Democrats Protect Baby Harvesters, Block Measure To Defund Planned Parenthood
[guest post by Dana]
In a vote of 53-46, Senate Democrats blocked a bill to defund Planned Parenthood:
Republicans fell short of the 60 votes needed to move forward with the legislation, which was fast-tracked to the floor after the release of undercover videos that show Planned Parenthood officials discussing fetal tissue from abortions.
Only two Democrats, Sens. Joe Donnelly (Ind.) and Joe Manchin (W.Va.), voted for the legislation, while two Republicans, Sen. Mark Kirk (Ill.) and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), voted against it.
McConnell voted no to preserve the option of bringing up the bill again. Kirk, who is facing a tough reelection race in 2016, had signaled he was likely to break with his party on the vote, citing the preventive health services that Planned Parenthood provides.
Sen. Lindsay Graham, who has railed against the videos, skipped the vote so he could campaign instead. However, he threw a bone to voters and reassured them that when he is elected, he would immediately defund the organization.
Interestingly, as with Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, Democrats who voted against the defunding measure made sure they did not watch the videos:
“I have not seen them,” Senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire told me after the vote.
“I’m sorry, what’s your name?” asked Senator Brian Schatz of Hawaii in response to a simple yes-or-no question. “Can you call my comms director?”
“I have not seen them, no,” Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania told me last week.
As New York senator Chuck Schumer stepped into a senators-only elevator, I asked him the same yes-or-no question. “Shut the door,” Schumer told an aide.
One Democrat did watch the videos, but chose to further the myth that defunding Planned Parenthood would keep millions of women from the nation’s largest health care provider instead of saving intact babies from having their organs harvested:
Only one Democratic senator, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, told me that she had seen any of the videos. McCaskill agreed that the videos were disturbing, but she added that “that’s not the point. The point is to prevent abortions by making sure that women can get birth control.”
–Dana
Good morning.
Dana (86e864) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:42 amMcCaskill agreed that the videos were disturbing, but she added that “that’s not the point. The point is to prevent abortions by making sure that women can get birth control
Just how debased and decadent does a society have to become before such people express at least a bit of embarrassment about what they’ve wrought? Considering the ongoing, never-ending debacles throughout the world that have been incubated by the left, quite a bit.
What really irritates me the most is that liberals like McCaskill can ultimately take advantage of the saving grace of voting with their feet and the moving van. So when a situation does become too extreme and unpleasant for them, they can get the hell out of a socio-economic mess nutured in part by their liberal mindset and voting practices.
Then again, if McCaskill is surrounded by a culture where, for example, her daughter is encouraged to be the proverbial hardened, uncaring “slut,” instead of abandoning ship, McCaskill may proclaim “I’m sticking around because the solution is to spend more money on public education!!!”
Mark (f32097) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:32 amLosing federal funding would make abortions more expensive, so fewer women would get them. Instead, supply and demand tells us they would either seek out contraceptives or have the babies. That could put Planned Parenthood out of business.
DRJ (1dff03) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:50 ammore expensive abortions could lead to some exciting new abortion innovations as well
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:06 amBetween last week and this week, McConnell has poured more gasoline, further fueling the fire and anger of Republicans toward the establishment GOP. And they can’t figure out why Trump kee
Dana (d2cc8d) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:11 amEh… And they can’t figure out why Trump keeps surging in the polls.
Dana (d2cc8d) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:13 ammow you add the det cord:
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/250162-fifth-planned-parenthood-video-to-be-released
narciso (ee1f88) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:34 amAbortions eliminate undesirables and are justified on eugenics grounds.
bob sykes (be5b42) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:40 amAs I have pointed out, ad nauseum, Section 1, Paragraph 3 of the bill ensures that funding for women’s health remains constant; it is just redirected to low- or no-cost clinics that are not also the largest abortion providers in America. (Those clinics also provide more comprehensive health services – e.g., mammograms – and are located in a broader range of areas than PP clinics. The double benefit is that women won’t have to travel as far to get health care and won’t have to take two unpaid days off work to get benefits.)
Why on earth the GOP sold this as “defund Planned Parenthood” and not “Give the money to better clinics” is beyond me.
bridget (606c39) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:43 amthe proper metaphor would be invading north africa after Pearl Harbor:
http://twitchy.com/2015/08/03/senator-brick-tamland-sen-angus-kings-analogy-to-planned-parenthood-defunding-bill-makes-zero-sense/
narciso (ee1f88) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:51 amI have a feeling that there are a few more videos coming, each one more terrible than the last.
I strongly suspect but do not know that the anchor for all of these will be tissue supply company’s execs talking about kickback to Planned Parenthood. Something like, PP charges only “packaging and transport” costs to the tissue supply company. That company separates and preps the tissues, sells them at a significant mark-up. Then the tissue company makes large donations back to Planned Parenthood or some other entity that funnels the money back to PP.
Xmas (35fdcf) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:53 amExcept, of course, that Obysmalcare requires everyone to have health insurance, and requires that all “acceptable” health insurance plans cover contraception, with no patient co-payments. Simply put, Senatrix McCaskill‘s point has already been met, and covered.
Is there even one county in the entire United States — perhaps Ni’ihau? — in which contraceptives cannot be purchased?
The clear-seeing Dana (f6a568) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:54 amthe red squaw freakout,
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/08/crackpot-jackpot-crazy-elizabeth-warren-drops-fox-news-baby-organ-harvesting-gop-debate-conspiracy-on-senate-floor/
narciso (ee1f88) — 8/4/2015 @ 9:19 amAny vote for any politician – democrat/socialist or RINO – who cannot see the evil of Planned Parenthood means the voter supports the murder of these innocents. I hope Governor Abbot will follow Gov Jindal’s example and cancel state medicare/medicaid contracts with the butchers of Planned Parenthood.
There is no morality behind the dems continued support of PP. They are merely protecting the political kickbacks PP gives to the tune of $15 million plus to democrat campaign coffers.
GOP Sen from IL, Kirk, is too cowardly to place principle over continuing at the federal trough for himself. Not sure I am buying McConnell’s excuse that he switched his vote to be able to bring it up again. Seems a dodge, given that he stopped Lee’s attempt to amend the highway bill to defund the ghouls of PP, which would have passed with a simple majority and not required the 60 vote passage that the separate bill passed.
So let’s look at the cowardly GOP establishment – allowed the SOB Reid to do away with the 60 vote cloture rule to cram activist leftist judges down our throats, then when the GOP gets the majority back, promptly re-establishes the 60 vote cloture rule thus hamstringing attempts at getting any conservative legislation passed.
McConnell and the GOP pseudo-elites seem bound and determined to go the way of the Whigs.
Pete (ceb4bf) — 8/4/2015 @ 11:18 amThe fifth video is out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egGUEvY7CEg
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 12:08 pmMark at comment #2 said “Just how debased and decadent does a society have to become before such people express at least a bit of embarrassment about what they’ve wrought? Considering the ongoing, never-ending debacles throughout the world that have been incubated by the left, quite a bit. ”
The answer comes from a catchy tune from several years back (“The Boys of Summer”, I think): “Don’t look back, you can never look back”.
That’s the Left in its most-absolute simplicity. All “Move Forward”, all the time. Don’t think, don’t reflect, don’t reason. No regrets. Don’t ever, ever, EVER stop to notice what you’ve ruined.
Forward. *Only* forward. Blindly forward. … and trust that SOMETHING you do during your frenzied destruction of the foundations of Western Civ will turn out to have been “the right thing to do at the time”.
Never look back. Never see what you’ve done, so you NEVER have judge yourself or your beliefs.
We’ve got a nation of tantrum-ing two-year-olds. Apparently all the adults have gone to Mars.
Dearie Me, Dearie (5f2042) — 8/4/2015 @ 12:09 pmAfter watching the video, it’s clear that PP engages in
highly illegal practices.
People have wondered why, if as PP insists it is simply being reimbursed for what the law allows in terms of preservation , storage, and transfer of the baby body parts, they’d
need to haggle.
This video makes it clear why they are haggling. When they tailor their procedures to suit the needs of their vulture tissue customers (again, it is illegal to do that) the abortion becomes more complicated and time consuming. But PP can’t charge anyone more for cost of doing the abortion
itself as that would be a red flag. It would show they are doing something differently and thus violating the law.
So the buyers pay PP for altering their procedures. That’s how they hide it.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 12:19 pmDr. Nucatola at the overarching national organization figures in this video as well. She appears to be the conductor of this orchestra, while she pretends not to know what the individual musicians at the affiliates are up to.
Meanwhile at the end they discuss consent forms which are standardized, but Nucatola is encouraging them to get away from such forms. So it appears that they may have now tailored their consent forms to inform women that they are altering their procedures to collect fetal tissue but that hasn’t always been the case.
Which is another violation of the law.
This video is from April of this year. So up until recently PP was modifying their procedures to suit the buyers, putting the interests of the patient secondary to that purpose, without informing the patients.
I was a bit distracted though, as when they were discussing this the guy with the body cam was sorting through a tray full of arms, legs, lungs, intestines, eyeballs, etc, like you’d go through the scraps of a Thanksgiving turkey.
So, yeah, this is pretty graphic.
I’ll have to rewatch it to verify my initial impressions.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 12:44 pmwhat we need to ask is why PP didn’t start doing this kind of tissue collection for research way back when Congress first authorized it
they really dropped the ball
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 12:50 pmhttp://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/08/5th-planned-parenthood-video-discusses-intact-fetal-cadavers.php
I’ve long concluded Dr. Gosnell was not an outlier.
Other doctors busted for potential violations of laws regulating abortions have had refrigerators and freezers full of intact and dismembered babies. PP has refrigerators and freezers full of dismembered babies (but if the price is right they’ll keep whole ones). And one of the reasons why is that their own “providers” have their own little Mengele-esque projects going on. So they need specimens.
I have no doubt that eventually we’ll get to the infanticide.
The post-birth abortion.
Because this PP goes through the shopping list and people (I use the term loosely) are requesting “specimens” from 16 to 22 weeks. That’s edging into the lower end of viability. And by viability I mean the ability to survive long term, not just a few minutes or hours.
And keep in mind, guessing gestational age down to the week is just that; a guess. So some of the 22 week old infants would be 23 to 24 weeks along and viable. And to get their grubby hands on salable tissue PP doesn’t use chemical feticides. So when, as we learned in an earlier video, a woman delivers before they can perform the “procedure” at least some of those infants would have been alive. Some which would have died regardless and others which could well have survived with medical intervention. But all of them would have at least
received aid and comfort had they been born in a hospital instead of a baby chop-shop.
Given the volumes PP deals with, that is a statistical certainty. Some of these babies that were delivered before PP got around to aborting them had to have been alive.
No wonder PP fights so strenuously, like a cornered rat, against treating an infant born alive during a botched abortion as if it were a human being. Which is of course exactly what it is.
Ghouls.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 1:08 pmIts a peculiar institution, as was extant a 150 years ago.
narciso (ee1f88) — 8/4/2015 @ 1:11 pmThey really dropped the ball when it came to following the law or acting as if they had souls, Mr. feets.
You do realize that when they are talking about “getting creative” they are talking about violating they law, right?
That they are telling the actors undercover as buyers about how they go about breaking the law for others, and that they are willing to do it for them, right?
They admit to breaking laws.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 1:11 pmPete wrote:
Go ahead and buy it: the party leader on the losing side does this frequently, for parliamentary procedure reasons. Harry Reid used to do it all the time.
The parliamentarian Dana (f6a568) — 8/4/2015 @ 1:12 pmi’m not sure i agree Mr. 57
about the lawbreaking
we’ll see but so far everything we’ve learned seems more or less fitting with what you’d expect fetal tissue collection to look like
how would it look different “legally” than it looks the way they’re doing it now?
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 1:17 pmPete’s a doctor Dana he went to med school and stuff
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 1:18 pmIts as honest and trustworthy an outfit as protogen.
narciso (ee1f88) — 8/4/2015 @ 1:20 pmmcconnell and his gestapo are ensuring a trump romp, or a mass republican exodus.
mg (31009b) — 8/4/2015 @ 1:24 pmQuoting: Only one Democratic senator, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, told me that she had seen any of the videos. McCaskill agreed that the videos were disturbing, but she added that “that’s not the point. The point is to prevent abortions by making sure that women can get birth control.”
====
Just want to point out: The absolutely CHEAPEST form of birth control is ALWAYS available, and absolutely FREE. It’s the word “No.”
Just so we’re clear, Ms McCaskill
A_Nonny_Mouse (4fe729) — 8/4/2015 @ 1:27 pma new life awaits you in the off-world colonies
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 1:30 pmThe Democrats simply changed the Senate rules when they didn’t like Republican filibusters on judicial nominees, and used a simple majority vote to do it. It’s time for Mitch McConnell to grow a pair of balls and do the same thing to the Democrats, for all legislation.
The Republican leadership might argue that, oh no, they might lose the majority in the 2016 elections and need the filibuster, but Senator Reid proved that, if he’s mad enough about filibusters, he’ll change the rules anyway. And while control of the Senate really could change in the 2016 elections, we are about as guaranteed as we can be that the Republicans will hold the majority in the House until after the reapportionment following the 2020 census.
If Senator McConnell would do this, the Republicans would be in a much stronger position vis a vis the President in the appropriations bills; they wouldn’t have to compromise with the Senate Democrats before bills were ever sent to the President.
The parliamentarian Dana (f6a568) — 8/4/2015 @ 1:52 pmWhere do I sign up, Mr. Feets?
Words like “Abomination of Desolation” keep swirling about in my head… it seems to me that –sometime real soon– “elsewhere” might be a better place to dwell than the Late, Great, USA.
A_Nonny_Mouse (5a3d4a) — 8/4/2015 @ 1:55 pmYeah, Dana, McConnell and grow a pair – if that ever happens it will be a sign of the apocalypse.
Steve Malynn (6b1ce5) — 8/4/2015 @ 1:56 pmSteve57, While I find it hard to always agree with a Squid (just ask my brother), you are again spot on. #20 +++
Steve Malynn (6b1ce5) — 8/4/2015 @ 1:59 pmThat is a misrepresentation of the truth. Reid never did away with the filibuster on legislation, so McConnell didn’t reestablish it. Nor, as far as I know, did he reestablish the filibuster on judicial nominees; there was a lot of talk about it at the end of 2014, but I never saw that anything came of it.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 8/4/2015 @ 2:05 pmMr Milhouse wrote:
Senator McConnell restored “regular order” in the Senate, but you’d never notice any restoration of the filibuster on judicial nominees, because the Republicans would have no need to filibuster; they could simply not bring up the nominations for a vote, the way Tom Daschle did as Majority Leader in 2001-2002.
The historian Dana (f6a568) — 8/4/2015 @ 2:30 pmProtogen is an evil corporation in the expanses thatrecovers an alien protovirus and almost created a global catastrophe.
narciso (b0adf2) — 8/4/2015 @ 2:46 pmprotogen did not follow the policies and procedures manual
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 3:02 pm42 USC 289g-1 Mr feets. If any of this were legal they wouldn’t be talking about “creative” ways to violate the criminal code so they don’t get caught.
Steve57 (55cd1d) — 8/4/2015 @ 3:10 pmwhat country do you live in exactly
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 3:11 pmWe are all thinking the same about you feets. But universe not country.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 8/4/2015 @ 3:36 pmLittle Known CDC Fact #278:
Any chair that Claire McCaskill occupies for more than 157 seconds must be immediately scrubbed down, decontaminated and irradiated by highly-trained personnel wearing protective Haz Mat gear.
Colonel Haiku (8dd5e1) — 8/4/2015 @ 3:39 pmI don’t know who you are talking to Mr. feets but I live in a country where it is against federal law to alter the time, place, location, etc., and most importantly to this discussion the method of abortion in order to harvest fetal tissue. Yet that is what they are talking about doing. It is also illegal to profit from these sales. Yet PP is haggling over prices AGAIN without reference to costs which should be a matter of record. What makes this video different is that they don talk about one increased cost. The added expense of illegally modifying the procedure to satisfy the buyer over the interests of the woman having the abortion. They can’t charge the woman, insurance, or medicaid for that as they are subordinating the woman’s interests to PP’s bottom line. They can’t charge the buyer for the increased cost of the abortion as that would advertise the flagrant illegality of the scheme. So the have to agree ona price that covers not just costs but makes all this worth the risk PP will be running.
What planet do you live on, feets?
Steve57 (55cd1d) — 8/4/2015 @ 3:41 pmthere’s altering procedures and then there’s altering procedures in a material way
and nobody’s shown where that’s ever happened Mr. 57
And nobody’s shown anyone’s profited off nothing either besides it was the creepy weirdos from the “Center for Medical Progress” what were the ones trying to set things up with all the profitings
this was a sting operation duh
not journalism
you have to take it with a grain of salt
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 3:47 pmI use that example to show how monstrous I see Stem express.
narciso (ee1f88) — 8/4/2015 @ 3:51 pmAnd, because of the doomed filibuster that McConnell chooses over country, no one outside the beltway will know that they did a damn thing about it. Because basically they didn’t.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 8/4/2015 @ 3:58 pmtune in next week to hear Meghan’s coward daddy, who’s spent the last two years of his dotage trying to undo the sequester so he can slop his pentagon piggy friends, say “I have an obligation to the taxpayers of Arizona”
lol
same bat time same bat channel
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 4:21 pmSlightly off topic- there was some court ruling saying it was OK to demand that a pro-life group must give up its list of donors. Any lawyer folk that know more than me care to comment or post a different thread on it?
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 8/4/2015 @ 4:23 pmDidn’t see that in any of the usual places, 2nd.
narciso (ee1f88) — 8/4/2015 @ 4:47 pmGot it feets. You’re the monkey with his hands over his ears, hearing no evil. The rest of us know better as we had the volume on and our ears unblocked.
Steve57 (55cd1d) — 8/4/2015 @ 4:50 pmit’s not evil Mr. 57
the videos show that these planned parenthood people are trying to figure out what role they have in letting women donate their aborted baby to research so scientists can learn stuff and make a better whirl
the Center for Medical Progress weirdos distorted all the conversations so we don’t even know yet what’s actually going on, but it seems like they talk to people – even ghoulish people like the CMP weirdos – then they go back to their board and talk to lawyers and decide how to move forward
there’s no proof yet at all that PP wanted to do business with a depraved and ghoulish outfit like the Center for Medical Progress
none of the people in the videos even get to make the final decisions they have to talk to their board and their lawyers and the surgeons – and they say that right there in the sting video if you watch the long versions
this is much ado about nothing
it’s the silly season!
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 5:01 pmNone so blind…
Gazzer (f205c8) — 8/4/2015 @ 5:03 pmas people what lost their vision in tragic fireworks accidents but there’s hope that stem cell research will point the way to a cure someday
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 5:05 pmhappyfeet is a creepy weirdo
Gerald A (949d7d) — 8/4/2015 @ 5:11 pmThe Intact Baby Cadavers®
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 8/4/2015 @ 5:16 pmam not Mr. A
I’m just not one of those people what get all excited cause of some fanatical lifeydoodles did a few sting videos
NTTAWWT
it’s just not who i am
i’m a wait and find out from a for reals investigation what the 411 here is
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 5:16 pm… as those who think blinders allow laser-like focus.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 8/4/2015 @ 5:20 pmhope that stem cell research will point the way to a cure someday
I’m hoping for a Nexus-6 Replicant at a reasonable price. She can look like Darryl Hannah, Joanna Cassidy or M. Sean Young — whatever’s on sale.
nk (dbc370) — 8/4/2015 @ 5:24 pmboy oh boy a Nexus-6!
poor Mr. Governor Walker’s sure gonna wish he hadn’t maxed out all them credit cards huh
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 5:27 pmMore like the alive vikander template.
narciso (ee1f88) — 8/4/2015 @ 5:38 pmSandra123456 > batcat • 11 minutes ago
Perhaps there is a streak of racist in our pro abortion contributors.
PP’s founder, Margaret Sanger would be so proud. “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” From: 10-Eye-Opening Quotes From Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 8/4/2015 @ 5:47 pmhttp://www.lifenews.com/2013/0…
Happyfeet – like with SSM, you are on over the top defender of this depravity, and have the stones to call the people that brought it to light the ghouls. It’s like I don’t even know you.
JD (3898b3) — 8/4/2015 @ 5:50 pmWhat kind of insane bizarro world do these hard hearted and hate filled leftists live in that the people who are pro-life are radicals and the people who are pro death are somehow the good guys? Do these people ever listen to themselves and how blindly foolish they sound?
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 8/4/2015 @ 5:56 pmMr. JD it’s not fair to convict anybody based on sting videos
the CMP ghouly ghouls have definitely established that there needs to be a for reals investigation
ok then so let’s have an ionvestigation
but people are running off all half-cocked in a weird ecstasy of self-righteousness like how they did on poor Hester Prynne
people should calm down and take a breath of the fleeting fragrant air of summer
because Mr. JD
the question is not whether or not PP is bad evil flying monkeys what want poop on Dorothy
the question is whether or not we’re going to allow fetal tissues to be used in research
and that my friend is a very very very serious question with tremendous implications
and it’s not a question you let fanatical lilarosers with hidden camera adjudicate
we have to have a for reals discussion involving many Peggy Noonan columns
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:00 pm*investigation* i mean
want *to* poop on Dorothy
it’s past my bedtime but i have to wait up for a call
🙁
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:01 pmThere are so many passages that speak of persecution because of one’s faith, frankly we are the low ebb of that trend.
narciso (ee1f88) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:03 pmhidden camera*s* i mean
plural
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:03 pmhoagie, in between wincing from the attentions of an insatiable Saddam Hussein, Sanger is squinting approvingly thru her periscope from the depths of Hell.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:05 pmi love it how it’s always me that gets in trouble even though i ALWAYS tell the truth and i never ever ever run around with hidden cameras going hey you wanna sell me some baby bits
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:08 pmAnytime someone says something along the lines of “the real question is” they are pissing on your leg and swearing to you it is raining.
JD (3898b3) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:14 pmNo, you defend the ghouls and condemn the messengers. You’ve lost your soul.
ropelight (8ac012) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:16 pmSanger was a eugenicist. She would approve of the abortions — she would not approve of the stem cell research. She would not have wanted “defective” people to survive by artificial means, and certainly not at public expense. That’s what she wanted to prevent in the first place.
nk (dbc370) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:17 pmThat is what Debbie Wasserman Liar says when she is flummoxed by a simple question.
JD (3898b3) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:17 pmAnytime someone says something along the lines of “the real question is” they are pissing on your leg and swearing to you it is raining.
i would never do that ever
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:22 pmDana #23
Understood, however the fact that McConnell blocked Lee’s amendment to defund PP from attachment to the highway bill, which would not have required 60 votes for passage, makes his position regarding defunding PP seem to be in favor of PP. The GOP has 56 votes. Kirk and Collins seem likely to oppose defunding, but that still leaves 54, more than enough to pass the Senate. When Obama vetoes the bill, it would give a GOP (that had any testicular fortitude) a clear campaign issue going into 2016. The campaign ad writes itself:
“The democrats voted to shut down the government in order to keep your tax dollars paying for PP to kill babies to harvest their parts. Is this what America stands for?”
It is not a principled stand to arrange votes so you LOOK like you hold a particular position, when you are acting in a manner that opposes your publical proclaimed stand.
Pete (6d94b7) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:23 pmBasically a whole host of senators voted to uphold the subsidies without reviewing theirbevidence, Senator shaheen notably among them. I don’t know I don’t think Sanger would have had qualms about the elect benefiting from this exercisr
narciso (ee1f88) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:24 pmThis kind of crap wouldn’t be happening if Senators were appointed by their respective State Legislatures, as the Founders intended. However, we’d be dealing with other kinds of crap, just not this kind that involves peddling baby parts (to pay for bonuses for the top executives?).
ropelight (8ac012) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:30 pm“Don’t piss in my soup and tell me you’re cooling it.”
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:31 pmYes, you are, Happyfeet. That is exactly what you are doing. When you attempt to re-frame this as a fetal tissue research issue instead of the reality, that PP is doing this without consent, changing procedures to maximize harvesting of human organs from non-human clumps of cells, and negotiating pricing so she can get her Lambo, that is exactly what you are doing.
JD (3898b3) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:35 pmAnd he proud of himself for stringing it out, like a troll.
ropelight (8ac012) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:38 pmthis was not undercover journalism this was a sting operation
sting operations are not America Mr. JD
they’re not for people like us
happyfeet (831175) — 8/4/2015 @ 6:51 pmExcept, of course, that Obysmalcare requires everyone to have health insurance, and requires that all “acceptable” health insurance plans cover contraception, with no patient co-payments. Simply put, Senatrix McCaskill‘s point has already been met, and covered.
Not for employees of Hobby Lobby.
Steve, sounds like you might want to play the video with your monitor turned off so you can focus on the audio component.
Two general observations
Y’all seem to forget that for most of these Democrats, life begins only after a successful delivery. You think of those fetuses as murdered humans. Hillary thinks of them as merely unwanted clumps of tissue…and why shouldn’t PP put those clumps to good use. (That is the apparent view of Hillary and Mr. Feets, not mine.)
And I am a bit creeped out by using a bureaucratic sounding word (feticide) to describe digoxin. There is a generally used word quite suitable for what you mean: poison.
kishnevi (91d5c6) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:05 pmUm…
I don’t think so.
But hey, carry on.
HF has done this before. Remember when he kept defending Shirley Sherrod? Or voting for Mitt Romney? Or…well, lots and lots of stuff. Shuck and jive when caught.
Like I said: fundamentally not serious. But don’t worry. He’ll tell you what real Christians believe. Real Americans.
Whatevs.
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:09 pmMore to the point, nk, JD…. Did you see McWhorter’s article here?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/27/antiracism-our-flawed-new-religion.html
It describes how “antiracism” is something like a religion these days.
The same thing is true of abortion to the Left. I don’t get it.
And these are the same people who threw a fit that Mitt Romney put a dog crate on the top of his car.
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:12 pmJD and Steve, I do think the informed consent issue may be less than you think. If a woman wants an abortion, the particular method of baby killing is probably irrelevant..or rather, probably her major concern is her own comfort, not that of the baby. And probably a significant portion of the clientele wouldn’t really understand the technicalities.
kishnevi (93670d) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:13 pmThe law according to happyfascist.
The law according to the law:
http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=fetal&f=treesort&fq=true&num=23&edition=prelim&granuleId=USC-prelim-title42-section289g-1
42 USC 289g-1 (2) (A)
Happy will pretend laws don’t exist when its something he’s enthusiastic about. The 1st Amendment in the case of crapping on Christians. Or killing and parting out babies.
No alteration of procedures, period. No words like “materially” qualify that. If its done solely for the purposes of of obtaining tissue then any deviation, no matter how slight, is illegal.
Of course, not using a feticide like digoxin when doing a second trimester abortion isn’t a slight deviation. It’s a major deviation, as Dr. Nucatola made very clear in at least one, perhaps two, prior videos. For two reasons.
A) If the baby is dead, there’s no possible way to run afoul of the partial birth abortion ban.
B) The feticide softens the kid’s body up, making it easier to tear apart with forceps.
Why don’t they use a feticide like digoxin? Solely for the purposes of obtaining tissue. If they poison the kid to death, that ruins the cells in the tissues they want to put on the market. So the kid has to be torn apart alive.
That’s a crime on soooo many levels. But it’s a crime on this level. It violates 42 USC 289g-1.
So happyfascist has to lie on behalf of his friends and invent some loophole about “materially” altering the procedure. A loophole that doesn’t exist. And even if it did you couldn’t fit this mega tanker full of criminality through it.
Look, feets, give it up. We have your number. We’re on to your act. You don’t give a rat’s @$$ how many crimes PP commits. You love abortion. If they asked you to help bury some bodies to get rid of the evidence, you’d help them.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:14 pmAnd you’d be wrong. The vast majority of women who get abortions, especially in the 2nd trimester want to know the baby is dead before it’s aborted.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:16 pmI think, Steven57, this takes us to Patterico’s concerns about the meaning of language in the law.
We have a culture developing where we do not follow laws unless we feel like it.
It’s swift journey, I am afraid, to some very dark places indeed.
But is isn’t about the law. It’s about how people feel about themselves, I fear.
You would think that these terrible videos would work the opposite way. But the High Priests of the DNC (maybe we should call them the High Priest of the D&C) have their Golden Idol.
Sad.
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:18 pmI can’t find the statistics I had come across previously, kishnevi, that would back up my statement. The percentage of women who wanted the fetus dead prior to abortion was approaching if not surpassing the 70% mark.
So let’s just say it is entirely speculative whether or not the woman would be concerned about the pain and suffering of the fetus. But it’s irrelevant.
The fact is, the law requires the abortionists get the woman’s consent before they can harvest the fetal tissue. If they’re not, then the abortionists are breaking the law.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:28 pmMolochs minions, is the way I have subbed them, ‘they though they were wise…
narciso (ee1f88) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:33 pmSimon, Mittens had a dog on his roof while TFG had a dog on the roof of his mouth. And who was the bad guy?
Gazzer (f205c8) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:37 pmSteve, I gladly take your word on that. I was going on logic. To me, wanting your baby to be killed but wanting it to be done in a nice way is a bit of cognitive dissonance. But thinking it over, I should not be surprised. After all, we live in a country where we seek to render capital punishment pain free.
kishnevi (294553) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:39 pm“If I had a dog, it would look just like Malaysian barbeque.”
– Barack H. Obama
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:44 pmThe fact is, the law requires the abortionists get the woman’s consent before they can harvest the fetal tissue. If they’re not, then the abortionists are breaking the law.
I am confuzzled there.
kishnevi (91d5c6) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:45 pmI thought the consent forms allowed fetal tissue donation, and the problem was that PP changed techniques to maximize the amount of tissue obtained, even though the consent forms specified other techniques?
I totally agree. The fact that this society is so full of s***, and people believe their own bulls***, is such a prominent feature of 21st century American society it’s now attracting scholarly notice.
I hope this link doesn’t put me in moderation.
http://www.amazon.com/On-Bullshit-Harry-G-Frankfurt/dp/1419348876
About the author:
The Amazon editorial review of his book On Bulls***:
So it isn’t quite the point to say that happyfascist is lying when he claims there is some loophole that says as long as PP doesn’t “materially” alter an abortion they can make changes to abortions to harvest organs.
When the law says the opposite.
Or that he’s lying when he accuses Christian bakers or florists of hating gays when they balk at making wedding cakes or floral arrangements because their faith tells them holy matrimony is between a man and a woman.
Even though they’d happily make any other cake for gays or, in the case of the florist in Washington state, had been happily selling floral arrangements to her gay friend for decades. Floral arrangements that had nothing to do with weddings.
People’s bulls*** says something about themeselves. “I am better than you.” Since he likes abortion and aboritionists, they can’t do any wrong.
Since he doesn’t like Xtofascists, they can do no right.
Why bother with facts when your own bulls*** is always on your side.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:48 pmI thought so! The link to the book at Amazon put my comment in moderation. You’ll see why. Here’s my comment without the link:
I totally agree. The fact that this society is so full of bulls***, and people believe their own bulls***, is such a prominent feature of 21st century American society it’s now attracting scholarly notice.
I hope this link doesn’t put me in moderation.
(link deleted; search on the title of the book)
About the author:
The Amazon editorial review of his book On Bulls***:
So it isn’t quite the point to say that happyfascist is lying when he claims there is some loophole that says as long as PP doesn’t “materially” alter an abortion they can make changes to abortions to harvest organs.
When the law says the opposite.
Or that he’s lying when he accuses Christian bakers or florists of hating gays when they balk at making wedding cakes or floral arrangements because their faith tells them holy matrimony is between a man and a woman.
Even though they’d happily make any other cake for gays or, in the case of the florist in Washington state, had been happily selling floral arrangements to her gay friend for decades. Floral arrangements that had nothing to do with weddings.
People’s bulls*** says something about themeselves. “I am better than you.” Since he likes abortion and aboritionists, they can’t do any wrong.
Since he doesn’t like Xtofascists, they can do no right.
Why bother with facts when your own bulls*** is always on your side.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:55 pmWell said Steve57.
Gazzer (f205c8) — 8/4/2015 @ 7:58 pmWhy can’t there be more than one problem? Why can’t there be a multitude of problems.
As I read it, the abortionist must first have the woman’s consent to an abortion before even raising the issue of harvesting fetal tissue.
So I see the potential for multiple violations here. First I gather they tell the woman what they’re going to do when they perform the abortion. Then they’re supposed to get her consent to let them do that.
Then they’re supposed to ask for permission to “donate” the tissue, and get her consent for that.
As I read it, it’s supposed to be a multi-step process.
And it appears that PP hasn’t been following the process the law mandates.
Altering the procedure to get the maximum number of body parts and then charging for them are a separate violation, IMHO.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:08 pmFor reference purposes, the consent form is among the documents listed here (will download as a PDF)…
kishnevi (91d5c6) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:11 pmhttp://www.centerformedicalprogress.org/human-capital/document-vault/
Sure it would. The senate would work exactly the same way it does now, and as an added bonus state governance would be completely screwed up because legislators would be elected not for their abilities as legislators but for their loyalty as senatorial electors, just like the party functionaries we now elect to the presidential electoral college.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:19 pmThank you, kishnevi, that clears up a lot.
It appears then that PP at least is following the law so far as as obtaining consent for the abortion first, then separately requesting and obtaining consent to “donate” the tissue. It’s then they go off the rails legally and ethically. Once they have the superficial paper trail established.
Which is of course no donation, but a sale. And, oh by the way, they’re telling the woman one thing about not altering the procedure, and then the buyer another about tailoring the procedure to their business requirements.
Since they have a long history with some of their satisfied baby-parts buyers, we don’t need to guess which one they’re lying to.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:21 pmYes for employees of Hobby Lobby, since the owners have no religious objection to providing contraceptives, drawing the line only at (what they consider) abortifacients. And those employers who do object to providing contraceptives, the employees still get free ones through the “free” add-on policy that the insurers have to provide if the employer informs the government of its objections. The only unresolved legal issue is whether this information must come in a specific government-mandated form, or just in a letter in the employer’s words.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:26 pmCMP glosses the donation consent form as not revealing PP’s financial interest in tissue donation.
But it does include a line saying that the abortion technique will not be changed to maximize harvested tissue.
The question then becomes how much wiggle room the original implied consent gived for the change in method. If this is a typical consent form I think it does. It says the pregnancy is extracted, but gives no details on the extraction process, and makes that shot of digoxin optional.
kishnevi (294553) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:26 pmhttps://payments.ppkm.org/ksinformedconsent.asp
Which by the way highlights HHS’s true agenda. If it were really just concerned about making sure the employees have the coverage in question, it could simply have rewritten the form in a way that would square with the Little Sisters’ consciences. But no, it insists that they must file this form, precisely because it contains a declaration that they can’t in good conscience make. It wants to make them submit to its ideology.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:33 pmkishnevi, the original consent form may have some wiggle room as (I hate to equate an abortion with a medical procedure as it is not) any doctor may have to modify a procedure based upon developments.
The point is, why does the doctor change the procedure?
It is illegal to change the procedure in any way solely to harvest tissue. Yet that is exactly what Melissa Farrel, the “doctor” from PPGC in Houston, says they will do. On video.
http://hotair.com/archives/2015/08/04/reminder-letter-to-la-hhs-from-planned-parenthood-gulf-coast-denied-allegations-corroborated-in-video/
They promise to deviate from their standard procedure solely to satisfy a contract with a tissue buyer. No amount of wiggle room will allow for that.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:42 pmThey promise to deviate from their standard procedure solely to satisfy a contract with a tissue buyer. No amount of wiggle room will allow for that.
But that is because of the second consent form, for donation, not the first form for the abortion.
And the real issue is that they are selling fetal tissue in the first place and possibly killing live births to do so, and whether they are playing fast and loose with consent forms is at most secondary to that.
kishnevi (93670d) — 8/4/2015 @ 9:08 pmThat’s a fascinating statistic, if true. I wonder what it means. What does these women mean by telling the abortionist to “make sure it’s dead before you kill it”? In other words, “kill it before you kill it”.
And why do they want it dead by poison instead of by having its brain sucked out? Is it because they think poison would be less painful? And if so, is it in fact less painful? We know that some poisons seem to kill adults painlessly (though we can’t know for sure), while some are very painful; what sort is digoxin? For that matter, how sensitive to pain are fœtuses at that stage? We know that even newborns are a lot less sensitive to pain than they will be when their nervous system has had time to develop; it stands to reason that babies with 4-5 months left to cook have even less developed nervous systems, and might be a lot less sensitive to pain, perhaps even not sensitive at all.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 8/4/2015 @ 9:25 pmkishnevi, altering their procedure for the purpose of obtaining fetal tissue is illegal. They could alter their standard procedure for the sake of the woman’s health. But not to fulfill a contract with a fetal tissue buyer. That is illegal and entirely separate from any hanky panky r.e. consent forms.
But that’s exactly what they’re promising to do on the video. They’re promising to do exactly what the law forbids.
The consent forms are covered in 42 USC 289g-1(2)(A)(i).
No consent form in the world gives PP cover to violate 42 USC 289g-1(2)(A)(ii) or 42 USC 289g-1(2)(A)(iii).
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 9:25 pmIn an adult digoxin is a heart medicine.
http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/guide/treatment-digoxin
It will give a tiny fetus a fatal heart attack, though.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 9:28 pmIt’s more like “kill it before you take it out” instead of “kill it by taking it out” (which is what the organ harvesting procedure entails; carefully crushing and dismembering the baby while it’s alive to preserve the profitable parts) or “take it out then kill it” (the Gosnell technique).
As I mentioned earlier, the advantage for the abortionist of killing the fetus, then removing the cadaver, is that they can’t be accused of performing a partial birth abortion. If the fetus was dead hours before they removed it then no harm, no foul, from an abortion practitioner’s perspective.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 9:33 pmMilhouse,
I suspect that women feel better about killing their babies of they have them drugged so they don’t feel as much pain. Which is absurd considering if they really believed it was just a mass of tissue they wouldn’t even think about this. It would just be vacuuming out “stuff”, but they know better.
Dana (86e864) — 8/4/2015 @ 9:43 pmBut is that really what they think happens? Are they told that digoxin is an anæsthetic that will put their baby gently to sleep, when in fact it gives the baby a heart attack that for all we know may be very painful? And do we know whether it’s painful, and if so how does it compare to the pain of being extracted whole? To what extent are babies of that age even capable of feeling pain, from eitehr procedure?
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 8/4/2015 @ 10:04 pmPP’s founder, Margaret Sanger would be so proud. “We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.” From: 10-Eye-Opening Quotes From Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger
The surprising bigotry/racism of some major figureheads of the Democrat Party over the past 100 years — including Woodrow Wilson (who segregated post offices), Franklin Roosevelt (who said Jews were to blame for the rise of Nazism), Harry Truman (whose comments and writings in private would make even a Klanner blush) is something I was not truly aware of until I started posting here and threads like this one either made me look further into what made liberals tick or, as in your case, contained text that pointed the way to just how deranged the left-leaning mindset can truly be.
BTW, the life history of Margaret Sanger reads like that of a stereotypical New York leftist — which is what she was — carrying on a routine full of libertine, liberal people and activities. Simply put, her blatant, ruthless form of racism (topped off with a healthy dollop of genocide) wasn’t even a bit mixed with, say, southern rightwing “redneck” culture.
Mark (8c444d) — 8/4/2015 @ 10:37 pmMilhouse @111, yes, from at least 20 weeks the fetus can feel pain. This isn’t a pro-life fabrication. The work on this has been done by researchers developing techniques of fetal surgery.
In fact, some doctors recommend using fetal anesthesia as early as 18 weeks.
http://www.cincinnatichildrens.org/health/a/fetal-anesthesia/
http://www.doctorsonfetalpain.com/fetal-pain-the-evidence/5-documentation/#.VcGj2xnbrIU
The science is, as they say, settled. Fetuses being ripped apart by the butchers at PP in the 2nd trimester do feel pain.
How painful the heart attack digoxin delivers, I don’t know. But I doubt the abortionist would say anything to the woman except soothing noises about how it won’t feel a thing.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/4/2015 @ 10:57 pmWarming the water in which to drown the kittens. Those assisting anesthesiologists belong on a gurney with a needle in their arms carrying a slightly different “anesthesia”.
nk (dbc370) — 8/4/2015 @ 11:06 pmno picklehead you’re wrong on this point
here’s how the PP hooch in vid 5 explains it in the CMP transcript
when you watch the whole videos and read the transcripts of all these different sting things
the PP hoochies actually seem pretty aware of the legal and ethical terrain they’re dealing with
the idea that there’s going to be any criminal charges filed seems pretty far-fetched
once we have a for reals investigation what isn’t an amateur sting operation run by fanatical lifeydoodles to lay out the facts everyone’s gonna go okey dokey ok good good done and done
and then we can all focus on more important things
i look forward to this day
happyfeet (831175) — 8/5/2015 @ 4:41 amSausage making. If the result won’t turn them off, maybe the process will. Even Himmler threw up at seeing a pile of dead Jews that he had ordered machine-gunned.
nk (dbc370) — 8/5/2015 @ 5:22 amA confession of sorts that I am not sure what to do with.
The existence of these videos do not bother me that much, because they do not surprise me at all,
the content is nothing new, only the documentation of it in this manner.
In fact, some “bioethicists” will argue that the use of fetal organs is a good thing and helps mitigate any qualms a person has about abortion,
just as they argue that embryonic stem cell research should not bother anyone since the embryo/fetus/unborn child was “being killed anyway”.
I think Santorum’s repartee with Boxer over partial birth abortion a few years ago should have been convincing as anything. Is there really any difference between killing the child outside of the womb and killing the child with one foot still in the birth canal? How about two feet? If there isn’t really any difference today, what about yesterday, and the day before that?
I guess for whatever reason some things may awaken a seared conscience, or rouse an uncomfortable one to being irate,
like nk points out,
but for those who just want the end result, the ability to deny the consequences of one’s actions, they aren’t interested in facts and reason.
At times I think it is helpful to think of evil as “moral schizophrenia”, delusions not of reality in the physical realm, but delusions of reality in the moral realm.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 8/5/2015 @ 6:01 amAt some point an embryo, fetus or baby develops his/her own DNA, correct? I’m no physician but wouldn’t individual DNA mean an individual person? So even if there is a valid argument that before that DNA develops the embryo is just tissue not a person, the same cannot be said thereafter.
There is also one more ugly little observation I have. If 5,000 abortions a year were being carried out for medical reasons that would be one thing, but when 1,000,000 are being done that is just killing for birth control. We have conditioned our women, those responsible through history for birthing and building our societies, to slaughter their own young for convenience rather than take a damn pill, use an IUD or keep their damn legs closed. Perhaps the human race has outlived its usefulness.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 8/5/2015 @ 6:35 amThat point is conception. As soon as the sperm enters the egg, they combine and form the zygote. At The zygote is still a single cell but as genetically complete as any human being ever will be.
There is no point that a zygote/blastocyst/embryo/fetus is ever just tissue. From conception it is genetically distinct from both the mother and father.
It’s telling that even the ghouls at PP call the baby parts in their trays the “products of conception.” Because it used to be uncontroversial to say that life begins at conception. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists used to agree with that until the 1960s when birth control pills became feasible. Then they realized that admitting life begins at conception would be problematic, as some birth control pills do prevent implantation.
So for political reasons they changed their definition of when pregnancy begins from conception ot implantation.
But PP can’t avoid the fact that a genetically distinct human being begins at conception. They acknowledge this because it is the “product of conception” that is “donating” its heart, lungs, brain, liver, legs, eyeballs, etc. Not the mother, not the father. They get to keep all theirs.
Just the genetically distinct human being that is dissected alive, which they refuse to acknowledge as a human being as they traffic in its parts that are only valuable because they are human.
Steve57 (5a07a9) — 8/5/2015 @ 7:16 amThat’s the problem, Steve57. Leftists are notoriously slippery when it comes to words and their meaning. They keep changing stuff to hide their intentions. And it works. They convolute so many definitions I sometimes need a menu to keep track. So if “from conception it is genetically distinct from both the mother and father” then from the moment of conception we are human and to kill us is murder. Thanks. I got lost years ago during the “Life Begins At” wars. As usual, leftists kept moving the goal posts and changing the meanings of words some of us just gave up. I assume that was their goal but these new videos have reawakened our need to address this filthy Mengele/Sanger business.
Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 8/5/2015 @ 7:33 am114. happyfeet (831175) — 8/5/2015 @ 4:41 am
the PP hoochies actually seem pretty aware of the legal and ethical terrain they’re dealing with
That itself is incriminating.
They repeatedly claim that they are not making any money on it. They make asure to say ir, even though they don’t have any idea they are being taped.
– Hamlet, usually misquoted as “Methinks the lady doth protest too much” – and I thought it was from Macbeth.
Sammy Finkelman (8bf66e) — 8/5/2015 @ 7:57 amThey must have paid lawyers a lot of money to tell them exactly what to say. But that would only be logical to do if they making a lot of money on it and engaging in creative accounting.
Sammy Finkelman (8bf66e) — 8/5/2015 @ 7:57 ambridget (606c39) — 8/4/2015 @ 8:43 am
Why on earth the GOP sold this as “defund Planned Parenthood” and not “Give the money to better clinics” is beyond me.
To motivate people to donate money? And, by the way, to motivate people to donate money, you’ve got to LOSE
Sammy Finkelman (8bf66e) — 8/5/2015 @ 8:03 amNo, it starts with its own DNA and very little else. The DNA is the design for the person that will develop over time. That’s what sex is for: normal cells contain all of a person’s DNA, but sperm and ova only contain half, so when they merge into one cell it contains one complete set that is different from both parents’.
It’s the plan for an individual person, but at that point’s just one cell, and it’s difficult to call it an organism, much less a live one, much less a living person.
Steve, what is the difference between a newly fertilized ovum and a cell taken from a recently deceased corpse, or from a swab, or a discarded hair or fingernail? Why is one a person and the other not? Why is it wrong to destroy one but not the other? I can’t accept that a single cell, or a blob of undifferentiated cells, is a living person. It’s something that, if kept in the right environment and given the right supplies, will become a person, but right now it’s just a plan.
Even after the cells have begun to differentiate, at about two weeks if I understand correctly, how is an embryo different from a corpse? Why is it OK to cut a corpse up for spare parts, but not an embryo? Sure, one is in a process of developing while the other is in a process of decaying, but at any one moment they are the same, aren’t they? Saying whether this entity is developing or decaying is like saying whether the globe is warming or cooling; it’s an extrapolation of a trend, based mostly on our experience of what usually happens.
So, what is the point at which we say it’s OK to cut a person up for spare parts? The generally accepted answer today is when there is no detectable brain activity, and no prospect that brain activity will restart. That’s when a person turns into a corpse. I draw a similar line for when an embryo turns into a person — when the brain first becomes active. Which requires that there be a brain in the first place. If there’s no brain then there can’t be any activity in it, or any prospect of such activity. So I say personhood comes at some point between when the brain forms and when we can detect activity in it. From what I’ve read I have the impression that the first detectable brain activity is at about 6 weeks, which is remarkably close to the 40 days that Jews and Christians traditionally took as the onset of personhood.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 8/5/2015 @ 1:12 pmFrom what I’ve read I have the impression that the first detectable brain activity is at about 6 weeks, which is remarkably close to the 40 days that Jews and Christians traditionally took as the onset of personhood.
Milhouse (a04cc3) — 8/5/2015 @ 1:12 pm
correct – it’s about six weeks. (Though of course the first part of your answer implies it’s human from the beginning — just btw, I don’t agree that personhood comes at onset of brain activity, but from the beginning.)
Sausage making. If the result won’t turn them off, maybe the process will. Even Himmler threw up at seeing a pile of dead Jews that he had ordered machine-gunned.
nk (dbc370) — 8/5/2015 @ 5:22 am
that comment reminded me of the man at 1:25 in this scene. Your first thought is he’s been driven insane by what he’s perpetrating. Then he laughs, as if you misinterpreted his screams. But then you know your first impression is correct, even though he walks and talks like a sane person in the rest of the movie.
It’s sickening to me that we have such graphic evidence that so many people are aware of yet refuse to even watch in case it might make them change their mind about the slaughter of unborn children. (am not counting the victims of the MSM virtual blackout) We have a lot of insane people in this country. Or maybe it’s just evil.
no one of consequence (325a59) — 8/5/2015 @ 2:24 pmI think it is moral insanity, and it is evil.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 8/6/2015 @ 5:47 am