Selling murdered baby parts for profit and other connected things

Why it is a good reason to provide birth control to anyone who requires it . Originally Posted by i'va biggen

:L ighten:

Cadavers that are given freely for research. In the old days grave robbers would steal corpses from where ever they found them to SELL to research centers. What they did was against the law and considered deviant and immoral. No, the proper analogy would be a guardian volunteering their relatives for medical research while they were still alive. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

no one is stealing fetal tissue, u are simply lying about what is goin on. If ur against a womans right to an abortion, fine. But lying about whats goin on is pretty cunty.

Like it or not abortion has been ruled constitutional by the SCOTUS, maybe ur side should try to pass a constitutional amendment. U gotta push ur Republican candidates to speak out on this issue clearly.

no one is stealing fetal tissue, u are simply lying about what is goin on. If ur against a womans right to an abortion, fine. But lying about whats goin on is pretty cunty.

Like it or not abortion has been ruled constitutional by the SCOTUS, maybe ur side should try to pass a constitutional amendment. U gotta push ur Republican candidates to speak out on this issue clearly. Originally Posted by southtown4488

Yes....pass a constitutional amendment you poor defenders of so called murdered babies.

lustylad told us that 85% of the country is against this....should have no problem getting this done. In fact what many of you claim the videos have shown is against the law...yet no one has been charged even here in red state Texas. Why is that? Maybe the constitutional scholar LexusLover can tell us why no one has been charged with a crime?

Could it be that no crime has been committed? Could it be that this is just a political football that both sides try and exploit?

Well asked, WTF. I wonder how the irrational hypocrites will answer, and how it will make any fucking sense.

Yes....pass a constitutional amendment you poor defenders of so called murdered babies.

lustylad told us that 85% of the country is against this....should have no problem getting this done. In fact what many of you claim the videos have shown is against the law...yet no one has been charged even here in red state Texas. Why is that? Maybe the constitutional scholar LexusLover can tell us why no one has been charged with a crime?

Could it be that no crime has been committed? Could it be that this is just a political football that both sides try and exploit? Originally Posted by WTF

exactly, they know damn well they do not have the public support to ban abortions. . . cause theyre just wrong. they would rather have poor women go back to abortions with wire hangers while rich women can fly to Canada to get theirs.. Fuckin scumbags.

lustylad told us that 85% of the country is against this....should have no problem getting this done. Originally Posted by WTF

exactly, they know damn well they do not have the public support to ban abortions. Originally Posted by southtown4488

You two are a pair of lying shitheads. When you're losing the argument, all you do is lie about the other side. You know damn well I never claimed 85% of the country want to ban ALL abortions. I said a very high percentage (actually 84%) support a ban on LATE-TERM abortions. I even posted a link so you would get it right. If you can't read or comprehend my links and you don't know how to post without lying - then STFU.

Funny how your messiah who is so quick to weigh in on every topic is silent about the PP videos:


The Political ‘Science’ of Planned Parenthood

Obama, not noticeably shy about weighing in on controversial subjects, is steering clear of this one.

By WILLIAM MCGURN
July 27, 2015 7:20 p.m. ET

‘When the science is inconvenient, when the facts don’t match up with the ideology, they are cast aside.”

So charged Sen. Barack Obama in a Planned Parenthood speech in 2007. The line was a dig at George W. Bush for his approach to abortion and reproductive rights. Eighteen months later, the new president repeated his snipe in his inaugural vow to “restore science to its rightful place.”

Today President Obama is the one finding the science inconvenient. In the past, the president hasn’t hesitated to weigh in on other controversies while they were in progress—from an altercation between a black Harvard professor and a local white cop to more recent comments about the rape allegations against Bill Cosby. Suddenly, however, he has nothing to say about two secretly recorded videos that include one Planned Parenthood doctor talking about a “less crunchy” abortion technique that would leave fetal organs intact for harvesting.

Then again, for all Mr. Obama’s talk about restoring science to its proper place, his promises made clear that, if elected, he would not only be the first African-American president but have a good claim to be deemed as the first Planned Parenthood POTUS as well. The price was jettisoning the soothing Bill Clinton language—“safe, legal and rare”—for a more militant approach in which no abortion is beyond the pale.

In the process, President Obama has had to overlook the contradictory approach to science among his own allies. Take sonograms, or ultrasounds. In the first video, Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Deborah Nucatola describes using ultrasound to help those doing the abortion “know where they are putting their forceps.”

On “Fox News Sunday” last weekend, Carly Fiorina underscored the contradiction. Planned Parenthood lobbies against laws requiring women to have an “opportunity to look at an ultrasound before she makes an incredibly difficult choice to end the unborn life within her,” said the Republican hopeful. “And yet they are using that same technology to harvest body parts.”

At other times when the facts don’t match up with his ideology, Mr. Obama retreats to silence. In 2013, when Kermit Gosnell’s abortion horrors were before the American people, Mr. Obama’s then-spokesman Jay Carney told reporters the president couldn’t comment on an ongoing trial.

The reporter pressed for an answer, noting that the president’s position had special relevance for this case. As an Illinois state senator, he pointed out, Mr. Obama had opposed a bill that would have provided medical care “to babies who would be born after a botched abortion” like those that Dr. Gosnell was accused of killing.

Two weeks after that White House news conference, Mr. Obama made history as the first sitting president to address Planned Parenthood. Two weeks later, Dr. Gosnell was convicted of murdering three babies. Still, the president has said nothing.

Now we have two Planned Parenthood docs on film talking about the value of human organs in a fetus whose humanity they would deny. In private the euphemisms disappear. “When they talk to the public or to women about to get an abortion they talk about ‘tissue,’ ” says Charmaine Yoest of Americans United for Life. "But when they talk to someone buying body parts, it’s about intact hearts, livers and lungs.”

Ditto for another inconvenience: Shouldn’t a decent respect for the facts include some presidential acknowledgment that Planned Parenthood is America’s largest abortion provider?

Finally, there is the president’s apparent willingness to put Planned Parenthood’s funding—slightly less than half of its $1.3 billion in annual revenue comes from taxpayers—above all else. Back in 2011, President Obama informed Republicans he would rather see the entire federal government shut down than cut a nickel from Planned Parenthood.

Which brings us back to today. When asked last week at the daily press briefing if the president has any concerns about the videos, White House spokesman Josh Earnest referred the reporter to Planned Parenthood, which he described as having “the highest ethical standards.” The only concern Mr. Earnest allowed was over the editing of the videos.

It’s an odd indifference for a president who likes to scold his critics for subordinating science to ideology. At a time when many in the pro-choice camp are saying how repelled they are to see Planned Parenthood reps joke about selling embryonic livers and buying Lamborghinis, the president remains unperturbed.

This is the abortion culture of Planned Parenthood. In that same 2007 speech where Mr. Obama first played the science card, he also endorsed its absolutist stance: “On this fundamental issue, I will not yield, and Planned Parenthood will not yield.”

That’s not science. That’s pure political allegiance. And a grubby one at that.

.

Late term abortions? that's a simplistic way of asking the question. . . theres a lot of variables that come into play into every individual case. . . if the womans life is in danger with delivery would 85% of Americans say she still cant get an abortion? Of course not.

Republicunts fail time and time again to acknowledge shades of gray in the real world.

Late term abortions? that's a simplistic way of asking the question. . . theres a lot of variables that come into play into every individual case. . . if the womans life is in danger with delivery would 85% of Americans say she still cant get an abortion? Of course not.

Republicunts fail time and time again to acknowledge shades of gray in the real world. Originally Posted by southtown4488

They don't deal well in nuance. And which states have the highest teen birth rates? Supposedly the most religious. Bullshit. A great example of how they talk out of both sides of their mouth. They want the govt out of everything except when it comes to choices about your own body.

Late term abortions? that's a simplistic way of asking the question. . . theres a lot of variables that come into play into every individual case. . . if the womans life is in danger with delivery would 85% of Americans say she still cant get an abortion? Of course not.

Republicunts fail time and time again to acknowledge shades of gray in the real world. Originally Posted by southtown4488

No suckclown, YOU are the one who simplified and distorted and lyingly expanded the original poll I cited to claim it was about ALL abortions. I have no problem with "shades of grey in the real world" - YOU do!

Do you support a ban on late-term abortions with an exception if the woman's life is in danger? Yes or no, suckclown?
.

No suckclown, YOU are the one who simplified and distorted and lyingly expanded the original poll I cited to claim it was about ALL abortions. I have no problem with "shades of grey in the real world" - YOU do!

Do you support a ban on late-term abortions with an exception if the woman's life is in danger? Yes or no, suckclown?
. Originally Posted by lustylad

theres already a ban on abortions past the point of viability, that's the SC roe v wade ruling. If the womens life is in danger, that's a decision between her and her doctor. . . not you or me or the pope or some damn politician.

Do you support a ban on late-term abortions with an exception if the woman's life is in danger? Yes or no, suckclown?
. Originally Posted by lustylad

I realize you were not addressing me but how about you answer a question.

Do you support at will abortions before 21 weeks?

Next....why do you suppose nobody has been charged with what you silly fuckers are describing as a crime? Any thoughts on that?

You two are a pair of lying shitheads. When you're losing the argument, all you do is lie about the other side. You know damn well I never claimed 85% of the country want to ban ALL abortions. I said a very high percentage (actually 84%) support a ban on LATE-TERM abortions. I even posted a link so you would get it right. If you can't read or comprehend my links and you don't know how to post without lying - then STFU.


. Originally Posted by lustylad

I'm not losing this argument. ..abortions are still happening. While i would prefer that women have access to free birth control to stop unwanted preggos...you can't always reason with you small government bible thumpers!

Now if what you describe is true....how come no one has been charged with this crime much less convicted?

Hahahaha.... just because you flunked accounting and are too stupid to grasp the simple concept that "money is fungible" doesn't mean the rest of us can't make the connection.... it's a two-step accounting shuffle to sidestep the Hyde Amendment.... What it all comes down to is you want to reach into the wallet of every American taxpayer and force them to help pay for abortion on demand. Go ahead and make all the bad "fucking choices" you want to, sewer rat. Just don't make me complicit in paying for them.

Your whole life is a litany of bad fucking choices.

. Originally Posted by lustylad

Ahh yes, the old 'money is fungible' argument. Sadly, it's bullshit. Abortions at PP are not free, dumbass. They are paid for. So no, taxpayers are NOT funding abortions at PP. Wrong again, Lusty Tard.





http://www.rawstory.com/2015/08/here...od-propaganda/

no one is stealing fetal tissue, u are simply lying about what is goin on. If ur against a womans right to an abortion, fine. But lying about whats goin on is pretty cunty.

Like it or not abortion has been ruled constitutional by the SCOTUS, maybe ur side should try to pass a constitutional amendment. U gotta push ur Republican candidates to speak out on this issue clearly. Originally Posted by southtown4488

Stepped on your dick just now. The Hyde Amendment is the law of the land and PP broke it. Where is your outrage for their lawless acts?

They don't deal well in nuance. And which states have the highest teen birth rates? Supposedly the most religious. Bullshit. A great example of how they talk out of both sides of their mouth. They want the govt out of everything except when it comes to choices about your own body. Originally Posted by WombRaider

Going for the lie again? We are concerned about "out of wed lock" birth rate. A lot of teenage girls get married and start families in this country. Why don't you give us the source of numbers.