Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Sanctity of Life (Abortion Megathread)
Options
-
15-07-2015 7:49pmWell the devil has shown his colours. The abortion industries dirty side.
Glad to see its not making the rounds in pro-life circles but also in secular Media.
Sickening.
http://www.lifenews.com/2015/07/14/planned-parenthood-defends-selling-body-parts-of-aborted-babies-calls-body-parts-tissue/
Its worth noting that mothers are being paid for the "donated" body parts of their children.8
Comments
-
This is sickening but not surprising. Weren't Irish children's organs harvested - without consent - about 10 years ago? On another chat-room I used frequent some years ago, an American anti-circumcision 'activist' gave referenced details of how the foreskin is sold to companies for use in their "anti-ageing" creams. I wonder if women know/care that their youthful complexion is down to rubbing the remains of a baby boys foreskin on their face?
It's good that these cases are brought to light, but it is not an isolated scenario. The article could do with describing where exactly the organs go and what "valuable" research is being conducted. If selling aborted children's organs is illegal, did they inform authorities? I don't recall the article stating if they did or not.0 -
I suppose what is worse is women who are desperate for money are aborting to get paid.0
-
It is sickening for a doctor, who took the Hippocratic Oath to describe where to crush an unborn child to death in order to save specific organs.0
-
Seems like it's some misrepresentation by a pro-life group.In the video, Planned Parenthood Senior Director Deborah Nucatola says some pretty graphic and seemingly disturbing things about tissue donation:
A lot of people want intact hearts these days, because they’re looking for specific nodes... Some people want lower extremities too, which, that’s simple. I mean, that’s easy.
She then goes on to talk about what sounds like Planned Parenthood’s monetary reward:
Every provider has had patients who want to donate their tissue, and they absolutely want to accommodate them. They just want to do it in a way that is not perceived as, “This clinic is selling tissue, this clinic is making money off of this.”
Except that, as Planned Parenthood told The Hill, its affiliates “can legally receive reimbursement from a tissue donation procedure for the ‘additional expenses related tissue donation, which can vary based on individual circumstance,’ but it does not go to staff members or providers.” These “additional expenses” might be the $10-30 it costs to transport the tissue being donated, which Planned Parenthood notes is “standard across the medical field.” And no, the patient donating the tissue doesn’t receive any financial reimbursement either.
In reality, the donation of fetal tissue is no different than any other situation in which a patient might donate tissue to scientific research. No money changes hands, and the donation could help pave the way to any number of medical breakthroughs.
Of course, that doesn’t stop the people behind the video’s release from going to great lengths to try to paint Planned Parenthood as operating outside the law. According to The Center for Medical Progress’s accompanying release, “The video is the first by The Center for Medical Progress in its ‘Human Capital’ series, a nearly 3-year-long investigative journalism study of Planned Parenthood’s illegal trafficking of aborted fetal parts.”
While Planned Parenthood notes that the group is “a long time anti-abortion activist that has used deceptive and unethical video editing, and that has created a fake medical website as well as a fake human tissue website that purports to provide services to stem cell researchers.” (For what it’s worth, the Center for Medical Progress did finally release the full video, though its claims remain just as flawed.)
The video itself opens with a short clip of former Planned Parenthood president Gloria Feldt that is edited to give the appearance of condemning the recorded conversation that follows. But the 20/20 segment on which Feldt appears is actually an investigation into abuses made by private sector “tissue and organ procurement companies.” And Feldt even went on to later affirm that “Planned Parenthood supports research using fetal tissue in accordance with legal and ethical guidelines and are deeply concerned about the attempt by some to profit from the humanitarian contributions of courageous women.”
In other words, this is a case of words being taken grossly out of context. Planned Parenthood is doing nothing even remotely shady here, nor are they doing something they haven’t publicly discussed before on multiple occasions. The real question now, though, is who’s behind this whole campaign in the first place.
The video, which had supposedly been held onto for a year before being released earlier this morning, was put out by The Center for Medical Progress, which describes itself as “a group of citizen journalists dedicated to monitoring and reporting on medical ethics and advances.” Oddly enough, 10 of the the 11 total tweets made by the group’s Twitter account are from today, while the only two posts on its website seem to be about the Planned Parenthood video. And just like its Twitter account, the group’s Facebook page is only a few months old.
Source
Also, just FYI, you can't mark threads as 'Christian thread'. I presumed it was to be read as Christian only' so I've removed that tag.If you can read this, you're too close!
0 -
It is sickening for a doctor, who took the Hippocratic Oath to describe where to crush an unborn child to death in order to save specific organs.
Its like the movie the Island. I see the socialist party and people before profit pushing abortion. What we have here is people procured for profit.0 -
Advertisement
-
SW.. Bottom line they are PAYING mothers for the aborted children.. Right... You can't dress it up any other way. intentionally killing a child for its organs.0
-
-
Not according to linked article I posted.
I know you are bias for pro-choice side..
so they are lying the video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjxwVuozMnU0 -
I know you are bias for pro-choice side..
so they are lying the video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjxwVuozMnU
Based on the link I provided, yes. They claim body parts are sold. That isn't correct according to the linked article.
The body parts are donated, i.e. nobody is paid for the donation.If you can read this, you're too close!
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Not according to linked article I posted.
A reputable site, maybe(?). I like how their first story, when I visited their home page is "Michael Douglas says he has a big ****; I wanna see the receipts". It shows that they are to be taken seriously!
If I remember correctly, this is not the first obscure website you've cited to bolster your 'argument'.
(the asterisks stand for a slang word for male genitalia, starting with d and ending with k, but certain words attract warnings, so I dare not post it)0 -
Seems like it's some misrepresentation by a pro-life group.
Seems like it's some misrepresentation by a pro-life group.
Quote:
In the video, Planned Parenthood Senior Director Deborah Nucatola says some pretty graphic and seemingly disturbing things about tissue donation:
Quote:
A lot of people want intact hearts these days, because they’re looking for specific nodes... Some people want lower extremities too, which, that’s simple. I mean, that’s easy.
She then goes on to talk about what sounds like Planned Parenthood’s monetary reward:
Quote:
Every provider has had patients who want to donate their tissue, and they absolutely want to accommodate them. They just want to do it in a way that is not perceived as, “This clinic is selling tissue, this clinic is making money off of this.”
Except that, as Planned Parenthood told The Hill, its affiliates “can legally receive reimbursement from a tissue donation procedure for the ‘additional expenses related tissue donation, which can vary based on individual circumstance,’ but it does not go to staff members or providers.” These “additional expenses” might be the $10-30 it costs to transport the tissue being donated, which Planned Parenthood notes is “standard across the medical field.” And no, the patient donating the tissue doesn’t receive any financial reimbursement either.
In reality, the donation of fetal tissue is no different than any other situation in which a patient might donate tissue to scientific research. No money changes hands, and the donation could help pave the way to any number of medical breakthroughs.
Of course, that doesn’t stop the people behind the video’s release from going to great lengths to try to paint Planned Parenthood as operating outside the law. According to The Center for Medical Progress’s accompanying release, “The video is the first by The Center for Medical Progress in its ‘Human Capital’ series, a nearly 3-year-long investigative journalism study of Planned Parenthood’s illegal trafficking of aborted fetal parts.”
While Planned Parenthood notes that the group is “a long time anti-abortion activist that has used deceptive and unethical video editing, and that has created a fake medical website as well as a fake human tissue website that purports to provide services to stem cell researchers.” (For what it’s worth, the Center for Medical Progress did finally release the full video, though its claims remain just as flawed.)
The video itself opens with a short clip of former Planned Parenthood president Gloria Feldt that is edited to give the appearance of condemning the recorded conversation that follows. But the 20/20 segment on which Feldt appears is actually an investigation into abuses made by private sector “tissue and organ procurement companies.” And Feldt even went on to later affirm that “Planned Parenthood supports research using fetal tissue in accordance with legal and ethical guidelines and are deeply concerned about the attempt by some to profit from the humanitarian contributions of courageous women.”
In other words, this is a case of words being taken grossly out of context. Planned Parenthood is doing nothing even remotely shady here, nor are they doing something they haven’t publicly discussed before on multiple occasions. The real question now, though, is who’s behind this whole campaign in the first place.
The video, which had supposedly been held onto for a year before being released earlier this morning, was put out by The Center for Medical Progress, which describes itself as “a group of citizen journalists dedicated to monitoring and reporting on medical ethics and advances.” Oddly enough, 10 of the the 11 total tweets made by the group’s Twitter account are from today, while the only two posts on its website seem to be about the Planned Parenthood video. And just like its Twitter account, the group’s Facebook page is only a few months old..
American law says otherwise
42 U.S. Code § 289g–2 - Prohibitions regarding human fetal tissue
(a) Purchase of tissue
It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly acquire, receive, or otherwise transfer any human fetal tissue for valuable consideration if the transfer affects interstate commerce.
(b) Solicitation or acceptance of tissue as directed donation for use in transplantation
It shall be unlawful for any person to solicit or knowingly acquire, receive, or accept a donation of human fetal tissue for the purpose of transplantation of such tissue into another person if the donation affects interstate commerce, the tissue will be or is obtained pursuant to an induced abortion, and—
(1) the donation will be or is made pursuant to a promise to the donating individual that the donated tissue will be transplanted into a recipient specified by such individual;
(2) the donated tissue will be transplanted into a relative of the donating individual; or
(3) the person who solicits or knowingly acquires, receives, or accepts the donation has provided valuable consideration for the costs associated with such abortion.
(c) Solicitation or acceptance of tissue from fetuses gestated for research purposes
It shall be unlawful for any person or entity involved or engaged in interstate commerce to—
(1) solicit or knowingly acquire, receive, or accept a donation of human fetal tissue knowing that a human pregnancy was deliberately initiated to provide such tissue; or
(2) knowingly acquire, receive, or accept tissue or cells obtained from a human embryo or fetus that was gestated in the uterus of a nonhuman animal.
(d) Criminal penalties for violations
(1) In general
Any person who violates subsection (a), (b), or (c) shall be fined in accordance with title 18, subject to paragraph (2), or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.
(2) Penalties applicable to persons receiving consideration
With respect to the imposition of a fine under paragraph (1), if the person involved violates subsection (a) or (b)(3), a fine shall be imposed in an amount not less than twice the amount of the valuable consideration received.
(e) Definitions
For purposes of this section:
(1) The term “human fetal tissue” has the meaning given such term in section 289g–1 (g) of this title.
(2) The term “interstate commerce” has the meaning given such term in section 321 (b) of title 21.
(3) The term “valuable consideration” does not include reasonable payments associated with the transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control, or storage of human fetal tissue.0 -
lazybones32 wrote: »A reputable site, maybe(?). I like how their first story, when I visited their home page is "Michael Douglas says he has a big ****; I wanna see the receipts". It shows that they are to be taken seriously!
If I remember correctly, this is not the first obscure website you've cited to bolster your 'argument'.
(the asterisks stand for a slang word for male genitalia, starting with d and ending with k, but certain words attract warnings, so I dare not post it)If you can read this, you're too close!
0 -
Did you watch the video?
I saw mention of the $30-$100 value but that was explained as probably transport/storage costs in my link.American law says otherwise
42 U.S. Code § 289g–2 - Prohibitions regarding human fetal tissue
(a) Purchase of tissue
It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly acquire, receive, or otherwise transfer any human fetal tissue for valuable consideration if the transfer affects interstate commerce.
(b) Solicitation or acceptance of tissue as directed donation for use in transplantation
It shall be unlawful for any person to solicit or knowingly acquire, receive, or accept a donation of human fetal tissue for the purpose of transplantation of such tissue into another person if the donation affects interstate commerce, the tissue will be or is obtained pursuant to an induced abortion, and—
(1) the donation will be or is made pursuant to a promise to the donating individual that the donated tissue will be transplanted into a recipient specified by such individual;
(2) the donated tissue will be transplanted into a relative of the donating individual; or
(3) the person who solicits or knowingly acquires, receives, or accepts the donation has provided valuable consideration for the costs associated with such abortion.
(c) Solicitation or acceptance of tissue from fetuses gestated for research purposes
It shall be unlawful for any person or entity involved or engaged in interstate commerce to—
(1) solicit or knowingly acquire, receive, or accept a donation of human fetal tissue knowing that a human pregnancy was deliberately initiated to provide such tissue; or
(2) knowingly acquire, receive, or accept tissue or cells obtained from a human embryo or fetus that was gestated in the uterus of a nonhuman animal.
(d) Criminal penalties for violations
(1) In general
Any person who violates subsection (a), (b), or (c) shall be fined in accordance with title 18, subject to paragraph (2), or imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.
(2) Penalties applicable to persons receiving consideration
With respect to the imposition of a fine under paragraph (1), if the person involved violates subsection (a) or (b)(3), a fine shall be imposed in an amount not less than twice the amount of the valuable consideration received.
(e) Definitions
For purposes of this section:
(1) The term “human fetal tissue” has the meaning given such term in section 289g–1 (g) of this title.
(2) The term “interstate commerce” has the meaning given such term in section 321 (b) of title 21.
(3) The term “valuable consideration” does not include reasonable payments associated with the transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control, or storage of human fetal tissue.
Where did I say it was lawful to sell human tissue?
From the link I provided:In reality, the donation of fetal tissue is no different than any other situation in which a patient might donate tissue to scientific research. No money changes hands, and the donation could help pave the way to any number of medical breakthroughs.
3 Deceptive Edits In The Video Claiming Planned Parenthood Is "Selling Aborted Baby Parts"
Snopes page on the video. Verdict is currently 'Undetermined' to the veracity of the claims of the video
And there's susipicion that the video may have been put together by a man with a criminal record due to his editing of 'investigative' videos. (via Snopes).An individual named David Daleiden has been widely credited as the “leader” of the Center for Medical Progress. While Daleiden’s online footprint is minimal, a 2009 Claremont University article (penned by fellow conservative activist Chuck Johnson) reported:James O’Keefe is a friend of David Daleiden’s. O’Keefe and Hannah Giles have been going coast to coast documenting instances of ACORN employees willingly giving advice on how to avoid paying taxes and shielding a would be pimp (running for congress) and a prostitutent from the watchful eye of the law. They’ve brought their investigation to New York City, Washington D.C., and Baltimore.O’Keefe came to prominence in 2009 after he produced “egregiously misleading” and “severely edited” videos targeting agencies such as ACORN:Videotapes secretly recorded and severely edited by O’Keefe seemed to show ACORN employees encouraging a “pimp” (O’Keefe) and his “prostitute,” actually a Florida college student named Hannah Miles, in conversations involving prostitution by underage girls, human trafficking and cheating on taxes. Those videos created a media sensation.If you can read this, you're too close!
0 -
Planned Parenthood: claims director offered to sell fetal body parts are ‘false’ (The Guardian)Planned Parenthood’s US headquarters has denied that an eight-minute undercover video shows the abortion provider’s medical director offering to sell fetal body parts to a tissue procurement company, as a pro-life group has claimed.
“In health care, patients sometimes want to donate tissue to scientific research that can help lead to medical breakthroughs, such as treatments and cures for serious diseases. Women at Planned Parenthood who have abortions are no different,” Planned Parenthood’s vice president for communications, Eric Ferrero, said in a statement.
“There is no financial benefit for tissue donation for either the patient or for Planned Parenthood,” the statement said. “In some instances, actual costs, such as the cost to transport tissue to leading research centers, are reimbursed, which is standard across the medical field.”
[...]
Planned Parenthood called the allegation “false” and said such claims have been “put forth by opponents of abortion services for decades”.
The organization blamed the video on a “well funded group established for the purpose of damaging” the abortion provider’s reputation.
The Center for Medical Progress bills itself as a “group of citizen journalists dedicated to monitoring ... medical ethics”. The undercover video of the Planned Parenthood doctor appears to be the organization’s only publication.If you can read this, you're too close!
0 -
Yes. And I see no definitive evidence of selling of body parts.
I saw mention of the $30-$100 value but that was explained as probably transport/storage costs in my link.
Where did I say it was lawful to sell human tissue?
From the link I provided:
Also, some additional links regarding this video/story.
3 Deceptive Edits In The Video Claiming Planned Parenthood Is "Selling Aborted Baby Parts"
Snopes page on the video. Verdict is currently 'Undetermined' to the veracity of the claims of the video
And there's susipicion that the video may have been put together by a man with a criminal record due to his editing of 'investigative' videos. (via Snopes).
The tape of the conversation with the doctor runs for 2 hours and 24 minutes. The 2 hour 24 minute tape has been published on social media.
Which bit of the 2 hour 24 minute tape was edited?
In respect of the American statute law, it is up to the American investigating authorities to decide if what is described by the doctor on the 2 hour 24 minute tape constitutes criminality.0 -
The tape of the conversation with the doctor runs for 2 hours and 24 minutes. The 2 hour 24 minute tape has been published on social media.
Which bit of the 2 hour 24 minute tape was edited?
In respect of the American statute law, it is up to the American investigating authorities to decide if what is described by the doctor on the 2 hour 24 minute tape constitutes criminality.
The video that was originally posted was 8 mins long . It was only after complaints due to the obvious editing that the extended video was released.
I haven't had time to watch a 2.5 hour video (or seen much analysis of it yet) so can't comment on whether that has been edited also.If you can read this, you're too close!
0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Watch the 2 hour 24 minute video and then make up your own mind whether or not it's more damning than the 8 minute video.
If you can read this, you're too close!
0 -
I presume you have watched the 2.5 hour video?
Of course, I did.you made a claim, it's not much to ask you to explain/expand on the claim, is it?
Without watching the entire 2 hour 24 minute video, you wouldn't be in a position to test the veracity of my claim regardless.
So my advice to you is, watch the entire video and when you do only then you can make up your mind as to the veracity of my claim.0 -
Gawker is obscure? it has something like 23 million visitors a month.
From Wiki - '(Gawker) promotes itself as "the source for daily Manhattan media news and gossip". It focuses on celebrities and the media industry.'
I should never have questioned the referencing of a celeb-focused website when discussing alleged organ-selling. A valid source indeed!0 -
lazybones32 wrote: »From Wiki - '(Gawker) promotes itself as "the source for daily Manhattan media news and gossip". It focuses on celebrities and the media industry.'
I should never have questioned the referencing of a celeb-focused website when discussing alleged organ-selling. A valid source indeed!
as opposed to the LifeNews.com?
From their twitter:LifeNews.com is the #1 pro-life web site battling abortion, euthanasia, & celebrating life.
people in glass houses and all that.
EDIT: I have included the Guardian as a source too.
And CNN:Though Planned Parenthood has described the Center for Medical Progress footage as a hit piece by "a well-funded group established for the purpose of damaging Planned Parenthood's mission and services," Nucatola acknowledges in the video that Planned Parenthood's national office sees the potential for controversy.
"So, we tried to do this, and at the national office we have a Litigation and Law Department that just really doesn't want us to be the middle people for this issue right now," she said. "And so we had a conversation, and we said, 'What if we go out and find everyone who is doing this and present everybody with a menu?' And at the end of the day they just decided that right now, it's just too touchy an issue for us to be an official middleman."
In another part of the video, the doctor tells the undercover actors that "behind closed doors," Planned Parenthood's affiliates are discussing how to handle the matter.
"Every provider has had patients who want to donate their tissue, and they absolutely want to accommodate them. They just want to do it in a way that is not perceived as 'This clinic is selling tissue. This clinic is making money off of this,' " she said.
The edited version of the video appears to be missing important context that's provided in the longer video. For instance, one of the actors asks Nucatola about prices for the organs.
"OK, so when you are, or the (Planned Parenthood) affiliate is determining what that monetary ... so that it doesn't raise any question of 'This is what it's about; this is the main,' what price range would you ..." the woman asks, her question trailing off.
Nucatola responds that the price would be between $30 and $100 per specimen, with consideration for what facility is used and "what's involved." It's not clear if a specimen constitutes the entire organ or only samples of it.
Nucatola doesn't specifically say that the price is for the purchase of the tissue, but the comment troubled bioethicist Art Caplan of New York University, who said after watching the edited version of the video it sounds like Planned Parenthood might be trying to make a profit.
But in the longer version of the video, Nucatola elaborates and appears to say the price is related to the cost of performing the procedure and shipping.
which does show that there is some things to be concerned about that are mentioned in the video.Another part of the video also raised concerns for Caplan. Nucatola talks about doctors performing abortions in which ultrasound is used to ascertain the best location to grab the fetus with forceps.
"We've been very good at getting heart, lung, liver because we know that, I'm not going to crush that part," she says.
Altering procedures in order to get tissue in the best condition would be a "big no-no," the bioethicist said, because the patient's health is paramount and that should be the only concern for doctors. Caplan did not comment specifically on whether the ultrasound procedure would endanger the mother, but he made it clear that any deviation from normal procedures is unacceptable.
"In abortion the primary goal is to give the safest abortion possible," Caplan said. "Your sole concern has to be the mother and her health."
Why didn't the group lead with that? Something that is much clearer based on what is said in the video rather than trying to spin something ambigious?If you can read this, you're too close!
0 -
lazybones32 wrote: »From Wiki - '(Gawker) promotes itself as "the source for daily Manhattan media news and gossip". It focuses on celebrities and the media industry.'
I should never have questioned the referencing of a celeb-focused website when discussing alleged organ-selling. A valid source indeed!
Gawker, the media of record0 -
lazybones32 wrote: »From Wiki - '(Gawker) promotes itself as "the source for daily Manhattan media news and gossip". It focuses on celebrities and the media industry.'
I should never have questioned the referencing of a celeb-focused website when discussing alleged organ-selling. A valid source indeed!
And yet no comments on using lifenews as a source. Pots and kettles.0 -
as opposed to the LifeNews.com?
people in glass houses and all that.
EDIT: I have included the Guardian as a source too.
which does show that there is some things to be concerned about that are mentioned in the video.
Why didn't the group lead with that? Something that is much clearer based on what is said in the video rather than trying to spin something ambigious?
Lifenews, source their news from other agencies and credit them. I wonder why you led your references with Gawker and then added the Guardian? (whose piece is very similar to International Business Times page last night and includes Dr. Caplan's quotes)
At least now, you are admitting that there may be some things of concern raised in the video; a slight change from your stance last night that it is just misrepresentation.
No point asking me about the methodology the group chose. I questioned if the authorities were informed first but maybe in American Society, it is better to garner Public attention first. Planned Parenthood are a very large Corporation with many influential members, advocates and benefactors.
According to the IBT last night, the Dr. Nuc...? at the centre of the case has gone "off the grid": twitter and FB pages cancelled (but her linkedin page remains open) and the President of the Corporation has already publicly defended her. Their PR machine went straight to work.0 -
Advertisement
-
lazybones32 wrote: »Lifenews, source their news from other agencies and credit them. I wonder why you led your references with Gawker and then added the Guardian? (whose piece is very similar to International Business Times page last night and includes Dr. Caplan's quotes)At least now, you are admitting that there may be some things of concern raised in the video; a slight change from your stance last night that it is just misrepresentation.No point asking me about the methodology the group chose. I questioned if the authorities were informed first but maybe in American Society, it is better to garner Public attention first. Planned Parenthood are a very large Corporation with many influential members, advocates and benefactors.
According to the IBT last night, the Dr. Nuc...? at the centre of the case has gone "off the grid": twitter and FB pages cancelled (but her linkedin page remains open) and the President of the Corporation has already publicly defended her. Their PR machine went straight to work.
Of course their PR went to work, it's a PR issue. As of yet, there are no criminal charges nor evidence of any criminal activity.If you can read this, you're too close!
0
Advertisement