white male privilege against the cost of her last 3 facelifts she’s seen the video, over and over, trying to find points she can obfuscate, mis-characterize, or deny. The woman is about the most despicable example of a two-faced, belly crawlin’ sub-standard human being who ever conned her way onto the national stage. in any previous era she would have been laughed and ridiculed into a well deserved humiliating obscurity.

    But, Pelosi’s a sign of the times, when men moved over and opened the door for the non-traditional participation of women in the cultural, economic, and political life of the nation, low-life opportunists and gender charlatans jumped at the chance to abuse evolving social relationships by manufacturing grievances and concocting phony Constitutional Rights, all in the self-serving effort to advantage their own personal interests while at the same time sticking their greedy snouts deep into the public trough.

    But, she’s really no different from so many other fellow travelers, not in kind anyway, Plelosi is just another corrupt Democrat politician, a rich bitch spouting socialism’s nostrums and funneling taxpayer money into her numbered accounts, just one among many of the same ilk.

    ropelight (bfe794)

  11. Imagine if a group of devout Christian Scientists decided that since medical surgery was against their beliefs, the government shouldn’t give Medicaid money to any hospital that performs surgeries. They’d show “graphic” videos of human beings being cut open and their organs removed; completely devoid of the context of how much it benefited the patient. They’d definitely be against any legalization of organ donations as well.

    That’s a nice try, moral, but the better analogy would be if the “surgery” performed on these people had the sole goal of ending their life, and the surgery was performed in a way so as to harvest the organs of the “patient” irrespective of whether or not that causes the patient undue pain and needless suffering.

    But your side always wants to distract everyone from the reality that abortion leads to a dead corpse.

    JVW (05e1e2)

  12. JVW,

    Actually, I think you missed the interesting issue with Moral’s post. It’s a given that Moral (and I) don’t think that an abortion results in the death of a human being, and you do. Where Moral stepped in it is the assumption that if a religious sect had objections to blood transfusion or appendectomies, the rest of us would be justified in saying “They have no right”. Well, they do. It stops at imposing their ideas on us, but not at objecting to paying for our ideas.

    Moral, of course, sees government supplemented medical care as a basic right.

    I don’t. I see it as a bribe to make us tolerate government.

    He who pays taxes, gets to bitch about how they are spent. He may not change anything, but calling him a kook is the first step on the road to saying he doesn’t have a right to say things that offend you.

    C. S. P. Schofield (ab2cdc)

  13. even though the House and Senate, are willing to let ‘the machinery of death’ go forth,

    http://therightscoop.com/more-planned-parenthood-video-footage-released-doctor-describes-how-to-secure-intact-fetal-brain-tissue/

    narciso (ee1f88)

  14. I see it more as not wanting the government to use taxpayer money to buy guns for Chris Harper-Mercer, C.S.P..

    nk (dbc370)

  15. she really doesn’t care about who is being butchered

    Sure she does. Do you think that her daughter would have an abortion? Or one of her daughter’s friends? Of course not. The child would be delivered, sent off to a nice home for some “deserving” couple, and quietly hushed up.

    Abortions are good, but only if the Right People are getting aborted. There’s a reason why liberals support opening abortions in poor urban (black) neighborhoods, and not in wealthy suburbs.

    egd (1ad898)

  16. “Moral” is anything but, but it’s attempt to distract and obfuscate are cute.

    JD (34f761)

  17. Actually, I think you missed the interesting issue with Moral’s post. It’s a given that Moral (and I) don’t think that an abortion results in the death of a human being, and you do.

    I’m free to believe that draining my bank account doesn’t make me “broke,” but believing it doesn’t make it so. I’m sorry, CSPS, I’m not really trying to pick a fight with you, but part of the reason that I think that you and moral don’t believe that abortion ends in the death of a human being is because of a neat little obfuscation that the abortion lobby has been peddling for the last 40+ years. And the whole point of the Planned Parenthood videos is to fully expose the idea that PP understands that the byproduct of their pregnancy termination services are in fact human beings, otherwise they wouldn’t be marketing their ability to procure human hearts, human brains, human livers, etc.

    I really don’t believe that abortion rights supporters are evil or even necessarily bad people, nor do I believe that a scared young woman who takes a Plan B pill packet or terminates an eight-week pregnancy is an evil person. Even a woman who seeks a late-second or even a third trimester abortion may be truly motivated by panic and a lack of a viable support network. The Pope made reference to this idea when he was here in the U.S. But I have a tough time giving a free pass to the employees who are in PP abortion clinics every single day and callously regard the product of their handiwork, especially the late-term butchery of which they seem so proud. While they may not in fact be truly evil, they are certainly having their judgement clouded by a true evil.

    JVW (05e1e2)

  18. .

    First, when asked by a reporter about whether an unborn baby with a human heart and a human liver is a human being

    What makes a human is not the tissue involved. I can put a human heart and liver into a wax dummy, that doesn’t make it human. I have no doubt it’s probably possible to transplant a human heart and a human liver into a pig …. is the pig now a human? Of course not.

    It’s the MIND that matters, not the DNA, not the APPEARANCE, not even the COMPONENTS. Because in religious terms these are tantamount to the Soul. THEY are what makes YOU, YOU.

    If I devise a mechanical heart, and a mechanical liver, and put them into you, are you no longer human? No.

    Are you LESS HUMAN? No.

    What PP is doing is reprehensible, but this argument is flat out crap.

    What makes you human is a human mind and a human heart (the metaphorical heart, not the “beating muscle”). This is part of the argument for capital punishment — by demonstrating an irreverence for (undisputed) human life, you’ve forfeited your claim to the human right to continue living. So, like a mad dog, society chooses to put you down as a threat to it.

    A fetus, prior to the point it has independent brain waves, has no non-religious argument for being a human with human rights. It is a collection of cells which can develop into a human, but is not yet a human.

    When does a fetus develop independent brainwaves? About the end of the first trimester, after which one can’t reasonably make the case that it doesn’t have a human mind and human thoughts. It might not until later, still, but that’s the point where we’re limited and unable to make any discernment of it.

    So the trimester boundary is about right for the LAW.

    I strongly encourage you to continue to make the case to women that it happens sooner, for religious reasons.

    Let them choose for themselves whether to listen to God or their (metaphorical) heart or whatever… or to do the expedient thing that part of them wants to do.

    But forcing women to do something for religious reasons, that’s not what The Law should reflect….

    .

    IGotBupkis, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses." (d7ab6c)

  19. A fetus, prior to the point it has independent brain waves, has no non-religious argument for being a human with human rights. It is a collection of cells which can develop into a human, but is not yet a human.

    When does a fetus develop independent brainwaves? About the end of the first trimester, after which one can’t reasonably make the case that it doesn’t have a human mind and human thoughts. It might not until later, still, but that’s the point where we’re limited and unable to make any discernment of it.

    A house truly isn’t a house when it is just a foundation dug out of the ground. You need floors and walls and windows for it to fully be a house. But if I use eminent domain to seize your property before you have started to put in your floors and walls haven’t I still taken away your home? A piece of land doesn’t need a structure to be a home any more than a human body needs brain waves or muscle twitching or the severing of the umbilical cord to be a life.

    JVW (ba78f9)

  20. JVW,

    I think Moral and a lot of the Pro-Choice crowd do exactly what you say they do. They carefully don’t look at what an abortion is and does, and comfort themselves with obfuscating bushwa.

    I don’t think a fetus is human because I don’t think an infant is human. I think humanity is learned or grown, and some ‘people’ never develop it. That explains people like John Wayne Gacy and Nancy Pelosi. I am willing to watch video of a know and proven serial killer’s execution, though it would be unpleasant (unless he had killed somebody I’d known, maybe). I have watched videos of abortions, and some of the Planned Parenthood videos (not all of them; they aren’t going to change my mind that abortion is not murder and Planned Parenthood are a bunch of idiots at best and possibly swine).

    We are going to see abortion banned almost everywhere in my lifetime. We are going to see this less because abortion is murder (to repeat; I don’t think it is) than because the people who want abortion legal were not willing to face hard facts, actually compromise on anything, or police their own (and prevent abattoirs like Kermit Gosnell’s operation). In other words; typical privileged Leftist Intellectual-manque twits.

    C. S. P. Schofield (ab2cdc)

  21. 20. No offense bud but you are one dumb blob of ooze. I have three degrees, 325 college credits and an IQ of 139 and that definition of humanity is bereft of same. Step in front of a bus immediately.

    DNF (51a50d)

  22. “I don’t think an INFANT is human.”

    It’s hard to come to grips with so foul an opinion. That is beneath contempt.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  23. Truly excremental…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  24. Some of my fondest memories of this life will ever be those of my daughter at 6 mos.:

    Creating a sequence of sounds that her mother would then mimic for 20 mins. at a stretch; role play with bathtub toys employing a language of her invention(Weegee woo & tucka tucka, et alia); swimming in the heated pool at the YMCA, playing “the wheels on the bus go round”; poring over “Good Night Moon” each night until the realization bedtime would follow inciting her to slam the book closed instantly indignant;..

    DNF (51a50d)

  25. I tried and tried and tried to frame a response to that comment by C.S.P. I even slept on it. In the light of a new day, I can still only shake my head. I just can’t find the words.

    nk (dbc370)

  26. This comes close:

    Mr. C.S.P., what you wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. It does not even come close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

    nk (dbc370)

  27. I don’t expect you to agree with me. I also point out that I don’t climb on my high horse and demand that the State enforce my opinion. If I’m right and abortion is illegal anyway, some women (most of whom are careless) are inconvenienced. If I’m wrong, and abortion is legal, then children are killed. I think abortion should be legal, but I’m not greatly exercised over the idea that it won’t be.

    I’ve slowly come to the sad conclusion that most Pro-Choice people don’t really agree with me. They believe an infant is human, and suspect deep down that so is a fetus. They want abortion because they think something it gives them is more important than a child’s life, and they are also on some level ashamed of themselves for that. Nothing else explains how hysterical and outraged they get when challenged.

    Kind of like how hysterical the doctrinair leftists get when you point out that being in favor of Communsm is being in favor of mass murder.

    C. S. P. Schofield (ab2cdc)

  28. You know who agreed with you? Heinrich Himmler. He established homes for unwed mothers (of proper Aryan descent) to address the problem of abortions, but he did not consider anyone human until they joined the NSDAP.

    nk (dbc370)

  29. nk,

    Nonsense. Like most high ranked Nazis, Himmlers was what used to be called a Sociopath; he didn’t consider anybody but himself human. In fact he, and people like him (*cough* Hillary *cough*) are prime exhibits for my way of thinking.

    The problem being, it seems difficult if not impssible to tell which infants will grow up to be human, and which will remain evil animals.

    C. S. P. Schofield (bb87d9)

  30. yes, that’s a dangerous notion to entertain, that’s how we ended up with 55 million, the promise of freedom, at the cost of one’s soul,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  31. I feel sorry for CSP. To have that depraved a belief living inside his head and still consider it reasonable is beyond lunacy. I wonder if it’s treatable.

    John Hitchcock (1b87a1)

  32. John Hitchcock,

    Now now, I’ll make a deal with you; you don’t try to medicalize my opinions you disagree with, and I won’t medicalize yours that I disagree with.

    Unlike, say, the Liberal Intellectual Radical Progressive establishment, which would love to ‘medicate’ both of us into submission.

    C. S. P. Schofield (ab2cdc)

  33. When you call a frog a cow, your opinion needs medicated.

    John Hitchcock (1b87a1)

  34. John Hancock,

    Do not make the same mistake the Pro-Choice people did. Do not confuse opinion for fact. They mistook their opinion (nothing with so few brain cells has a mind) for fact. What we provably know about the relationship between the brain and the mind could be inscribed on the head of a pin. With a cold chisel.

    C. S. P. Schofield (ab2cdc)

  35. When your opinion gets in the way of fact, I trash your opinion. Because your opinion in this regard is diseased.

    John Hitchcock (1b87a1)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4090 secs.