Planned Parenthood exposed -- CAUTION

[Bean Bag]

I'm not sure why you keep talking around in circles, you still haven't answered my questions.

You create a straw-man argument about being against killing people for research, but that isn't what's happening here. People aren't being killed for research, tissue from foetuses already aborted are being used for research. Despite what your paranoia might suggest, there isn't a killing-to-order going on here.

Abortion is legal, and it is legal under some circumstances to use that tissue for scientific research.

So, how about answering my questions from my previous post, so we can have a reasoned debate? You want people to share and discuss their opinions, but you seem to be reluctant to answer questions about your own opinions.

To answer your question, I am happy for my organs to be donated for others to use after I die, and any remaining tissue can be used for scientific research. I like the idea of helping after I am gone.

Hold your horses.  Wait a second.  Stop the train.  We can't debate.  You have different definitions than I have.  I define a fetus as a life (or anchor baby, if you're a Hillary kinda person).

It's sorta like arguing with Himmler -- I say "hey you're killing people!"  And Himmler says "no we're not.  We're killing Jews."  So... you know, it's not gonna work, you and me.


By the way... thanks for being an organ donor.  But do you recall seeing a checkbox for "Right Now."

[Loaf]

I'm not sure why you keep talking around in circles, you still haven't answered my questions.

You create a straw-man argument about being against killing people for research, but that isn't what's happening here. People aren't being killed for research, tissue from foetuses already aborted are being used for research. Despite what your paranoia might suggest, there isn't a killing-to-order going on here.

Abortion is legal, and it is legal under some circumstances to use that tissue for scientific research.

So, how about answering my questions from my previous post, so we can have a reasoned debate? You want people to share and discuss their opinions, but you seem to be reluctant to answer questions about your own opinions.

To answer your question, I am happy for my organs to be donated for others to use after I die, and any remaining tissue can be used for scientific research. I like the idea of helping after I am gone.

Hold your horses.  Wait a second.  Stop the train.  We can't debate.  You have different definitions than I have.  I define a fetus as a life (or anchor baby, if you're a Hillary kinda person).

It's sorta like arguing with Himmler -- I say "hey you're killing people!"  And Himmler says "no we're not.  We're killing Jews."  So... you know, it's not gonna work, you and me.


By the way... thanks for being an organ donor.  But do you recall seeing a checkbox for "Right Now."

I see you've invoked Godwin's law and are backing down. Righty-ho

[Bean Bag]

Right, right, right.  We disagree on the fundamentals, seems kind of pointless, no?  I'll walk you through it again, if you like.  Just didn't want you to get dizzy again.

[Loaf]

Right, right, right.  We disagree on the fundamentals, seems kind of pointless, no?  I'll walk you through it again, if you like.  Just didn't want you to get dizzy again.

Which fundamentals?

You still haven't answered my questions

It's hard to get a straight answer out of you.

[Bean Bag]

Are you serious -- or just trying to be difficult?   A fetus is a human being.  I would have thought the rest was easy, but....

[Empire Of Love]

Let's sort out a definition of science and faith first, then we can tackle the other stuff

Loaf,

I want to continue this discussion but I'm unbelievably tied up.  I'll try to post in the next day or so.

EoL

[Loaf]

Let's sort out a definition of science and faith first, then we can tackle the other stuff

Loaf,

I want to continue this discussion but I'm unbelievably tied up.  I'll try to post in the next day or so.

EoL

That's cool, there's no rush. Thanks for letting me know.

[Loaf]

Are you serious -- or just trying to be difficult?   A fetus is a human being.  I would have thought the rest was easy, but....

I understand your position on abortion. That is not what i was asking you about.

To put it crudely, a dead body is just tissue. Dead bodies can be used for a number of useful and practical things: cadaver dissection for training doctors, organ donation, stem cells and other forms of scientific research.

You mentioned previously that you have an ethical stance against killing people for research. However, people are not killed to order for the purposes of research. Women do not decide to get pregnant and have an abortion because they initially wanted to donate a foetus. They are two separate legal issues. Women are legally allowed to choose to have an abortion. Women are also then allowed to choose whether tissue from the foetus can be used for research. Note also that the sale of foetal tissue is non-profit.

My initial question, many posts ago, what was asking you what you found so bonechilling in the conversation about the practical implications of shipping donated tissue, and with an implied undertone of whether or not you agree with using dead bodies (human or foetal) for scientific research.

An answer to that question is not easy to fill in, so if you feel up to answering the question, then go ahead. I won't get dizzy.

Just as an fyi, my own position on abortion is that it is an incredibly complex issue. If I were a pregnant woman, I do not know whether i could go ahead with an abortion, but I think that it should be legal for women to have an abortion. I do not think it is a decision to be taken lightly, or without counselling or without understanding the psychological or physical ramifications of the procedure. I think a lot of support should be provided for these women, and I think there is a grim irony that men decide the (legal) fate of women's bodies.

[Mike's Beard]

Here's a brainwave; women, if you are not in a stable relationship with a partner who wants to have a child then don't get knocked up in the first place. It's not exactly rocket science.

[alf wiedersehen]

Newsflash, men: if you're not in a stable relationship with a partner who wants a child, don't impregnate your significant other.

[Rocky Raccoon]

I think it's pretty funny to watch a bunch of men argue about abortion and Planned Parenthood with each other as if any of their opinions on the subject mattered.

[Bean Bag]

I think it's pretty funny to watch a bunch of men argue about abortion and Planned Parenthood with each other as if any of their opinions on the subject mattered.

I'm sure slave owners (white or black, male or female) thought it was funny to watch abolitionists (white or black, male or female) talk about ending slavery.

[alf wiedersehen]

I think it's pretty funny to watch a bunch of men argue about abortion and Planned Parenthood with each other as if any of their opinions on the subject mattered.

I'm thinking about starting a thread where women can decide whether men can have vasectomies or not.

[Bean Bag]

Are you serious -- or just trying to be difficult?    A fetus is a human being.  I would have thought the rest was easy, but....

I understand your position on abortion. That is not what i was asking you about.

To put it crudely, a dead body is just tissue. Dead bodies can be used for a number of useful and practical things: cadaver dissection for training doctors, organ donation, stem cells and other forms of scientific research.

You mentioned previously that you have an ethical stance against killing people for research. However, people are not killed to order for the purposes of research. Women do not decide to get pregnant and have an abortion because they initially wanted to donate a foetus. They are two separate legal issues. Women are legally allowed to choose to have an abortion. Women are also then allowed to choose whether tissue from the foetus can be used for research. Note also that the sale of foetal tissue is non-profit.

My initial question, many posts ago, what was asking you what you found so bonechilling in the conversation about the practical implications of shipping donated tissue, and with an implied undertone of whether or not you agree with using dead bodies (human or foetal) for scientific research.

An answer to that question is not easy to fill in, so if you feel up to answering the question, then go ahead. I won't get dizzy.

Just as an fyi, my own position on abortion is that it is an incredibly complex issue. If I were a pregnant woman, I do not know whether i could go ahead with an abortion, but I think that it should be legal for women to have an abortion. I do not think it is a decision to be taken lightly, or without counselling or without understanding the psychological or physical ramifications of the procedure. I think a lot of support should be provided for these women, and I think there is a grim irony that men decide the (legal) fate of women's bodies.

They're killing unborn babies Loaf.  This is not a morgue, though that term would be slightly closer than the one they're using.  But these, eh-hmm, "clinics" (how they can use that term, I don't know) are killing half of their patients -- and discussing the best methods to do so, in order to extrapolate the best gain, in this case financial.

I appreciate the discussion, but this was all covered in the syllabus. Please tell me I've answered the question to your satisfaction!  

---------

Regarding the ones that are already dead.  Remember they had to be alive before they were dead.  And I don't think they were capable of "checking the organ donor box" on their driver's license (as you were) before they were killed.  Killed, not died.  Killed.  Even though they were legally killed -- please remember to thank them for their donation when you get to the pearly gates.

Please tell me we're good on this question.

---------

Regarding your personal opinion on abortion -- that's fine.  I'm appreciate you sharing it.  But I find it silly that anyone would label it "complex" then proceed to school those who find it easy.  Either you're OK with it or not.  But if you're OK with it, just understand what you are doing.

Sorry for my condescending tone.  It's actually part of the presentation, as it emphasizes the basic logic and morality that needs to be brushed aside in order to excuse some pretty strange behavior.

[Bean Bag]

I think it's pretty funny to watch a bunch of men argue about abortion and Planned Parenthood with each other as if any of their opinions on the subject mattered.

I'm thinking about starting a thread where women can decide whether men can have vasectomies or not.

   Even better, start up a thread where people who disagree with you can do whatever they want to you.

[Mike's Beard]

Newsflash, men: if you're not in a stable relationship with a partner who wants a child, don't impregnate your significant other.

One of the ways a woman can make sure her significant other does not impregnate her is by making him wear a condom.

[Douchepool]

One of the ways a woman can make sure her significant other does not impregnate her is by making him wear a condom.

And why would they do that when government provides incentives to spawn a whole shitload of bastard children?

[alf wiedersehen]

Newsflash, men: if you're not in a stable relationship with a partner who wants a child, don't impregnate your significant other.

One of the ways a woman can make sure her significant other does not impregnate her is by making him wear a condom.

One of the ways men can make sure to not impregnate people is by wearing a condom without being forced to because there's no reason to place all the responsibility for a two-person interaction onto only one of the people involved.

[Mike's Beard]

Newsflash, men: if you're not in a stable relationship with a partner who wants a child, don't impregnate your significant other.

One of the ways a woman can make sure her significant other does not impregnate her is by making him wear a condom.

One of the ways men can make sure to not impregnate people is by wearing a condom without being forced to because there's no reason to place all the responsibility for a two-person interaction onto only one of the people involved.

Absolutely, but as it's the woman who is left holding the bag, so to speak, the buck really has to stop with them.

[filledeplage]

Are you serious -- or just trying to be difficult?    A fetus is a human being.  I would have thought the rest was easy, but....

I understand your position on abortion. That is not what i was asking you about.

To put it crudely, a dead body is just tissue. Dead bodies can be used for a number of useful and practical things: cadaver dissection for training doctors, organ donation, stem cells and other forms of scientific research.

You mentioned previously that you have an ethical stance against killing people for research. However, people are not killed to order for the purposes of research. Women do not decide to get pregnant and have an abortion because they initially wanted to donate a foetus. They are two separate legal issues. Women are legally allowed to choose to have an abortion. Women are also then allowed to choose whether tissue from the foetus can be used for research. Note also that the sale of foetal tissue is non-profit.

My initial question, many posts ago, what was asking you what you found so bonechilling in the conversation about the practical implications of shipping donated tissue, and with an implied undertone of whether or not you agree with using dead bodies (human or foetal) for scientific research.

An answer to that question is not easy to fill in, so if you feel up to answering the question, then go ahead. I won't get dizzy.

Just as an fyi, my own position on abortion is that it is an incredibly complex issue. If I were a pregnant woman, I do not know whether i could go ahead with an abortion, but I think that it should be legal for women to have an abortion. I do not think it is a decision to be taken lightly, or without counselling or without understanding the psychological or physical ramifications of the procedure. I think a lot of support should be provided for these women, and I think there is a grim irony that men decide the (legal) fate of women's bodies.

Loaf - nonprofits are notoriously non-transparent. They get tax breaks. And most purport to have a charitable or educational purpose. There are many nonprofits whose CEO's make several hundred "large" a year.  I don't consider that charity.  Or education.  

They can't "show a profit" but that doesn't mean they are free from corruption, or kickbacks. The whole "Lamborghini" scenario doesn't sound like there was "non-profit" but this has little to do with whether it is legal. Salaries and perks are often constructed into a non-profit budget to end up with a zero balance at the end of the year.  More money comes in? Bigger salary, next year. When I discovered the local United Way CEO was making $300k (back in the late 90's) I stopped donating to them.  They are often "top heavy" in salaries and "bottom light" in direct services. If you have to raise a million dollars to get a quarter of a million in charitable service, isn't something "rotten in Denmark?" (Shakespeare- Hamlet) The math doesn't work, when you get 25 cents on a dollar. If you're lucky.

The sale or "quid pro quo" for things of "value" ( not always money) for "intact body parts," is procribed. It has nothing to do with the "right to choose" which is legal.  And there is the whole area of "consent" to exploit the "proceeds" of the contents of a woman's uterus. The "sales pitch" prior to abortion procedures is that the "contents" of her uterus would be going for "medical life saving research." It was used to sooth the conscience of the woman undergoing the procedure ( a false representation.)  Not for non-consensual organ sale to a "for profit" entity.  

And, oddly, many who were pro-choice, have found their positions being changed by the "visualization technology" which has evolved since Roe v. Wade. What was "abstract" in philosophy, in the mid 1970's, is now visually, a 3D phenomenon.  

[Robbie Mac]

I think it's pretty funny to watch a bunch of men argue about abortion and Planned Parenthood with each other as if any of their opinions on the subject mattered.

I'm thinking about starting a thread where women can decide whether men can have vasectomies or not.

Yeah, that'll go over like a lead balloon...

[Douchepool]

I think it's pretty funny to watch a bunch of men argue about abortion and Planned Parenthood with each other as if any of their opinions on the subject mattered.

When their tax dollars are supporting Planned Parenthood and, by proxy, abortions? Yes, they do matter. If women and their fellow cuckolds who defend Planned Parenthood are so empowered and don't really care about the opinions of non-cuckold (read: real) men then why don't they pay for their own abortions? See, it's really easy for women and their fellow cuckolds to say that men's opinions shouldn't matter. Pay for your own abortions if that's how you feel.

Would you make that same comment about women who don't support abortion or Planned Parenthood? I'd hazard a guess and say no because that would be "sexist" on your part.

I'm thinking about starting a thread where women can decide whether men can have vasectomies or not.

You're comparing apples and oranges.

[Rocky Raccoon]

Be realistic.  If tax money didn't go towards abortions, would the taxpayers be saving money?  No, the government would just find something else to spend the money on.  So what's the difference?

[Niko]

I think it's pretty funny to watch a bunch of men argue about abortion and Planned Parenthood with each other as if any of their opinions on the subject mattered.

I'm sure slave owners (white or black, male or female) thought it was funny to watch abolitionists (white or black, male or female) talk about ending slavery.

Spot on point bro.

Jk. You're insane

[filledeplage]

I think it's pretty funny to watch a bunch of men argue about abortion and Planned Parenthood with each other as if any of their opinions on the subject mattered.

When their tax dollars are supporting Planned Parenthood and, by proxy, abortions? Yes, they do matter. If women and their fellow cuckolds who defend Planned Parenthood are so empowered and don't really care about the opinions of non-cuckold (read: real) men then why don't they pay for their own abortions? See, it's really easy for women and their fellow cuckolds to say that men's opinions shouldn't matter. Pay for your own abortions if that's how you feel.

Would you make that same comment about women who don't support abortion or Planned Parenthood? I'd hazard a guess and say no because that would be "sexist" on your part.

I'm thinking about starting a thread where women can decide whether men can have vasectomies or not.

You're comparing apples and oranges.

The waters are muddied.  The issue is that women have been given choice for reproduction. However, they have had their "choice" robbed, as Planned Parenthood have used the "proceeds" (the organs and tissue of their foeti for commercial gain, and specific research) and they consent for research but not for commercial bartering and exchanges.

Ultrasounds are reported to have been taken, but not shown to the women.  This could mean a lower threshold they have used for "consent" matters.  PP would not want to lose the financial advantage by allowing the women to see what is rightfully theirs growing in utero.  Fewer might opt to go through with the procedure.  They have been deceptive in their practices.

When you buy a car, you want the "carfax."  This is analogous to that. As it is an unfair and deceptive practice in the marketplace, as medicine is a business.

Once the philosophical and religious influences are removed from the equation, it is easy to see that wrong has been going on for financial gain, for many years, and likely makes fools of those who advocated for reproductive freedom.  They, unwittingly, made the compelling argument for those who were opposed to abortion for religious and philosophical reasons  and betrayed their biggest sponsors.  It was like a self-fulfilling prophesy.  They did it to themselves.