Planned Parenthood caught trafficking in human body parts

[aris2chat]

Perhaps this will help you...then again!

Sale of baby body parts

Lucrative?? LMAO!! At $30 to $100 each? I have already posted statements from 3 experts in the field who say the amount charged will barely cover the costs. Not only did PP not make a profit, they may have lost money.

Cover what costs? They receive OVER ONE HALF BILLION a year from the Fed! and they do over 330,000 abortions a year...even figuring LOW at $30 a shot, that comes to over $1 million! Your so called EXPERTS have a VESTED INTEREST in PP.... how stupid of you to even rely on this?

None of the federal money is allowed to be used for abortions. The 400k PAP smears, 500k breast exams, and over 1 million STD testings and treatments take care of the federal money.

Here are 3 experts in the field discussing the money charged by PP for the donated tissues:

"We also asked experts in the use of human tissue for research about the potential for profit.Sherilyn J. Sawyer, the director of Harvard University and Brigham and Women’s Hospital’s “biorepository,” told us that “there’s no way there’s a profit at that price.” She continued in an email:

Sawyer, July 20: In reality, $30-100 probably constitutes a loss for [Planned Parenthood]. The costs associated with collection, processing, storage, and inventory and records management for specimens are very high. Most hospitals will provide tissue blocks from surgical procedures (ones no longer needed for clinical purposes, and without identity) for research, and cost recover for their time and effort in the range of $100-500 per case/block. In the realm of tissues for research $30-100 is completely reasonable and normal fee.

Jim Vaught, president of the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories and formerly the deputy director of the National Cancer Institute’s Office ofBiorepositories and Biospecimen Research, told us in an email that “$30 to $100 per sample is a reasonable charge for clinical operations to recover their costs for providing tissue.” In fact, he said, the costs to a clinic are often much higher, but most operations that provide this kind of tissue have “no intention of fully recovering [their] costs, much less making a profit.”

Carolyn Compton, the chief medical and science officer of Arizona State University’s National Biomarkers Development Alliance and a former director of biorepositories and biospecimen research at the National Cancer Institute, agreed that this was “a modest price tag for cost recovery.” Compton told us in an email: ” ‘Profit’ is out of the question, in my mind. I would say that whoever opined about ‘profit’ knows very little about the effort and expense involved in providing human biospecimens for research purposes.”

from: Unspinning the Planned Parenthood Video

It should not be an either or, but how much would it cost the tax payer to care for the pregnant mother through her pregnancy? who much to raise the child in the system? How many of those in the system will unfortunately commit a crime in their lifetime? How much to process them through the legal process and jail them? How many millions of children and infants in the world need homes right now? Do you expect even a tenth of them to actually find homes? And the rest?

Do you really understand the support system helping would be mothers through their pregnancy just to give up the children? And if they actually kept the child? Where is the moral and financial support for them? It is a highly insufficient, but you expect taxpayers to be more concerned with a life not yet viable over that of those struggling right now? What of the suffering of the woman that give up a child even for the best reasons? It is easier to loose a child than to know there is one out there that has to be given to someone else or that exists in a failing system.

If girls/women had better education and more access to birth control option the need for abortions might be reduced but never be eliminated. Force men to be the ones responsible for not producing pregnancies till both parents are fully ready for the commitment.

Put an end to all abuse and suffering of the living and ever other social problem. Don't interfere with a woman's right over her body.

Another series of lies to justify the murder of the vulnerable. Nazis also sold the murder of defenseless ppl based on their consideration as a burden. You baby killing pigs are disgusting.

a million children are adopted in the US each year while more than 150+ million are out there with no homes or a proper system to care for them

and you having conniptions over half a million abortions? So should women have to go oversea or to mexico rather than have the safety and choice in their own state? What control will you impose of women that go to other countries? How are you going to prevent the pregnancies in the first place? It is not enough that so many american's go elsewhere to adopt but you would have them do the same for abortions? What next, for surgery or to deny medical treatment and a choice to end their lives with dignity? What part of a persons life is beyond being legislated or controlled by those who have no direct right to even voice an opinion?

 

[Faun]

Really? It is her choice and no one else? Are you POSITIVE about that?

Yes.

Because if that is the case then you really need to address those places where late term abortion is denied to women unless there is a threat to her life.

I have addressed it already.

I wish that would be supporters of abortion would wake the fuck up and bother to acknowledge that this is NOT just about the women but also about the future child who also deserves a modicum of protection already. Back abortion right, that's fine as I do too but at least acknowledge what we are dealing with and it is not simply her rights but the balancing act between the most basic of rights (the right to life) and the rights of the mother to control her own body.

I've always said that it's a balancing of rights - at what point does the fetus' rights over-rule the mothers? The right of a person to control their own body is also a "most basic" of rights.

Your fist statement cannot coexis with your last.

Essentially - you just said that the decision to abort is ONLY about the mother.

THEN you agreed that it was a balancing act. Those 2 thoughts are in disagreement. IF it is only the mother in question then the rights of the unborn are immaterial and are not considered. CLEARLY this is not the case. Do you disagree with late term abortion restrictions?

That would, of course, tie into your statement that you claim to have already addressed the reality that it is illegal to have late term abortions in some jurisdictions. I have not seen you actually address that.

Ya, you are right - when I read it through again, it doesn't make sense.
Third trimester abortions are severely restricted and I support those restrictions - once a fetus is viable then it's not just her decision except if the pregnancy endangers her health or life or severe fetal defects that were undetectable earlier. I think at that point the fetus has rights that can't be denied. I have said that on multiple occassions - maybe not in this thread though.

Till the fetus is living and breathing apart from the mother's body, it is still up to her what happens to her body. If she is willing to male the commitment of her body for carrying the fetus and to give birth, that is her choice. If not, that too is her choice. Fetus does not live without her cooperation.
Late term is not simple thing to consider but when the life of the woman or the imminent suffering and death of the fetus is involved, it should be a decision she and her doctor make. Government and outsiders should not be a part of the decision.
There is no shortage of infants and children that need good homes in the world. Telling a woman she has no choice and has to carry and give birth is not your right and should never be. We are not a population of the verge of extinction that woman should be forced to be baby making machines. We are horrified by puppy mills but that is what you would force a women to be?

What a stupid argument. Who decides a child should be killed, rather than risk the chance of potential unhappiness? And there IS a shortage of babies available for adoption. It it the obligation of a mother, no matter what development stage her child is at, to protect that child until such time as she can safely transfer the protection of the child to someone else. You have no right...in theory or as a mother, to terminate the life of any other human....even if you find that duty a nuisance.

If the child is not yet born, the woman carrying it can decide. It's her body feeding it and you cannot force her to do so against her will.

 

[koshergrl]

Those ones that are in the system aren't babies. People don't adopt them because they have physical and psychological problems, and unhinged relatives, and state oversight. Aborting the viable infants of 18 year old prostitutes and slaves does not make those kids cease to exist. Meanwhile, we have a booming black market for babies because idiots like you coerce women into killing their babies to fund the abortion industry.

 

[aris2chat]

Perhaps this will help you...then again!

Sale of baby body parts

Lucrative?? LMAO!! At $30 to $100 each? I have already posted statements from 3 experts in the field who say the amount charged will barely cover the costs. Not only did PP not make a profit, they may have lost money.

Cover what costs? They receive OVER ONE HALF BILLION a year from the Fed! and they do over 330,000 abortions a year...even figuring LOW at $30 a shot, that comes to over $1 million! Your so called EXPERTS have a VESTED INTEREST in PP.... how stupid of you to even rely on this?

None of the federal money is allowed to be used for abortions. The 400k PAP smears, 500k breast exams, and over 1 million STD testings and treatments take care of the federal money.

Here are 3 experts in the field discussing the money charged by PP for the donated tissues:

"We also asked experts in the use of human tissue for research about the potential for profit.Sherilyn J. Sawyer, the director of Harvard University and Brigham and Women’s Hospital’s “biorepository,” told us that “there’s no way there’s a profit at that price.” She continued in an email:

Sawyer, July 20: In reality, $30-100 probably constitutes a loss for [Planned Parenthood]. The costs associated with collection, processing, storage, and inventory and records management for specimens are very high. Most hospitals will provide tissue blocks from surgical procedures (ones no longer needed for clinical purposes, and without identity) for research, and cost recover for their time and effort in the range of $100-500 per case/block. In the realm of tissues for research $30-100 is completely reasonable and normal fee.

Jim Vaught, president of the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories and formerly the deputy director of the National Cancer Institute’s Office ofBiorepositories and Biospecimen Research, told us in an email that “$30 to $100 per sample is a reasonable charge for clinical operations to recover their costs for providing tissue.” In fact, he said, the costs to a clinic are often much higher, but most operations that provide this kind of tissue have “no intention of fully recovering [their] costs, much less making a profit.”

Carolyn Compton, the chief medical and science officer of Arizona State University’s National Biomarkers Development Alliance and a former director of biorepositories and biospecimen research at the National Cancer Institute, agreed that this was “a modest price tag for cost recovery.” Compton told us in an email: ” ‘Profit’ is out of the question, in my mind. I would say that whoever opined about ‘profit’ knows very little about the effort and expense involved in providing human biospecimens for research purposes.”

from: Unspinning the Planned Parenthood Video

It should not be an either or, but how much would it cost the tax payer to care for the pregnant mother through her pregnancy? who much to raise the child in the system? How many of those in the system will unfortunately commit a crime in their lifetime? How much to process them through the legal process and jail them? How many millions of children and infants in the world need homes right now? Do you expect even a tenth of them to actually find homes? And the rest?

Do you really understand the support system helping would be mothers through their pregnancy just to give up the children? And if they actually kept the child? Where is the moral and financial support for them? It is a highly insufficient, but you expect taxpayers to be more concerned with a life not yet viable over that of those struggling right now? What of the suffering of the woman that give up a child even for the best reasons? It is easier to loose a child than to know there is one out there that has to be given to someone else or that exists in a failing system.

If girls/women had better education and more access to birth control option the need for abortions might be reduced but never be eliminated. Force men to be the ones responsible for not producing pregnancies till both parents are fully ready for the commitment.

Put an end to all abuse and suffering of the living and ever other social problem. Don't interfere with a woman's right over her body.

Another series of lies to justify the murder of the vulnerable. Nazis also sold the murder of defenseless ppl based on their consideration as a burden. You baby killing pigs are disgusting.

no this is killing baby pigs

A woman has the right to choose what happens to be body..........not you or outsiders
You choose for your body, not everyone else's body

 

[koshergrl]

Lucrative?? LMAO!! At $30 to $100 each? I have already posted statements from 3 experts in the field who say the amount charged will barely cover the costs. Not only did PP not make a profit, they may have lost money.

Cover what costs? They receive OVER ONE HALF BILLION a year from the Fed! and they do over 330,000 abortions a year...even figuring LOW at $30 a shot, that comes to over $1 million! Your so called EXPERTS have a VESTED INTEREST in PP.... how stupid of you to even rely on this?

None of the federal money is allowed to be used for abortions. The 400k PAP smears, 500k breast exams, and over 1 million STD testings and treatments take care of the federal money.

Here are 3 experts in the field discussing the money charged by PP for the donated tissues:

"We also asked experts in the use of human tissue for research about the potential for profit.Sherilyn J. Sawyer, the director of Harvard University and Brigham and Women’s Hospital’s “biorepository,” told us that “there’s no way there’s a profit at that price.” She continued in an email:

Sawyer, July 20: In reality, $30-100 probably constitutes a loss for [Planned Parenthood]. The costs associated with collection, processing, storage, and inventory and records management for specimens are very high. Most hospitals will provide tissue blocks from surgical procedures (ones no longer needed for clinical purposes, and without identity) for research, and cost recover for their time and effort in the range of $100-500 per case/block. In the realm of tissues for research $30-100 is completely reasonable and normal fee.

Jim Vaught, president of the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories and formerly the deputy director of the National Cancer Institute’s Office ofBiorepositories and Biospecimen Research, told us in an email that “$30 to $100 per sample is a reasonable charge for clinical operations to recover their costs for providing tissue.” In fact, he said, the costs to a clinic are often much higher, but most operations that provide this kind of tissue have “no intention of fully recovering [their] costs, much less making a profit.”

Carolyn Compton, the chief medical and science officer of Arizona State University’s National Biomarkers Development Alliance and a former director of biorepositories and biospecimen research at the National Cancer Institute, agreed that this was “a modest price tag for cost recovery.” Compton told us in an email: ” ‘Profit’ is out of the question, in my mind. I would say that whoever opined about ‘profit’ knows very little about the effort and expense involved in providing human biospecimens for research purposes.”

from: Unspinning the Planned Parenthood Video

It should not be an either or, but how much would it cost the tax payer to care for the pregnant mother through her pregnancy? who much to raise the child in the system? How many of those in the system will unfortunately commit a crime in their lifetime? How much to process them through the legal process and jail them? How many millions of children and infants in the world need homes right now? Do you expect even a tenth of them to actually find homes? And the rest?

Do you really understand the support system helping would be mothers through their pregnancy just to give up the children? And if they actually kept the child? Where is the moral and financial support for them? It is a highly insufficient, but you expect taxpayers to be more concerned with a life not yet viable over that of those struggling right now? What of the suffering of the woman that give up a child even for the best reasons? It is easier to loose a child than to know there is one out there that has to be given to someone else or that exists in a failing system.

If girls/women had better education and more access to birth control option the need for abortions might be reduced but never be eliminated. Force men to be the ones responsible for not producing pregnancies till both parents are fully ready for the commitment.

Put an end to all abuse and suffering of the living and ever other social problem. Don't interfere with a woman's right over her body.

Another series of lies to justify the murder of the vulnerable. Nazis also sold the murder of defenseless ppl based on their consideration as a burden. You baby killing pigs are disgusting.

no this is killing baby pigs
View attachment 46452

A woman has the right to choose what happens to be body..........not you or outsiders
You choose for your body, not everyone else's body

Try to kill a child in front of me and see what happens. I choose to defend the helpless, vulnerable and innocent from those who seek to hurt them. If their parents try to hurt them, I will choose to protect them from their parents.

 

[aris2chat]

Cover what costs? They receive OVER ONE HALF BILLION a year from the Fed! and they do over 330,000 abortions a year...even figuring LOW at $30 a shot, that comes to over $1 million! Your so called EXPERTS have a VESTED INTEREST in PP.... how stupid of you to even rely on this?

None of the federal money is allowed to be used for abortions. The 400k PAP smears, 500k breast exams, and over 1 million STD testings and treatments take care of the federal money.

Here are 3 experts in the field discussing the money charged by PP for the donated tissues:

"We also asked experts in the use of human tissue for research about the potential for profit.Sherilyn J. Sawyer, the director of Harvard University and Brigham and Women’s Hospital’s “biorepository,” told us that “there’s no way there’s a profit at that price.” She continued in an email:

Sawyer, July 20: In reality, $30-100 probably constitutes a loss for [Planned Parenthood]. The costs associated with collection, processing, storage, and inventory and records management for specimens are very high. Most hospitals will provide tissue blocks from surgical procedures (ones no longer needed for clinical purposes, and without identity) for research, and cost recover for their time and effort in the range of $100-500 per case/block. In the realm of tissues for research $30-100 is completely reasonable and normal fee.

Jim Vaught, president of the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories and formerly the deputy director of the National Cancer Institute’s Office ofBiorepositories and Biospecimen Research, told us in an email that “$30 to $100 per sample is a reasonable charge for clinical operations to recover their costs for providing tissue.” In fact, he said, the costs to a clinic are often much higher, but most operations that provide this kind of tissue have “no intention of fully recovering [their] costs, much less making a profit.”

Carolyn Compton, the chief medical and science officer of Arizona State University’s National Biomarkers Development Alliance and a former director of biorepositories and biospecimen research at the National Cancer Institute, agreed that this was “a modest price tag for cost recovery.” Compton told us in an email: ” ‘Profit’ is out of the question, in my mind. I would say that whoever opined about ‘profit’ knows very little about the effort and expense involved in providing human biospecimens for research purposes.”

from: Unspinning the Planned Parenthood Video

It should not be an either or, but how much would it cost the tax payer to care for the pregnant mother through her pregnancy? who much to raise the child in the system? How many of those in the system will unfortunately commit a crime in their lifetime? How much to process them through the legal process and jail them? How many millions of children and infants in the world need homes right now? Do you expect even a tenth of them to actually find homes? And the rest?

Do you really understand the support system helping would be mothers through their pregnancy just to give up the children? And if they actually kept the child? Where is the moral and financial support for them? It is a highly insufficient, but you expect taxpayers to be more concerned with a life not yet viable over that of those struggling right now? What of the suffering of the woman that give up a child even for the best reasons? It is easier to loose a child than to know there is one out there that has to be given to someone else or that exists in a failing system.

If girls/women had better education and more access to birth control option the need for abortions might be reduced but never be eliminated. Force men to be the ones responsible for not producing pregnancies till both parents are fully ready for the commitment.

Put an end to all abuse and suffering of the living and ever other social problem. Don't interfere with a woman's right over her body.

Another series of lies to justify the murder of the vulnerable. Nazis also sold the murder of defenseless ppl based on their consideration as a burden. You baby killing pigs are disgusting.

no this is killing baby pigs
View attachment 46452

A woman has the right to choose what happens to be body..........not you or outsiders
You choose for your body, not everyone else's body

Try to kill a child in front of me and see what happens. I choose to defend the helpless, vulnerable and innocent from those who seek to hurt them. If their parents try to hurt them, I will choose to protect them from their parents.

Parents choose to not allow medical treatment or vaccines in the name of religion. Parents act out of lack of education and just plain stupidity sometimes.
Save the lives of all those who are alive that want your help but stay out of dictating to a woman about what happens to her body.

Care more for the quality of lives and not the unwanted lives not yet able to live outside a woman's body.

Care for the quality of the woman's life and allow her to decide what is best for her.

 

[koshergrl]

None of the federal money is allowed to be used for abortions. The 400k PAP smears, 500k breast exams, and over 1 million STD testings and treatments take care of the federal money.

Here are 3 experts in the field discussing the money charged by PP for the donated tissues:

"We also asked experts in the use of human tissue for research about the potential for profit.Sherilyn J. Sawyer, the director of Harvard University and Brigham and Women’s Hospital’s “biorepository,” told us that “there’s no way there’s a profit at that price.” She continued in an email:

Sawyer, July 20: In reality, $30-100 probably constitutes a loss for [Planned Parenthood]. The costs associated with collection, processing, storage, and inventory and records management for specimens are very high. Most hospitals will provide tissue blocks from surgical procedures (ones no longer needed for clinical purposes, and without identity) for research, and cost recover for their time and effort in the range of $100-500 per case/block. In the realm of tissues for research $30-100 is completely reasonable and normal fee.

Jim Vaught, president of the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories and formerly the deputy director of the National Cancer Institute’s Office ofBiorepositories and Biospecimen Research, told us in an email that “$30 to $100 per sample is a reasonable charge for clinical operations to recover their costs for providing tissue.” In fact, he said, the costs to a clinic are often much higher, but most operations that provide this kind of tissue have “no intention of fully recovering [their] costs, much less making a profit.”

Carolyn Compton, the chief medical and science officer of Arizona State University’s National Biomarkers Development Alliance and a former director of biorepositories and biospecimen research at the National Cancer Institute, agreed that this was “a modest price tag for cost recovery.” Compton told us in an email: ” ‘Profit’ is out of the question, in my mind. I would say that whoever opined about ‘profit’ knows very little about the effort and expense involved in providing human biospecimens for research purposes.”

from: Unspinning the Planned Parenthood Video

It should not be an either or, but how much would it cost the tax payer to care for the pregnant mother through her pregnancy? who much to raise the child in the system? How many of those in the system will unfortunately commit a crime in their lifetime? How much to process them through the legal process and jail them? How many millions of children and infants in the world need homes right now? Do you expect even a tenth of them to actually find homes? And the rest?

Do you really understand the support system helping would be mothers through their pregnancy just to give up the children? And if they actually kept the child? Where is the moral and financial support for them? It is a highly insufficient, but you expect taxpayers to be more concerned with a life not yet viable over that of those struggling right now? What of the suffering of the woman that give up a child even for the best reasons? It is easier to loose a child than to know there is one out there that has to be given to someone else or that exists in a failing system.

If girls/women had better education and more access to birth control option the need for abortions might be reduced but never be eliminated. Force men to be the ones responsible for not producing pregnancies till both parents are fully ready for the commitment.

Put an end to all abuse and suffering of the living and ever other social problem. Don't interfere with a woman's right over her body.

Another series of lies to justify the murder of the vulnerable. Nazis also sold the murder of defenseless ppl based on their consideration as a burden. You baby killing pigs are disgusting.

no this is killing baby pigs
View attachment 46452

A woman has the right to choose what happens to be body..........not you or outsiders
You choose for your body, not everyone else's body

Try to kill a child in front of me and see what happens. I choose to defend the helpless, vulnerable and innocent from those who seek to hurt them. If their parents try to hurt them, I will choose to protect them from their parents.

Parents choose to not allow medical treatment or vaccines in the name of religion. Parents act out of lack of education and just plain stupidity sometimes.
Save the lives of all those who are alive that want your help but stay out of dictating to a woman about what happens to her body.

Care more for the quality of lives and not the unwanted lives not yet able to live outside a woman's body.

Oh look, more baby killing script reading.

 

[sakinago]

Yes.

I have addressed it already.

I've always said that it's a balancing of rights - at what point does the fetus' rights over-rule the mothers? The right of a person to control their own body is also a "most basic" of rights.

Your fist statement cannot coexis with your last.

Essentially - you just said that the decision to abort is ONLY about the mother.

THEN you agreed that it was a balancing act. Those 2 thoughts are in disagreement. IF it is only the mother in question then the rights of the unborn are immaterial and are not considered. CLEARLY this is not the case. Do you disagree with late term abortion restrictions?

That would, of course, tie into your statement that you claim to have already addressed the reality that it is illegal to have late term abortions in some jurisdictions. I have not seen you actually address that.

Ya, you are right - when I read it through again, it doesn't make sense.
Third trimester abortions are severely restricted and I support those restrictions - once a fetus is viable then it's not just her decision except if the pregnancy endangers her health or life or severe fetal defects that were undetectable earlier. I think at that point the fetus has rights that can't be denied. I have said that on multiple occassions - maybe not in this thread though.

Till the fetus is living and breathing apart from the mother's body, it is still up to her what happens to her body. If she is willing to male the commitment of her body for carrying the fetus and to give birth, that is her choice. If not, that too is her choice. Fetus does not live without her cooperation.
Late term is not simple thing to consider but when the life of the woman or the imminent suffering and death of the fetus is involved, it should be a decision she and her doctor make. Government and outsiders should not be a part of the decision.
There is no shortage of infants and children that need good homes in the world. Telling a woman she has no choice and has to carry and give birth is not your right and should never be. We are not a population of the verge of extinction that woman should be forced to be baby making machines. We are horrified by puppy mills but that is what you would force a women to be?

So it is a question on when it can live on it's own?

If the mother was willing and the fetus could be safely removed and transplanted.............but that is not yet a viable option yet. It is still the woman's seed and up to her if she would give it up. And if she was to be compensated for giving up tissue?

There are other causes to get involved in rather than a woman's right to choose if she is ready to be a mother or not. At what age, education level does she have or loose that right? If she is raped, does she have to carry the fetus? If she is undergoing medical treatment, does she have to give that up? What if she is in school or beginning a new job? What if there are other circumstances that make it the wrong time or just wrong for her? When is a woman's body her own? When do others have no say in what a woman can or chooses what is best for her physically, mentally, financially or moral for her? Religion should have no place in the law or a woman's right to choose.

So terry chiavo wasn't viable to eat without a tube... Therefore husband had every right to remove it?

 

[koshergrl]

Your fist statement cannot coexis with your last.

Essentially - you just said that the decision to abort is ONLY about the mother.

THEN you agreed that it was a balancing act. Those 2 thoughts are in disagreement. IF it is only the mother in question then the rights of the unborn are immaterial and are not considered. CLEARLY this is not the case. Do you disagree with late term abortion restrictions?

That would, of course, tie into your statement that you claim to have already addressed the reality that it is illegal to have late term abortions in some jurisdictions. I have not seen you actually address that.

Ya, you are right - when I read it through again, it doesn't make sense.
Third trimester abortions are severely restricted and I support those restrictions - once a fetus is viable then it's not just her decision except if the pregnancy endangers her health or life or severe fetal defects that were undetectable earlier. I think at that point the fetus has rights that can't be denied. I have said that on multiple occassions - maybe not in this thread though.

Till the fetus is living and breathing apart from the mother's body, it is still up to her what happens to her body. If she is willing to male the commitment of her body for carrying the fetus and to give birth, that is her choice. If not, that too is her choice. Fetus does not live without her cooperation.
Late term is not simple thing to consider but when the life of the woman or the imminent suffering and death of the fetus is involved, it should be a decision she and her doctor make. Government and outsiders should not be a part of the decision.
There is no shortage of infants and children that need good homes in the world. Telling a woman she has no choice and has to carry and give birth is not your right and should never be. We are not a population of the verge of extinction that woman should be forced to be baby making machines. We are horrified by puppy mills but that is what you would force a women to be?

So it is a question on when it can live on it's own?

If the mother was willing and the fetus could be safely removed and transplanted.............but that is not yet a viable option yet. It is still the woman's seed and up to her if she would give it up. And if she was to be compensated for giving up tissue?

There are other causes to get involved in rather than a woman's right to choose if she is ready to be a mother or not. At what age, education level does she have or loose that right? If she is raped, does she have to carry the fetus? If she is undergoing medical treatment, does she have to give that up? What if she is in school or beginning a new job? What if there are other circumstances that make it the wrong time or just wrong for her? When is a woman's body her own? When do others have no say in what a woman can or chooses what is best for her physically, mentally, financially or moral for her? Religion should have no place in the law or a woman's right to choose.

So terry chiavo wasn't viable to eat without a tube... Therefore husband had every right to remove it?

Of course she believes that. If a progressive feels sorry for you, it's automatically a death sentence.

 

[aris2chat]

Cover what costs? They receive OVER ONE HALF BILLION a year from the Fed! and they do over 330,000 abortions a year...even figuring LOW at $30 a shot, that comes to over $1 million! Your so called EXPERTS have a VESTED INTEREST in PP.... how stupid of you to even rely on this?

None of the federal money is allowed to be used for abortions. The 400k PAP smears, 500k breast exams, and over 1 million STD testings and treatments take care of the federal money.

Here are 3 experts in the field discussing the money charged by PP for the donated tissues:

"We also asked experts in the use of human tissue for research about the potential for profit.Sherilyn J. Sawyer, the director of Harvard University and Brigham and Women’s Hospital’s “biorepository,” told us that “there’s no way there’s a profit at that price.” She continued in an email:

Sawyer, July 20: In reality, $30-100 probably constitutes a loss for [Planned Parenthood]. The costs associated with collection, processing, storage, and inventory and records management for specimens are very high. Most hospitals will provide tissue blocks from surgical procedures (ones no longer needed for clinical purposes, and without identity) for research, and cost recover for their time and effort in the range of $100-500 per case/block. In the realm of tissues for research $30-100 is completely reasonable and normal fee.

Jim Vaught, president of the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories and formerly the deputy director of the National Cancer Institute’s Office ofBiorepositories and Biospecimen Research, told us in an email that “$30 to $100 per sample is a reasonable charge for clinical operations to recover their costs for providing tissue.” In fact, he said, the costs to a clinic are often much higher, but most operations that provide this kind of tissue have “no intention of fully recovering [their] costs, much less making a profit.”

Carolyn Compton, the chief medical and science officer of Arizona State University’s National Biomarkers Development Alliance and a former director of biorepositories and biospecimen research at the National Cancer Institute, agreed that this was “a modest price tag for cost recovery.” Compton told us in an email: ” ‘Profit’ is out of the question, in my mind. I would say that whoever opined about ‘profit’ knows very little about the effort and expense involved in providing human biospecimens for research purposes.”

from: Unspinning the Planned Parenthood Video

It should not be an either or, but how much would it cost the tax payer to care for the pregnant mother through her pregnancy? who much to raise the child in the system? How many of those in the system will unfortunately commit a crime in their lifetime? How much to process them through the legal process and jail them? How many millions of children and infants in the world need homes right now? Do you expect even a tenth of them to actually find homes? And the rest?

Do you really understand the support system helping would be mothers through their pregnancy just to give up the children? And if they actually kept the child? Where is the moral and financial support for them? It is a highly insufficient, but you expect taxpayers to be more concerned with a life not yet viable over that of those struggling right now? What of the suffering of the woman that give up a child even for the best reasons? It is easier to loose a child than to know there is one out there that has to be given to someone else or that exists in a failing system.

If girls/women had better education and more access to birth control option the need for abortions might be reduced but never be eliminated. Force men to be the ones responsible for not producing pregnancies till both parents are fully ready for the commitment.

Put an end to all abuse and suffering of the living and ever other social problem. Don't interfere with a woman's right over her body.

Another series of lies to justify the murder of the vulnerable. Nazis also sold the murder of defenseless ppl based on their consideration as a burden. You baby killing pigs are disgusting.

no this is killing baby pigs
View attachment 46452

A woman has the right to choose what happens to be body..........not you or outsiders
You choose for your body, not everyone else's body

Try to kill a child in front of me and see what happens. I choose to defend the helpless, vulnerable and innocent from those who seek to hurt them. If their parents try to hurt them, I will choose to protect them from their parents.

You make choices every day that have the potential to hurt people. Every purchase, every trip out of the house, every choice of chemicals and cleaners, every type of food you make. It is hard to live on this earth and not have some harmful effect on others. Who protects those people from you?

 

[aris2chat]

Your fist statement cannot coexis with your last.

Essentially - you just said that the decision to abort is ONLY about the mother.

THEN you agreed that it was a balancing act. Those 2 thoughts are in disagreement. IF it is only the mother in question then the rights of the unborn are immaterial and are not considered. CLEARLY this is not the case. Do you disagree with late term abortion restrictions?

That would, of course, tie into your statement that you claim to have already addressed the reality that it is illegal to have late term abortions in some jurisdictions. I have not seen you actually address that.

Ya, you are right - when I read it through again, it doesn't make sense.
Third trimester abortions are severely restricted and I support those restrictions - once a fetus is viable then it's not just her decision except if the pregnancy endangers her health or life or severe fetal defects that were undetectable earlier. I think at that point the fetus has rights that can't be denied. I have said that on multiple occassions - maybe not in this thread though.

Till the fetus is living and breathing apart from the mother's body, it is still up to her what happens to her body. If she is willing to male the commitment of her body for carrying the fetus and to give birth, that is her choice. If not, that too is her choice. Fetus does not live without her cooperation.
Late term is not simple thing to consider but when the life of the woman or the imminent suffering and death of the fetus is involved, it should be a decision she and her doctor make. Government and outsiders should not be a part of the decision.
There is no shortage of infants and children that need good homes in the world. Telling a woman she has no choice and has to carry and give birth is not your right and should never be. We are not a population of the verge of extinction that woman should be forced to be baby making machines. We are horrified by puppy mills but that is what you would force a women to be?

So it is a question on when it can live on it's own?

If the mother was willing and the fetus could be safely removed and transplanted.............but that is not yet a viable option yet. It is still the woman's seed and up to her if she would give it up. And if she was to be compensated for giving up tissue?

There are other causes to get involved in rather than a woman's right to choose if she is ready to be a mother or not. At what age, education level does she have or loose that right? If she is raped, does she have to carry the fetus? If she is undergoing medical treatment, does she have to give that up? What if she is in school or beginning a new job? What if there are other circumstances that make it the wrong time or just wrong for her? When is a woman's body her own? When do others have no say in what a woman can or chooses what is best for her physically, mentally, financially or moral for her? Religion should have no place in the law or a woman's right to choose.

So terry chiavo wasn't viable to eat without a tube... Therefore husband had every right to remove it?

She was not alive, she was being artificially kept fed and breathing. She had irreversible brain damage. Why should she have had to be kept under those conditions? That is not living. Her brain was a shriveled mass of dead cells. She should not have been kept so long like that. She should have been freed long before.

 

[koshergrl]

None of the federal money is allowed to be used for abortions. The 400k PAP smears, 500k breast exams, and over 1 million STD testings and treatments take care of the federal money.

Here are 3 experts in the field discussing the money charged by PP for the donated tissues:

"We also asked experts in the use of human tissue for research about the potential for profit.Sherilyn J. Sawyer, the director of Harvard University and Brigham and Women’s Hospital’s “biorepository,” told us that “there’s no way there’s a profit at that price.” She continued in an email:

Sawyer, July 20: In reality, $30-100 probably constitutes a loss for [Planned Parenthood]. The costs associated with collection, processing, storage, and inventory and records management for specimens are very high. Most hospitals will provide tissue blocks from surgical procedures (ones no longer needed for clinical purposes, and without identity) for research, and cost recover for their time and effort in the range of $100-500 per case/block. In the realm of tissues for research $30-100 is completely reasonable and normal fee.

Jim Vaught, president of the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories and formerly the deputy director of the National Cancer Institute’s Office ofBiorepositories and Biospecimen Research, told us in an email that “$30 to $100 per sample is a reasonable charge for clinical operations to recover their costs for providing tissue.” In fact, he said, the costs to a clinic are often much higher, but most operations that provide this kind of tissue have “no intention of fully recovering [their] costs, much less making a profit.”

Carolyn Compton, the chief medical and science officer of Arizona State University’s National Biomarkers Development Alliance and a former director of biorepositories and biospecimen research at the National Cancer Institute, agreed that this was “a modest price tag for cost recovery.” Compton told us in an email: ” ‘Profit’ is out of the question, in my mind. I would say that whoever opined about ‘profit’ knows very little about the effort and expense involved in providing human biospecimens for research purposes.”

from: Unspinning the Planned Parenthood Video

It should not be an either or, but how much would it cost the tax payer to care for the pregnant mother through her pregnancy? who much to raise the child in the system? How many of those in the system will unfortunately commit a crime in their lifetime? How much to process them through the legal process and jail them? How many millions of children and infants in the world need homes right now? Do you expect even a tenth of them to actually find homes? And the rest?

Do you really understand the support system helping would be mothers through their pregnancy just to give up the children? And if they actually kept the child? Where is the moral and financial support for them? It is a highly insufficient, but you expect taxpayers to be more concerned with a life not yet viable over that of those struggling right now? What of the suffering of the woman that give up a child even for the best reasons? It is easier to loose a child than to know there is one out there that has to be given to someone else or that exists in a failing system.

If girls/women had better education and more access to birth control option the need for abortions might be reduced but never be eliminated. Force men to be the ones responsible for not producing pregnancies till both parents are fully ready for the commitment.

Put an end to all abuse and suffering of the living and ever other social problem. Don't interfere with a woman's right over her body.

Another series of lies to justify the murder of the vulnerable. Nazis also sold the murder of defenseless ppl based on their consideration as a burden. You baby killing pigs are disgusting.

no this is killing baby pigs
View attachment 46452

A woman has the right to choose what happens to be body..........not you or outsiders
You choose for your body, not everyone else's body

Try to kill a child in front of me and see what happens. I choose to defend the helpless, vulnerable and innocent from those who seek to hurt them. If their parents try to hurt them, I will choose to protect them from their parents.

You make choices every day that have the potential to hurt people. Every purchase, every trip out of the house, every choice of chemicals and cleaners, every type of food you make. It is hard to live on this earth and not have some harmful effect on others. Who protects those people from you?

They don't need protection from me.

 

[koshergrl]

Ya, you are right - when I read it through again, it doesn't make sense.
Third trimester abortions are severely restricted and I support those restrictions - once a fetus is viable then it's not just her decision except if the pregnancy endangers her health or life or severe fetal defects that were undetectable earlier. I think at that point the fetus has rights that can't be denied. I have said that on multiple occassions - maybe not in this thread though.

Till the fetus is living and breathing apart from the mother's body, it is still up to her what happens to her body. If she is willing to male the commitment of her body for carrying the fetus and to give birth, that is her choice. If not, that too is her choice. Fetus does not live without her cooperation.
Late term is not simple thing to consider but when the life of the woman or the imminent suffering and death of the fetus is involved, it should be a decision she and her doctor make. Government and outsiders should not be a part of the decision.
There is no shortage of infants and children that need good homes in the world. Telling a woman she has no choice and has to carry and give birth is not your right and should never be. We are not a population of the verge of extinction that woman should be forced to be baby making machines. We are horrified by puppy mills but that is what you would force a women to be?

So it is a question on when it can live on it's own?

If the mother was willing and the fetus could be safely removed and transplanted.............but that is not yet a viable option yet. It is still the woman's seed and up to her if she would give it up. And if she was to be compensated for giving up tissue?

There are other causes to get involved in rather than a woman's right to choose if she is ready to be a mother or not. At what age, education level does she have or loose that right? If she is raped, does she have to carry the fetus? If she is undergoing medical treatment, does she have to give that up? What if she is in school or beginning a new job? What if there are other circumstances that make it the wrong time or just wrong for her? When is a woman's body her own? When do others have no say in what a woman can or chooses what is best for her physically, mentally, financially or moral for her? Religion should have no place in the law or a woman's right to choose.

So terry chiavo wasn't viable to eat without a tube... Therefore husband had every right to remove it?

She was not alive, she was being artificially kept fed and breathing. She had irreversible brain damage. Why should she have had to be kept under those conditions? That is not living. Her brain was a shriveled mass of dead cells. She should not have been kept so long like that. She should have been freed long before.

Yes, she was alive. That's why they had to withhold food and water to kill her. Like I said...weak helpless people have shortened lifespans when a progressive notices them.

 

[aris2chat]

It should not be an either or, but how much would it cost the tax payer to care for the pregnant mother through her pregnancy? who much to raise the child in the system? How many of those in the system will unfortunately commit a crime in their lifetime? How much to process them through the legal process and jail them? How many millions of children and infants in the world need homes right now? Do you expect even a tenth of them to actually find homes? And the rest?

Do you really understand the support system helping would be mothers through their pregnancy just to give up the children? And if they actually kept the child? Where is the moral and financial support for them? It is a highly insufficient, but you expect taxpayers to be more concerned with a life not yet viable over that of those struggling right now? What of the suffering of the woman that give up a child even for the best reasons? It is easier to loose a child than to know there is one out there that has to be given to someone else or that exists in a failing system.

If girls/women had better education and more access to birth control option the need for abortions might be reduced but never be eliminated. Force men to be the ones responsible for not producing pregnancies till both parents are fully ready for the commitment.

Put an end to all abuse and suffering of the living and ever other social problem. Don't interfere with a woman's right over her body.

Another series of lies to justify the murder of the vulnerable. Nazis also sold the murder of defenseless ppl based on their consideration as a burden. You baby killing pigs are disgusting.

no this is killing baby pigs
View attachment 46452

A woman has the right to choose what happens to be body..........not you or outsiders
You choose for your body, not everyone else's body

Try to kill a child in front of me and see what happens. I choose to defend the helpless, vulnerable and innocent from those who seek to hurt them. If their parents try to hurt them, I will choose to protect them from their parents.

You make choices every day that have the potential to hurt people. Every purchase, every trip out of the house, every choice of chemicals and cleaners, every type of food you make. It is hard to live on this earth and not have some harmful effect on others. Who protects those people from you?

They don't need protection from me.

Do you protect christians from being massacred? Do you protect the millions of refugees in the world? Do you prevent the abuse of children being used in war? Do you prevent all the starving from death? Do you prevent all the water from contamination? Do you prevent all fossil fuels from being used? Do you prevent soil erosion? Do you prevent animals from being killed? Have you solved poverty or famines? Have you ended cancer and death? Are you fighting slavery in the world?

You don't have the right to control a woman's body. You don't have the right to take that choice away from her. You have no right to make her carry and give birth to a child she is not ready to care for.

 

[aris2chat]

Till the fetus is living and breathing apart from the mother's body, it is still up to her what happens to her body. If she is willing to male the commitment of her body for carrying the fetus and to give birth, that is her choice. If not, that too is her choice. Fetus does not live without her cooperation.
Late term is not simple thing to consider but when the life of the woman or the imminent suffering and death of the fetus is involved, it should be a decision she and her doctor make. Government and outsiders should not be a part of the decision.
There is no shortage of infants and children that need good homes in the world. Telling a woman she has no choice and has to carry and give birth is not your right and should never be. We are not a population of the verge of extinction that woman should be forced to be baby making machines. We are horrified by puppy mills but that is what you would force a women to be?

So it is a question on when it can live on it's own?

If the mother was willing and the fetus could be safely removed and transplanted.............but that is not yet a viable option yet. It is still the woman's seed and up to her if she would give it up. And if she was to be compensated for giving up tissue?

There are other causes to get involved in rather than a woman's right to choose if she is ready to be a mother or not. At what age, education level does she have or loose that right? If she is raped, does she have to carry the fetus? If she is undergoing medical treatment, does she have to give that up? What if she is in school or beginning a new job? What if there are other circumstances that make it the wrong time or just wrong for her? When is a woman's body her own? When do others have no say in what a woman can or chooses what is best for her physically, mentally, financially or moral for her? Religion should have no place in the law or a woman's right to choose.

So terry chiavo wasn't viable to eat without a tube... Therefore husband had every right to remove it?

She was not alive, she was being artificially kept fed and breathing. She had irreversible brain damage. Why should she have had to be kept under those conditions? That is not living. Her brain was a shriveled mass of dead cells. She should not have been kept so long like that. She should have been freed long before.

Yes, she was alive. That's why they had to withhold food and water to kill her. Like I said...weak helpless people have shortened lifespans when a progressive notices them.

Her brain said other wise

 

[koshergrl]

I have the right and the obligation to protect the weak and vulnerable from those who seek to harm and kill them. The human right to life supercedes a woman's non existent right to 'not be told what to do'. I know you think women have the right to kill their children. I know you think PP ghouls have the right to abuse, lie to, damage and kill women under a false banner of choice. I know you think people have the right to coerce and force women to submit to late term abortion, and I know you believe husbands have the right to kill wives who become a burden. You're despicable, and of no consequence. People like me will always number in the majority. Anti social serial killing monsters should not be allowed to walk about free, and we are quickly approaching a time, again, when they will not.

 

[Cecilie1200]

"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.

Wow, your posts are actually getting dumber and more irrelevant exponentially. At this rate, we're going to have to rewrite the laws of physics.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

"Not true! My ability to say it makes it so!"

*yawn*

 

[Cecilie1200]

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

Uh, yeah, toward the Census. D

Abortion is not an easy choice for a woman and I can't begin to imagine what a woman would go through giving up a child for adoption also. It's her choice and no one elses. I wish strangers, who know nothing about her would get the hell out of her private life.

Really? It is her choice and no one else? Are you POSITIVE about that?

Yes.

Because if that is the case then you really need to address those places where late term abortion is denied to women unless there is a threat to her life.

I have addressed it already.

I wish that would be supporters of abortion would wake the fuck up and bother to acknowledge that this is NOT just about the women but also about the future child who also deserves a modicum of protection already. Back abortion right, that's fine as I do too but at least acknowledge what we are dealing with and it is not simply her rights but the balancing act between the most basic of rights (the right to life) and the rights of the mother to control her own body.

I've always said that it's a balancing of rights - at what point does the fetus' rights over-rule the mothers? The right of a person to control their own body is also a "most basic" of rights.

Your fist statement cannot coexis with your last.

Essentially - you just said that the decision to abort is ONLY about the mother.

THEN you agreed that it was a balancing act. Those 2 thoughts are in disagreement. IF it is only the mother in question then the rights of the unborn are immaterial and are not considered. CLEARLY this is not the case. Do you disagree with late term abortion restrictions?

That would, of course, tie into your statement that you claim to have already addressed the reality that it is illegal to have late term abortions in some jurisdictions. I have not seen you actually address that.

Ya, you are right - when I read it through again, it doesn't make sense.
Third trimester abortions are severely restricted and I support those restrictions - once a fetus is viable then it's not just her decision except if the pregnancy endangers her health or life or severe fetal defects that were undetectable earlier. I think at that point the fetus has rights that can't be denied. I have said that on multiple occassions - maybe not in this thread though.

Till the fetus is living and breathing apart from the mother's body, it is still up to her what happens to her body. If she is willing to male the commitment of her body for carrying the fetus and to give birth, that is her choice. If not, that too is her choice. Fetus does not live without her cooperation.
Late term is not simple thing to consider but when the life of the woman or the imminent suffering and death of the fetus is involved, it should be a decision she and her doctor make. Government and outsiders should not be a part of the decision.
There is no shortage of infants and children that need good homes in the world. Telling a woman she has no choice and has to carry and give birth is not your right and should never be. We are not a population of the verge of extinction that woman should be forced to be baby making machines. We are horrified by puppy mills but that is what you would force a women to be?

Um, the fetus IS living, and although not inhaling and exhaling through the mouth and nose, he also processes oxygen.

It's also funny how someone who most likely proudly believes he/she/it stands on the side of science, you blindly cling to the biologically incorrect belief that the fetus is part of the mother's body.

I'm also laughing at your whole "All abortions must be legal, because 1% of them have to do with hard cases!" line, like I always do. It must suck so badly to be you. I'd pity you, except I don't.

 

[koshergrl]

So it is a question on when it can live on it's own?

If the mother was willing and the fetus could be safely removed and transplanted.............but that is not yet a viable option yet. It is still the woman's seed and up to her if she would give it up. And if she was to be compensated for giving up tissue?

There are other causes to get involved in rather than a woman's right to choose if she is ready to be a mother or not. At what age, education level does she have or loose that right? If she is raped, does she have to carry the fetus? If she is undergoing medical treatment, does she have to give that up? What if she is in school or beginning a new job? What if there are other circumstances that make it the wrong time or just wrong for her? When is a woman's body her own? When do others have no say in what a woman can or chooses what is best for her physically, mentally, financially or moral for her? Religion should have no place in the law or a woman's right to choose.

So terry chiavo wasn't viable to eat without a tube... Therefore husband had every right to remove it?

She was not alive, she was being artificially kept fed and breathing. She had irreversible brain damage. Why should she have had to be kept under those conditions? That is not living. Her brain was a shriveled mass of dead cells. She should not have been kept so long like that. She should have been freed long before.

Yes, she was alive. That's why they had to withhold food and water to kill her. Like I said...weak helpless people have shortened lifespans when a progressive notices them.

Her brain said other wise

View attachment 46455

Ah, the old 'only things I don't want to kill are alive' definition of life. So reminiscent of bygone ages, when those marked for death were labeled as less than human, therefore not granted human rights.