Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So, then, again, it is not that you oppose the use of fetal tissue or the reimbursement to Planned Parenthood for the costs of their obtaining that tissue. You object to abortion. A couple of weeks ago a mother whose young daughter died donated her organs to save the life of a little boy who was near death. I guess since that child could not legally consent you think that it was terrible for the parent to donate those organs?One set of organs are coming from unfortunate unwanted death, the other organs are coming from someone who volunteered death for another, and then said go ahed take the organs. The difference is the cause of death. If you support that so much then we should force those we give the death penalty to, to harvest their organsRight over your head, huh? Explain the difference, ethically, between using the tissue from dead fetuses and using the tissue from dead people. If is it morally and ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the relatives of a dead person either for research or for direct transplantation to liver recipients, why it is not morally or ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the mothers of an aborted fetus for research? And if it is permissible for the hospital that recovers the organ or preserves the tissue for research to be reimbursed for the cost of services done in connection with that, why it is wrong for Planned Parenthood to similarly be reimbursed for the cost it incurs in securing, storing and transporting the fetal tissue to the researcher?Who said anything about organ transplant??? Nice straw man on a totally separate issue. I'm on record saying if that's how you feel about abortion, go ahed and donate the parts. But the people here championing abortion can't answer a simple question of do you take schiavo off of life support if the doctor says give her 4 months and she'll be fine. If you are so secure in supporting abortion then answer the damn question. And then try to explain the difference when that is done to a babySo, you would ban organ transplants, then? The abortions do not take place so that fetal tissue can be obtained. You do know that, right? So, if the abortion is happening, what, again, is the problem with using the tissue for medical research? How is that any different from using organs for transplant or tissue for research from a person who has died?Yes let's cannibalize our unwanted young to increase our own life span. What a wonderful society we arePeople I idolize. There are several doctors quote in there who do the research. Dr. Carson did the research and defends it. You know nothing about the research. You don't care how much it can help. You don't care about women being victimized. Any lie you can tell to achieve your goal of banning reproductive freedom for women is ok.
Very few clinics do that "stuff". And stop with the pimp and sex trafficker nonsense. As much of a moron as you appeared before, that crap makes you seem really disturbed. It is not true and you can offer nothing to prove it is true.Of course you would be too much of a pussy to not answer those questions. And, actually, that is the issue. Is it unethical for an organization to be reimbursed for costs associated with the collection, preservation and transportation of human tissue. You do believe that there is no difference between a fetus at 15 weeks gestation and a fully grown human, right? They are both people entitled to full protection of the law, according to you. Then why is it not appropriate to apply the same principles to the retrieval and use of all human tissue, whenever and wherever obtained? If Planned Parenthood only received reimbursement for their actual cost and did not alter the procedures in a manner that increased the risk to the woman, you would be ok with using fetal tissue in research, right? Since the government gives no money that is used for abortion, why would you deny Planned Parenthood the money they use to provide contraception; to provide pap smears and mammograms; to treat sexually transmitted diseases? Why end support for those things?Right over your head, huh? Explain the difference, ethically, between using the tissue from dead fetuses and using the tissue from dead people. If is it morally and ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the relatives of a dead person either for research or for direct transplantation to liver recipients, why it is not morally or ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the mothers of an aborted fetus for research? And if it is permissible for the hospital that recovers the organ or preserves the tissue for research to be reimbursed for the cost of services done in connection with that, why it is wrong for Planned Parenthood to similarly be reimbursed for the cost it incurs in securing, storing and transporting the fetal tissue to the researcher?Who said anything about organ transplant??? Nice straw man on a totally separate issue. I'm on record saying if that's how you feel about abortion, go ahed and donate the parts. But the people here championing abortion can't answer a simple question of do you take schiavo off of life support if the doctor says give her 4 months and she'll be fine. If you are so secure in supporting abortion then answer the damn question. And then try to explain the difference when that is done to a babySo, you would ban organ transplants, then? The abortions do not take place so that fetal tissue can be obtained. You do know that, right? So, if the abortion is happening, what, again, is the problem with using the tissue for medical research? How is that any different from using organs for transplant or tissue for research from a person who has died?
You're talking to an issue that nobody else is speaking to. That isn't the discussion here. The discussion is...should PP be funded by the government when #1, they're illegally selling dead babies and altering procedures to facilitate that (both of which are straight up criminal), and #2, they're supposed to be protecting the interests of the woman at all costs....which they obviously don't.
The answer is of course not. They should be prosecuted as the criminals they are, and the money the government has been giving to them should to to other women's clinics (of which there are many).
Other clinics do all that stuff, much better. And they don't sell dead babies or work with pimps and human traffickers to abuse women.
They do none of those things. You have a very low opinion of women, don't you?You are a liar. You have no concern for women. they are not being abused or killed by butchers. If your goal to ban all abortions is reached, there will be Kermit Gosnells in ever town, performing illegal and unsafe abortions; just like there was before Roe v. Wade. You would rather see a woman die at the hands of a Kermit Gosnell than be able to secure an abortion in a properly licensed clinic with medical professionals performing the procedures. Your delusion are growing. Late term abortions are illegal other than to save the life or preserve the health of the mother. They make up a tiny percentage of all abortions. You have absolutely no proof of your deluded claims about sex trafficking and the rest of that nonsense. You want to see women die rather than have the ability to either prevent or terminate an unwanted pregnancy. You are a vile and hatefilled person.Again, your concern is with the "butchers." You do not care about women. You do not care about research. You will use anything you can to try to ban abortion. You are lying if you deny that.Well, when someone is caught selling dead babies, you let us know. It is, and should be, illegal to sell organs for transplant; to sell tissue for research; or to sell fetal tissue for research. No one disputes that. You repeatedly claim that we defend the selling of such tissue when, in fact, we don't. It is simply not true that the video provide convincing evidence that what you claim is happening, is happening.
Multiple someones have been caught. You are just pretending it didn't happen, so you can protect the butchers who abuse women and sell dead babies.
No, my concern is to protect vulnerable women from being abused and killed by butchers who want to harvest and sell their babies. My concern is to protect women from the abusers who force them to get late term abortions in the first place, and who force them to get abortions at any stage in order to hide crimes like child sexual abuse, incest, human trafficking, and sex trafficking....people who abuse and kill women, and who do it with the complicit encouragement and assistance of Planned Parenthood.
So you maintain that it's good that Planned Parenthood lies to women, takes advantage of women, kills women, and sells their babies.
I suppose somebody has to do it..after all, you can't be everywhere at once!
Yes I object to the abortion, I've been saying that for a long time now on this thread. And again that mother did not volunteer her child to die.So, then, again, it is not that you oppose the use of fetal tissue or the reimbursement to Planned Parenthood for the costs of their obtaining that tissue. You object to abortion. A couple of weeks ago a mother whose young daughter died donated her organs to save the life of a little boy who was near death. I guess since that child could not legally consent you think that it was terrible for the parent to donate those organs?One set of organs are coming from unfortunate unwanted death, the other organs are coming from someone who volunteered death for another, and then said go ahed take the organs. The difference is the cause of death. If you support that so much then we should force those we give the death penalty to, to harvest their organsRight over your head, huh? Explain the difference, ethically, between using the tissue from dead fetuses and using the tissue from dead people. If is it morally and ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the relatives of a dead person either for research or for direct transplantation to liver recipients, why it is not morally or ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the mothers of an aborted fetus for research? And if it is permissible for the hospital that recovers the organ or preserves the tissue for research to be reimbursed for the cost of services done in connection with that, why it is wrong for Planned Parenthood to similarly be reimbursed for the cost it incurs in securing, storing and transporting the fetal tissue to the researcher?Who said anything about organ transplant??? Nice straw man on a totally separate issue. I'm on record saying if that's how you feel about abortion, go ahed and donate the parts. But the people here championing abortion can't answer a simple question of do you take schiavo off of life support if the doctor says give her 4 months and she'll be fine. If you are so secure in supporting abortion then answer the damn question. And then try to explain the difference when that is done to a babySo, you would ban organ transplants, then? The abortions do not take place so that fetal tissue can be obtained. You do know that, right? So, if the abortion is happening, what, again, is the problem with using the tissue for medical research? How is that any different from using organs for transplant or tissue for research from a person who has died?Yes let's cannibalize our unwanted young to increase our own life span. What a wonderful society we are
Not sure what Schiavo you are talking about but the one in Florida was brain dead and had no chance of recovery. So, yes, it was ok to allow her to die with some dignity rather than keep her body alive contrary to her wishes. Too bad her parents did not love her as much as her husband did.Yes I object to the abortion, I've been saying that for a long time now on this thread. And again that mother did not volunteer her child to die.So, then, again, it is not that you oppose the use of fetal tissue or the reimbursement to Planned Parenthood for the costs of their obtaining that tissue. You object to abortion. A couple of weeks ago a mother whose young daughter died donated her organs to save the life of a little boy who was near death. I guess since that child could not legally consent you think that it was terrible for the parent to donate those organs?One set of organs are coming from unfortunate unwanted death, the other organs are coming from someone who volunteered death for another, and then said go ahed take the organs. The difference is the cause of death. If you support that so much then we should force those we give the death penalty to, to harvest their organsRight over your head, huh? Explain the difference, ethically, between using the tissue from dead fetuses and using the tissue from dead people. If is it morally and ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the relatives of a dead person either for research or for direct transplantation to liver recipients, why it is not morally or ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the mothers of an aborted fetus for research? And if it is permissible for the hospital that recovers the organ or preserves the tissue for research to be reimbursed for the cost of services done in connection with that, why it is wrong for Planned Parenthood to similarly be reimbursed for the cost it incurs in securing, storing and transporting the fetal tissue to the researcher?Who said anything about organ transplant??? Nice straw man on a totally separate issue. I'm on record saying if that's how you feel about abortion, go ahed and donate the parts. But the people here championing abortion can't answer a simple question of do you take schiavo off of life support if the doctor says give her 4 months and she'll be fine. If you are so secure in supporting abortion then answer the damn question. And then try to explain the difference when that is done to a babySo, you would ban organ transplants, then? The abortions do not take place so that fetal tissue can be obtained. You do know that, right? So, if the abortion is happening, what, again, is the problem with using the tissue for medical research? How is that any different from using organs for transplant or tissue for research from a person who has died?
So... Is it ok to pull schiavo off life support if doctor says x amount of months and she'll be ok
If the doctor looking over schiavo said give her x amount of months on life support and she'll will be fine, small chance she won't make it, but very good chance she'll be fine. Does the husband still have the right to take her off life supportNot sure what Schiavo you are talking about but the one in Florida was brain dead and had no chance of recovery. So, yes, it was ok to allow her to die with some dignity rather than keep her body alive contrary to her wishes. Too bad her parents did not love her as much as her husband did.Yes I object to the abortion, I've been saying that for a long time now on this thread. And again that mother did not volunteer her child to die.So, then, again, it is not that you oppose the use of fetal tissue or the reimbursement to Planned Parenthood for the costs of their obtaining that tissue. You object to abortion. A couple of weeks ago a mother whose young daughter died donated her organs to save the life of a little boy who was near death. I guess since that child could not legally consent you think that it was terrible for the parent to donate those organs?One set of organs are coming from unfortunate unwanted death, the other organs are coming from someone who volunteered death for another, and then said go ahed take the organs. The difference is the cause of death. If you support that so much then we should force those we give the death penalty to, to harvest their organsRight over your head, huh? Explain the difference, ethically, between using the tissue from dead fetuses and using the tissue from dead people. If is it morally and ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the relatives of a dead person either for research or for direct transplantation to liver recipients, why it is not morally or ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the mothers of an aborted fetus for research? And if it is permissible for the hospital that recovers the organ or preserves the tissue for research to be reimbursed for the cost of services done in connection with that, why it is wrong for Planned Parenthood to similarly be reimbursed for the cost it incurs in securing, storing and transporting the fetal tissue to the researcher?Who said anything about organ transplant??? Nice straw man on a totally separate issue. I'm on record saying if that's how you feel about abortion, go ahed and donate the parts. But the people here championing abortion can't answer a simple question of do you take schiavo off of life support if the doctor says give her 4 months and she'll be fine. If you are so secure in supporting abortion then answer the damn question. And then try to explain the difference when that is done to a baby
So... Is it ok to pull schiavo off life support if doctor says x amount of months and she'll be ok
No. If the doctor tells a husband that his wife will be fine, of course you cannot remove her from life support. That, of course, is not remotely close to what happened with Terri Schiavo. She was brain dead and had been so for years. No doctor who examined her told her or her parents that she would be fine; that she only need a couple more months, after several years, on life support.If the doctor looking over schiavo said give her x amount of months on life support and she'll will be fine, small chance she won't make it, but very good chance she'll be fine. Does the husband still have the right to take her off life supportNot sure what Schiavo you are talking about but the one in Florida was brain dead and had no chance of recovery. So, yes, it was ok to allow her to die with some dignity rather than keep her body alive contrary to her wishes. Too bad her parents did not love her as much as her husband did.Yes I object to the abortion, I've been saying that for a long time now on this thread. And again that mother did not volunteer her child to die.So, then, again, it is not that you oppose the use of fetal tissue or the reimbursement to Planned Parenthood for the costs of their obtaining that tissue. You object to abortion. A couple of weeks ago a mother whose young daughter died donated her organs to save the life of a little boy who was near death. I guess since that child could not legally consent you think that it was terrible for the parent to donate those organs?One set of organs are coming from unfortunate unwanted death, the other organs are coming from someone who volunteered death for another, and then said go ahed take the organs. The difference is the cause of death. If you support that so much then we should force those we give the death penalty to, to harvest their organsRight over your head, huh? Explain the difference, ethically, between using the tissue from dead fetuses and using the tissue from dead people. If is it morally and ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the relatives of a dead person either for research or for direct transplantation to liver recipients, why it is not morally or ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the mothers of an aborted fetus for research? And if it is permissible for the hospital that recovers the organ or preserves the tissue for research to be reimbursed for the cost of services done in connection with that, why it is wrong for Planned Parenthood to similarly be reimbursed for the cost it incurs in securing, storing and transporting the fetal tissue to the researcher?
So... Is it ok to pull schiavo off life support if doctor says x amount of months and she'll be ok
Very few clinics do that "stuff". And stop with the pimp and sex trafficker nonsense. As much of a moron as you appeared before, that crap makes you seem really disturbed. It is not true and you can offer nothing to prove it is true.Of course you would be too much of a pussy to not answer those questions. And, actually, that is the issue. Is it unethical for an organization to be reimbursed for costs associated with the collection, preservation and transportation of human tissue. You do believe that there is no difference between a fetus at 15 weeks gestation and a fully grown human, right? They are both people entitled to full protection of the law, according to you. Then why is it not appropriate to apply the same principles to the retrieval and use of all human tissue, whenever and wherever obtained? If Planned Parenthood only received reimbursement for their actual cost and did not alter the procedures in a manner that increased the risk to the woman, you would be ok with using fetal tissue in research, right? Since the government gives no money that is used for abortion, why would you deny Planned Parenthood the money they use to provide contraception; to provide pap smears and mammograms; to treat sexually transmitted diseases? Why end support for those things?Right over your head, huh? Explain the difference, ethically, between using the tissue from dead fetuses and using the tissue from dead people. If is it morally and ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the relatives of a dead person either for research or for direct transplantation to liver recipients, why it is not morally or ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the mothers of an aborted fetus for research? And if it is permissible for the hospital that recovers the organ or preserves the tissue for research to be reimbursed for the cost of services done in connection with that, why it is wrong for Planned Parenthood to similarly be reimbursed for the cost it incurs in securing, storing and transporting the fetal tissue to the researcher?Who said anything about organ transplant??? Nice straw man on a totally separate issue. I'm on record saying if that's how you feel about abortion, go ahed and donate the parts. But the people here championing abortion can't answer a simple question of do you take schiavo off of life support if the doctor says give her 4 months and she'll be fine. If you are so secure in supporting abortion then answer the damn question. And then try to explain the difference when that is done to a baby
You're talking to an issue that nobody else is speaking to. That isn't the discussion here. The discussion is...should PP be funded by the government when #1, they're illegally selling dead babies and altering procedures to facilitate that (both of which are straight up criminal), and #2, they're supposed to be protecting the interests of the woman at all costs....which they obviously don't.
The answer is of course not. They should be prosecuted as the criminals they are, and the money the government has been giving to them should to to other women's clinics (of which there are many).
Other clinics do all that stuff, much better. And they don't sell dead babies or work with pimps and human traffickers to abuse women.
What part of they fired her for violating their own rules and policies are you too stupid to understand? Of course, since they were not prostitutes and he was not a pimp, you have yet to offer any proof that they have ever worked with anyone who abused women.Very few clinics do that "stuff". And stop with the pimp and sex trafficker nonsense. As much of a moron as you appeared before, that crap makes you seem really disturbed. It is not true and you can offer nothing to prove it is true.Of course you would be too much of a pussy to not answer those questions. And, actually, that is the issue. Is it unethical for an organization to be reimbursed for costs associated with the collection, preservation and transportation of human tissue. You do believe that there is no difference between a fetus at 15 weeks gestation and a fully grown human, right? They are both people entitled to full protection of the law, according to you. Then why is it not appropriate to apply the same principles to the retrieval and use of all human tissue, whenever and wherever obtained? If Planned Parenthood only received reimbursement for their actual cost and did not alter the procedures in a manner that increased the risk to the woman, you would be ok with using fetal tissue in research, right? Since the government gives no money that is used for abortion, why would you deny Planned Parenthood the money they use to provide contraception; to provide pap smears and mammograms; to treat sexually transmitted diseases? Why end support for those things?Right over your head, huh? Explain the difference, ethically, between using the tissue from dead fetuses and using the tissue from dead people. If is it morally and ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the relatives of a dead person either for research or for direct transplantation to liver recipients, why it is not morally or ethically acceptable to use tissue donated by the mothers of an aborted fetus for research? And if it is permissible for the hospital that recovers the organ or preserves the tissue for research to be reimbursed for the cost of services done in connection with that, why it is wrong for Planned Parenthood to similarly be reimbursed for the cost it incurs in securing, storing and transporting the fetal tissue to the researcher?
You're talking to an issue that nobody else is speaking to. That isn't the discussion here. The discussion is...should PP be funded by the government when #1, they're illegally selling dead babies and altering procedures to facilitate that (both of which are straight up criminal), and #2, they're supposed to be protecting the interests of the woman at all costs....which they obviously don't.
The answer is of course not. They should be prosecuted as the criminals they are, and the money the government has been giving to them should to to other women's clinics (of which there are many).
Other clinics do all that stuff, much better. And they don't sell dead babies or work with pimps and human traffickers to abuse women.
"Planned Parenthood has fired a New Jersey staffer who appeared in an undercover video coaching two people on how to get reproductive health services for their underage sex workers.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/02/planned-parenthood-fires-employee-caught-engaging-in-nefarious-behavior-in-undercover-video/#ixzz3ip8fbIX7
So why is it ok to then do that to a baby, but not ok for hypothetical schiavo. That baby on mothers "life support a large majority of the time will end up just fineNo. If the doctor tells a husband that his wife will be fine, of course you cannot remove her from life support. That, of course, is not remotely close to what happened with Terri Schiavo. She was brain dead and had been so for years. No doctor who examined her told her or her parents that she would be fine; that she only need a couple more months, after several years, on life support.If the doctor looking over schiavo said give her x amount of months on life support and she'll will be fine, small chance she won't make it, but very good chance she'll be fine. Does the husband still have the right to take her off life supportNot sure what Schiavo you are talking about but the one in Florida was brain dead and had no chance of recovery. So, yes, it was ok to allow her to die with some dignity rather than keep her body alive contrary to her wishes. Too bad her parents did not love her as much as her husband did.Yes I object to the abortion, I've been saying that for a long time now on this thread. And again that mother did not volunteer her child to die.So, then, again, it is not that you oppose the use of fetal tissue or the reimbursement to Planned Parenthood for the costs of their obtaining that tissue. You object to abortion. A couple of weeks ago a mother whose young daughter died donated her organs to save the life of a little boy who was near death. I guess since that child could not legally consent you think that it was terrible for the parent to donate those organs?One set of organs are coming from unfortunate unwanted death, the other organs are coming from someone who volunteered death for another, and then said go ahed take the organs. The difference is the cause of death. If you support that so much then we should force those we give the death penalty to, to harvest their organs
So... Is it ok to pull schiavo off life support if doctor says x amount of months and she'll be ok
So, now you are calling that fifteen year old girl a sex trafficker? What part of "no laws were broken" are you too dense to understand? What part of parental consent is not required in Washington do you not understand? And what does this have to do with fetal tissue research?
Right. You would prefer a world where girls in their situation have their pimp pay the Kermit Gosnell's of the world butcher them in a back alley.
Right. You would prefer a world where girls in their situation have their pimp pay the Kermit Gosnell's of the world butcher them in a back alley.
I see creepy giggling psycho is still being creepy...cuz abortion and the abuse of women and girls is so funny and all....No, I would charge the monsters who cut them up, kill their babies and abuse them in jail. I don't believe in the death penalty, even for butchers.Like you give a rat's ass about women. You would charge them all with murder and lock them up, if not kill them.Idb is cackling mindlessly at the concept of abused women being lied to and forced into the stirrups, I see. You see the type of monsters support planned parenthood. They know what transpires and they glory in it.
