Planned Parenthood caught trafficking in human body parts

[JFish123]

There are mountains of evidence supporting the bible.

Talking Snakes
Talking Donkeys
Giants
satyrs
Unicorns

all appear in the bible. Where's the evidence?

No unicorns in bible. And if God exists would anything be impossible for Him? It takes far more faith to be an atheist than not one I'm afraid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JFish123]

There are mountains of evidence supporting the bible.

Talking Snakes
Talking Donkeys
Giants
satyrs
Unicorns

all appear in the bible. Where's the evidence?

Also wizards and witches, ghosts, dragons, and evil spirits. It pretty much reads like the ancient pan-Semitic Harry Potter.

No dragons in the bible. And is anything too much for God? No. It takes more faith to be an atheist then not to be one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

And so? That's not how artists rendered Him. They painted Him like your picture hence it's Jesus on your Profile pic, which is what's this is all about. Sorry bro.

You are sorry alright...sorry bro

 

[EverCurious]

There are mountains of evidence supporting the bible.

Talking Snakes
Talking Donkeys
Giants
satyrs
Unicorns

all appear in the bible. Where's the evidence?

No unicorns in bible. And if God exists would anything be impossible for Him? It takes far more faith to be an atheist than not one I'm afraid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He's got a point on the Unicorn anyway:

In 1611, when the KJV was produced, the translators used the word "unicorn" to translate a single Hebrew word, רְאֵם reym, because they didn't know what the original Hebrew word meant. It is the English that critics complain about, not the original Hebrew text. Let's take a look at a few of the verses in the KJV that use the word "unicorn."

• Job. 39:9-10 KJV, "Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? 10Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?"
• Psalm 22:21 KJV, "Save me from the lion’s mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns."
• Isaiah 34:7 KJV, "And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness."
• See also KJV in Num. 23:22; Nu. 24:8; Deut. 33:17; Psalm 29:6; 92:10.

In every occurrence of the English word "unicorn," it is the same Hebrew word ראם reym.

• רְאֵם [râʾem, râʾeym, reym, rem /reh·ame/] n m. From 7213; TWOT 2096a; GK 8028; Nine occurrences; AV translates as “unicorn” nine times. 1 probably the great aurochs or wild bulls which are now extinct. The exact meaning is not known. 1
• reem or רְאֵים reem or רֵים rem or רֵם rem (910b); from 7213; a wild ox:—wild ox(7), wild oxen(2).2
• 8028 רְאֵם (reʾēm): n.masc.; ≡ Str 7214; TWOT 2096a—1. LN 4.1–4.37 (most versions) wild ox, aurochs, i.e., an extinct, long-horned, ancestor of the domestic cattle, Bos primigenius bojanus (Nu 23:22; 24:8; Dt 33:17; Job 39:9, 10; Ps 22:21[EB 21]; 92:11[EB 10]; Isa 34:7+), note: kjv, lxx, VULG. translate as a single-horned animal, such as rhinoceros or mysterious unicorn; 2. LN 4.1–4.37 unit: בֵּן רְאֵם (bēn reʾēm) adolescent wild ox, i.e., a non-domestic ox likely under two years old (Ps 29:6+) 3

Critics
Of course critics will just say that the Bible translators altered the English to escape the inclusion of mythical creatures. But again, they must realize that the KJV is in English, and it is the English they are complaining about, not the original Hebrew word.

• UNICORN kjv rendering for an animal called a “wild ox” in the nlt and most modern translations (Nm 24:8; Dt 33:17). Unicorn is an unfortunate translation (following the Septuagint) because the animal had two horns, not one. See Animals (Wild Ox). 4
• Unicorn--described as an animal of great ferocity and strength (Num. 23:22), R.V., “wild ox,” marg., “ox-antelope;” 24:8; Isa. 34:7, R.V., “wild oxen”), and untamable (Job 39:9). It was in reality a two-horned animal; but the exact reference of the word so rendered (reem) is doubtful. Some have supposed it to be the buffalo; others, the white antelope, called by the Arabs rim. Most probably, however, the word denotes the Bos primigenius (“primitive ox”), which is now extinct all over the world. This was the auerochs of the Germans, and the urus described by Caesar (Gal. Bel., vi.28) as inhabiting the Hercynian forest. The word thus rendered has been found in an Assyrian inscription written over the wild ox or bison, which some also suppose to be the animal intended (comp. Deut. 33:17; Ps. 22:21; 29:6; 92:10). 5

The LXX--Septuagint
The LXX (The Greek translation of the Old Testament done around 250 B.C.) says of Job 39:9, βουλήσεται δέ σοι μονόκερως δουλεῦσαι ἢ κοιμηθῆναι ἐπὶ φάτνης σου. The Greek word μονόκερως monokeros is what the Hebrews tranlsated the Hebrew word רְאֵם reym into. It is an unfortunate rendering. It literally means "one horn," and this is why the KJV rendered it as unicorn since it was using the LXX and not the original Hebrew here.

 

[sakinago]

Not my post that says that. But, Abortion is wrong so Planned Parenthood is wrong. So says the man whose image you use. Try to get to know Him before using His image.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jesus said an adulterer is equal to a murderer, do you believe this is true?

And a murderer and someone who lies is equal...

And a murderer and a thief are equal....

Etc.

We all fall short of the glory of God, was His message, no? That's why we need Him, right?

Uh, He said those who look with lust have committed adultery in their heart, not murder. But that's neither here nor there I suppose. Every sin is equally bad before God. But it does NOT give the right to sin, like abortion or say it's ok and defend it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jesus loves it when we bomb the Third world ....

Never said He did. Doesn't excuse abortion. You can't say since someone is sinning over there it's ok for others to sin over here. It's illogical


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Except your idea of sin does not mean it is against US law. And abortion is legal.

But so was jim crow, slavery, eminent domain (still is), those were all laws and policy, does not make them right. And right to life is in the constitution, which was created from religious dogma saying that god gives us the right to choose, speak, defend ourselves, etc.

 

[EverCurious]

Jesus said an adulterer is equal to a murderer, do you believe this is true?

And a murderer and someone who lies is equal...

And a murderer and a thief are equal....

Etc.

We all fall short of the glory of God, was His message, no? That's why we need Him, right?

Uh, He said those who look with lust have committed adultery in their heart, not murder. But that's neither here nor there I suppose. Every sin is equally bad before God. But it does NOT give the right to sin, like abortion or say it's ok and defend it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jesus loves it when we bomb the Third world ....

Never said He did. Doesn't excuse abortion. You can't say since someone is sinning over there it's ok for others to sin over here. It's illogical


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Except your idea of sin does not mean it is against US law. And abortion is legal.

But so was jim crow, slavery, eminent domain (still is), those were all laws and policy, does not make them right. And right to life is in the constitution, which was created from religious dogma saying that god gives us the right to choose, speak, defend ourselves, etc.

The constitution defines that life begins at viability, at minimum 21 weeks, as per Roe vs Wade and many other courts of the nation.

 

[koshergrl]

There are mountains of evidence supporting the bible.

Talking Snakes
Talking Donkeys
Giants
satyrs
Unicorns

all appear in the bible. Where's the evidence?

No unicorns in bible. And if God exists would anything be impossible for Him? It takes far more faith to be an atheist than not one I'm afraid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He's got a point on the Unicorn anyway:

In 1611, when the KJV was produced, the translators used the word "unicorn" to translate a single Hebrew word, רְאֵם reym, because they didn't know what the original Hebrew word meant. It is the English that critics complain about, not the original Hebrew text. Let's take a look at a few of the verses in the KJV that use the word "unicorn."

• Job. 39:9-10 KJV, "Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? 10Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?"
• Psalm 22:21 KJV, "Save me from the lion’s mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns."
• Isaiah 34:7 KJV, "And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness."
• See also KJV in Num. 23:22; Nu. 24:8; Deut. 33:17; Psalm 29:6; 92:10.

In every occurrence of the English word "unicorn," it is the same Hebrew word ראם reym.

• רְאֵם [râʾem, râʾeym, reym, rem /reh·ame/] n m. From 7213; TWOT 2096a; GK 8028; Nine occurrences; AV translates as “unicorn” nine times. 1 probably the great aurochs or wild bulls which are now extinct. The exact meaning is not known. 1
• reem or רְאֵים reem or רֵים rem or רֵם rem (910b); from 7213; a wild ox:—wild ox(7), wild oxen(2).2
• 8028 רְאֵם (reʾēm): n.masc.; ≡ Str 7214; TWOT 2096a—1. LN 4.1–4.37 (most versions) wild ox, aurochs, i.e., an extinct, long-horned, ancestor of the domestic cattle, Bos primigenius bojanus (Nu 23:22; 24:8; Dt 33:17; Job 39:9, 10; Ps 22:21[EB 21]; 92:11[EB 10]; Isa 34:7+), note: kjv, lxx, VULG. translate as a single-horned animal, such as rhinoceros or mysterious unicorn; 2. LN 4.1–4.37 unit: בֵּן רְאֵם (bēn reʾēm) adolescent wild ox, i.e., a non-domestic ox likely under two years old (Ps 29:6+) 3

Critics
Of course critics will just say that the Bible translators altered the English to escape the inclusion of mythical creatures. But again, they must realize that the KJV is in English, and it is the English they are complaining about, not the original Hebrew word.

• UNICORN kjv rendering for an animal called a “wild ox” in the nlt and most modern translations (Nm 24:8; Dt 33:17). Unicorn is an unfortunate translation (following the Septuagint) because the animal had two horns, not one. See Animals (Wild Ox). 4
• Unicorn--described as an animal of great ferocity and strength (Num. 23:22), R.V., “wild ox,” marg., “ox-antelope;” 24:8; Isa. 34:7, R.V., “wild oxen”), and untamable (Job 39:9). It was in reality a two-horned animal; but the exact reference of the word so rendered (reem) is doubtful. Some have supposed it to be the buffalo; others, the white antelope, called by the Arabs rim. Most probably, however, the word denotes the Bos primigenius (“primitive ox”), which is now extinct all over the world. This was the auerochs of the Germans, and the urus described by Caesar (Gal. Bel., vi.28) as inhabiting the Hercynian forest. The word thus rendered has been found in an Assyrian inscription written over the wild ox or bison, which some also suppose to be the animal intended (comp. Deut. 33:17; Ps. 22:21; 29:6; 92:10). 5

The LXX--Septuagint
The LXX (The Greek translation of the Old Testament done around 250 B.C.) says of Job 39:9, βουλήσεται δέ σοι μονόκερως δουλεῦσαι ἢ κοιμηθῆναι ἐπὶ φάτνης σου. The Greek word μονόκερως monokeros is what the Hebrews tranlsated the Hebrew word רְאֵם reym into. It is an unfortunate rendering. It literally means "one horn," and this is why the KJV rendered it as unicorn since it was using the LXX and not the original Hebrew here.

People like to pretend that there were no Hebrew scholars in hand to assist with the development of the kjv. History know-nothings actually believe that the best educated rulers of the past were as retarded as they are.

 

[Faun]

It's illegal to alter treatment to accommodate obtaining tissue to sell....and both pp butchers, nocatola and 'i wanna lamboughini' described doing just that.

It's also illegal to sell human body parts.

There's no proof they were selling body parts.the videos demonstrate they were seeking minimal fees to cover expenses, which the law does allow.

Only a leftist defending cherished dogma could consider "we have it on videotape" to be "no proof".

Look up the word "proof", Chuckles.

The videos do not demonstrate what you claim. There is no proof among them that body parts were being sold. What is demonstrated was PP provided donated body parts where a prospective buyer was asked to cover the expenses related to the donation.

Dude, those videos could have shown the president of Planned Parenthood standing on an auction block taking bids and you'd still post the same line. Your "arguments" are nothing more than mindless partisan kneejerking.

Regardless of your hyperbole, the videos do not indicate what you claim. Again, they indicate charges to cover costs. The specimens are donated, not sold.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It's also illegal to sell human body parts.

There's no proof they were selling body parts.the videos demonstrate they were seeking minimal fees to cover expenses, which the law does allow.

"minimal" fees are negotiable? LMAO

They can be when you don't know how much the expenses are. She can't even afford a tune up on a Lamborghini, no less purchasing one, making a few dollars on such a transaction.

Yeah, because God knows, PP only butchers a few babies here and there. It's not like they're doing a ghastly volume business in fetal corpses, or anything.

Your strawman aside, the woman from PP in that video intimated she was somewhat removed from the costs of those services. It's highly plausible she was indeed not up to date with the current costs involved.

Riiiight. So now your lame argument is that Planned Parenthood is such an inefficient and unprofessional organization that they have people taking meetings about topics they aren't qualified to address? All the more reason not to give them our tax money.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Uh, He said those who look with lust have committed adultery in their heart, not murder. But that's neither here nor there I suppose. Every sin is equally bad before God. But it does NOT give the right to sin, like abortion or say it's ok and defend it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jesus loves it when we bomb the Third world ....

Never said He did. Doesn't excuse abortion. You can't say since someone is sinning over there it's ok for others to sin over here. It's illogical


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Except your idea of sin does not mean it is against US law. And abortion is legal.

But so was jim crow, slavery, eminent domain (still is), those were all laws and policy, does not make them right. And right to life is in the constitution, which was created from religious dogma saying that god gives us the right to choose, speak, defend ourselves, etc.

The constitution defines that life begins at viability, at minimum 21 weeks, as per Roe vs Wade and many other courts of the nation.

It does?! Would you mind quoting and citing the exact Article/Amendment which mentions abortion and provides a specific definition of life, as "viability" or anything else? Thanks so much. I know I'm not the only one who has looked in vain for those words anywhere in the Constitution's text.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It's also illegal to sell human body parts.

There's no proof they were selling body parts.the videos demonstrate they were seeking minimal fees to cover expenses, which the law does allow.

Only a leftist defending cherished dogma could consider "we have it on videotape" to be "no proof".

Look up the word "proof", Chuckles.

The videos do not demonstrate what you claim. There is no proof among them that body parts were being sold. What is demonstrated was PP provided donated body parts where a prospective buyer was asked to cover the expenses related to the donation.

Dude, those videos could have shown the president of Planned Parenthood standing on an auction block taking bids and you'd still post the same line. Your "arguments" are nothing more than mindless partisan kneejerking.

Regardless of your hyperbole, the videos do not indicate what you claim. Again, they indicate charges to cover costs. The specimens are donated, not sold.

"Squawk! The memo told me I believe this! Squawk! Polly want an abortion! Squawk!"

You'd make a better argument if your lips weren't so firmly planted on any liberal ass that presents itself, just FYI. Your complete abdication of any and all dignity in pursuit of political agenda makes me sad to know that you exist.

 

[sakinago]

There are mountains of evidence supporting the bible.

Talking Snakes
Talking Donkeys
Giants
satyrs
Unicorns

all appear in the bible. Where's the evidence?

Keep on beating up that straw man, your doing well. Where is your evidence that it is not human life? I got my evidence of 42 chromosomes, functioning cells and ORGANS, and the hallmarks required to be considered life. And yes the organs function, not 100% but neither do a newborns. What your saying, is like saying a caterpillar is not the same species as a butterfly, because it doesn't have wings. That's a better argument than a fetus not being human life, since in the cocoon that caterpillar turns to soup, and almost entirely changes. If I rip out a pacemaker, breathing tube, insulin regulator, or dropped a newborn or a severely autistic child on the floor they will die too. And the constitution was written by religious nuts who said God gives us the right to disagree with him, no man should have the power to force others to agree with them. These religious nuts also said god gave us life, therefore no man should have the power to take it. These rights are inalienable rights from god, according to them. I happen to believe in those rights.

 

[Faun]

There's no proof they were selling body parts.the videos demonstrate they were seeking minimal fees to cover expenses, which the law does allow.

"minimal" fees are negotiable? LMAO

They can be when you don't know how much the expenses are. She can't even afford a tune up on a Lamborghini, no less purchasing one, making a few dollars on such a transaction.

Yeah, because God knows, PP only butchers a few babies here and there. It's not like they're doing a ghastly volume business in fetal corpses, or anything.

Your strawman aside, the woman from PP in that video intimated she was somewhat removed from the costs of those services. It's highly plausible she was indeed not up to date with the current costs involved.

Riiiight. So now your lame argument is that Planned Parenthood is such an inefficient and unprofessional organization that they have people taking meetings about topics they aren't qualified to address? All the more reason not to give them our tax money.

So don't pay your taxes. Then your money won't go to them.

 

[BlueGin]

No ...he was making the claim that people shouldn't have to pay taxes to fund the military since they didn't agree with Iraq.

Equating that ...to me agreeing with defunding PP.

Women can get all services that PP offers through other providers. They are not beholden to PP as their only option.

Totally different than taxes that go to fund the military.

Apples and oranges... Like I said.

Well, no, it really isn't.

Actually, here's the thing. Women can't get the services PP provides in most cases from other providers. First they need to get a referal from their primary care physician. Then they need to find an OB/GYN, a lot of whom won't take MedicAid patients. There's already a shortage of OB/GYN's in this country, partially because the insurance is so high to practice in that kind of medicine, partially because religious nutters shoot them if they happen to provide abortions.

If I have to fund the War in Iraq, you have to fund Planned Parenthood.

Or maybe we sould just have a Schedule attached to the 1040. Check off the programs you want to support. If not enough people check off a program, it doesn't get funded.

Betcha PP gets fully funded before the Iraq War does.

I find OBGYN's for girls on Medicaid everyday. It's not that hard.

And no they don't need a referral.

Strike two.

Hey bonehead. If it's so hard to get care on Medicaid. Why did you loons force all the low income people to sign up?

 

[Faun]

There's no proof they were selling body parts.the videos demonstrate they were seeking minimal fees to cover expenses, which the law does allow.

Only a leftist defending cherished dogma could consider "we have it on videotape" to be "no proof".

Look up the word "proof", Chuckles.

The videos do not demonstrate what you claim. There is no proof among them that body parts were being sold. What is demonstrated was PP provided donated body parts where a prospective buyer was asked to cover the expenses related to the donation.

Dude, those videos could have shown the president of Planned Parenthood standing on an auction block taking bids and you'd still post the same line. Your "arguments" are nothing more than mindless partisan kneejerking.

Regardless of your hyperbole, the videos do not indicate what you claim. Again, they indicate charges to cover costs. The specimens are donated, not sold.

"Squawk! The memo told me I believe this! Squawk! Polly want an abortion! Squawk!"

You'd make a better argument if your lips weren't so firmly planted on any liberal ass that presents itself, just FYI. Your complete abdication of any and all dignity in pursuit of political agenda makes me sad to know that you exist.

You shouldn't get so frustrated cause you can't prove your delusions. There is no memo. I watched the videos. There is no sale indicated in them; only donations. You can bitch and moan all you want -- that will not make a discussion of a sale magically appear in them.

But don't let go of your hopes & dreams. There are purportedly more incriminating videos yet to be released. Who knows, maybe you'll get lucky.

 

[BlueGin]

There's no proof they were selling body parts.the videos demonstrate they were seeking minimal fees to cover expenses, which the law does allow.

Only a leftist defending cherished dogma could consider "we have it on videotape" to be "no proof".

Look up the word "proof", Chuckles.

The videos do not demonstrate what you claim. There is no proof among them that body parts were being sold. What is demonstrated was PP provided donated body parts where a prospective buyer was asked to cover the expenses related to the donation.

Dude, those videos could have shown the president of Planned Parenthood standing on an auction block taking bids and you'd still post the same line. Your "arguments" are nothing more than mindless partisan kneejerking.

Regardless of your hyperbole, the videos do not indicate what you claim. Again, they indicate charges to cover costs. The specimens are donated, not sold.

"Squawk! The memo told me I believe this! Squawk! Polly want an abortion! Squawk!"

You'd make a better argument if your lips weren't so firmly planted on any liberal ass that presents itself, just FYI. Your complete abdication of any and all dignity in pursuit of political agenda makes me sad to know that you exist.

I like how they are now throwing Obamacare's Medicaid coverage under the bus after defending it to the death just last month.

Stupid sheep

 

[Faun]

Only a leftist defending cherished dogma could consider "we have it on videotape" to be "no proof".

Look up the word "proof", Chuckles.

The videos do not demonstrate what you claim. There is no proof among them that body parts were being sold. What is demonstrated was PP provided donated body parts where a prospective buyer was asked to cover the expenses related to the donation.

Dude, those videos could have shown the president of Planned Parenthood standing on an auction block taking bids and you'd still post the same line. Your "arguments" are nothing more than mindless partisan kneejerking.

Regardless of your hyperbole, the videos do not indicate what you claim. Again, they indicate charges to cover costs. The specimens are donated, not sold.

"Squawk! The memo told me I believe this! Squawk! Polly want an abortion! Squawk!"

You'd make a better argument if your lips weren't so firmly planted on any liberal ass that presents itself, just FYI. Your complete abdication of any and all dignity in pursuit of political agenda makes me sad to know that you exist.

I like how they are now throwing Obamacare's Medicaid coverage under the bus after defending it to the death just last month.

Stupid sheep

Who's 'they?" I've said nothing about ObamaCare's Medicaid coverage then or now.

 

[sakinago]

Uh, He said those who look with lust have committed adultery in their heart, not murder. But that's neither here nor there I suppose. Every sin is equally bad before God. But it does NOT give the right to sin, like abortion or say it's ok and defend it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jesus loves it when we bomb the Third world ....

Never said He did. Doesn't excuse abortion. You can't say since someone is sinning over there it's ok for others to sin over here. It's illogical


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Except your idea of sin does not mean it is against US law. And abortion is legal.

But so was jim crow, slavery, eminent domain (still is), those were all laws and policy, does not make them right. And right to life is in the constitution, which was created from religious dogma saying that god gives us the right to choose, speak, defend ourselves, etc.

The constitution defines that life begins at viability, at minimum 21 weeks, as per Roe vs Wade and many other courts of the nation.

No it doesn't, roe v wade was about it not being fair that you could get abortions in some states but not in others, much like the gay marriage ruling. The constitution at one point also said blacks only counted as 3/5ths

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Meet The Extremists Behind The Latest Attacks On Planned Parenthood
Submitted by Miranda Blue on Monday, 8/3/2015 2:30 pm
As the Senate prepares to vote this afternoon on a bill to strip federal funds from Planned Parenthood, People For the American Way has released a new report detailing the activists behind the latest round of attacks on the women’s health organization, their ideology and ultimate goals.

A group called the Center for Medical Progress has promised to release a dozen videos that it claims show that Planned Parenthood is “selling baby parts” for profit. That claim is easily debunked, but as PFAW details, the specific accusations are only part of the point:

The latest Planned Parenthood smear falls in a long line of attacks on the organization that have failed at proving any wrongdoing but succeeded at reinforcing long-held myths about the organization within the anti-choice movement. Previous attacks by activists related to the latest series of videos have made flimsy attempts to “prove” that Planned Parenthood targets people of color and harbors sex traffickers. Similarly, the latest attack hopes to reinforce the longstanding anti-choice myth that Planned Parenthood is a massive “industry” that preys on women for profit. None of these specific claims have held up to the smallest amount of scrutiny, but that was never the point. -

The report also details the anti-choice activists behind the Center for Medical Progress, including Live Action’s Lila Rose, who has called for abortions to be performed “in the public square” and Operation Rescue’s Troy Newman, who once publicly celebrated the death of an abortion provider. - See more at: Meet The Extremists Behind The Latest Attacks On Planned Parenthood Right Wing Watch

 

[HenryBHough]

OK, you've seen the movie....

Now comes what? Tee Shirts? Headbands? Sliced Lunch Meats?