Planned Parenthood Exposed - New Undercover Video

[Anguille]

It matters not if it needs the mother to live, as it will continue to need that kind of assistance throughout much of its early existence.

Whether or not we use government money to do this, we should not continue to practice killing as the only option and once there is another we should stop that practice once and for all. The goal of any doctor should not be to kill one of the entities in the room, nor to force another to take part in incubating it. How can we do both? By starting. As long as we think there are no other options, we will be right.

No matter the advances made, abortion will probably always be needed in cases where other efforts fail. I don't agree with all you say but it's great to see another viewpoint that is unique from the usual pro or anti choice vitriol.

 

[KittenKoder]

I couldn't agree with the requirement of a license to procreate, as attractive as that idea sounds. What a woman does with her body is still her business, IMO, even if I don't approve or even if it's clearly not good for society if she's popping out babies. I would totally agree with the right for the state to remove children from parents once born. You don't own the kids you bear.

Basically the way it would work is that the human would have their tubes tied, and the males would have vasectemies (no, I am not knowledge in the correct terms) until they get the license, then the procedure would be reversed. That way they CAN do whatever they wanted with only disease to worry about (nothing but education can help that part). It would allow the control of the population while also making it possible to ensure the children are born to parents who are ready for them in many ways. While this does have one flaw, mostly the upper class will probably be the ones to have children, this flaw actually creates it's own solution, the wealth of the upper class would become spread out more while the lower classes would have the chance to save up.

 

[Anguille]

You don't see a huge potential for problems with something like that?

Of course, but knowing you would lose your baby at birth would act as a big deterrent to many to reproduce. Plus, what is the other option? Force abortion or birth control on people? That is just as wrong as denying them the right to it.

I would not want to see my idea used as a method to take babies away from poor women, only women who have too many babies.

 

[KittenKoder]

For a slightly related story:

In the homeless shelters here there is a well known woman who shows up only when hand outs are present. She has nine children, each in foster homes, herself a junky who lives in the shelters. The only reason she doesn't have more is because disease finally took it's toll and now she is sterile (thank the gods). She goes to the shelters and gets stuff for all her kids (or so she claims), but many suspect she is just selling it for drugs. Recently many shelters have even started to mail the items themselves (at their own expense) to ensure this, she now comes by a LOT less since then.

 

[no1tovote4]

No matter the advances made, abortion will probably always be needed in cases where other efforts fail. I don't agree with all you say but it's great to see another viewpoint that is unique from the usual pro or anti choice vitriol.

When other efforts fail, the fetus would already have been removed from the woman's body. This would happen more often than not when beginning this action towards a positive solution. It would be a time to grieve but it would not be an abortion and it would likely advance our knowledge, if only a minute amount.

Abortion would be relegated to the extremely few times that it would be necessary to perform that in an emergency situation to save the mother's life.

While the beginning may be full of much the same result, the intent would no longer be directly to kill. The difference would be large. And in the end, women would have actual choices rather than two, incubate or kill.

 

[Anguille]

Basically the way it would work is that the human would have their tubes tied, and the males would have vasectemies (no, I am not knowledge in the correct terms) until they get the license, then the procedure would be reversed. That way they CAN do whatever they wanted with only disease to worry about (nothing but education can help that part). It would allow the control of the population while also making it possible to ensure the children are born to parents who are ready for them in many ways. While this does have one flaw, mostly the upper class will probably be the ones to have children, this flaw actually creates it's own solution, the wealth of the upper class would become spread out more while the lower classes would have the chance to save up.

If rich people having more kids was what it would take to eliminate poverty, they'd be having tons. They have few and that's how come they stay rich.
If the rich became the breeders, the rich would soon be poor and the poor rich. LOL!

 

[KittenKoder]

If rich people having more kids was what it would take to eliminate poverty, they'd be having tons. They have few and that's how come they stay rich.
If the rich became the breeders, the rich would soon be poor and the poor rich. LOL!

Exactly ... in a tongue in cheek manner. I think it'd be cool. I'm right in the middle and would probably be there still, but it'd be interesting to see such an event.

 

[Anguille]

Maybe we should just put birth control pills in the drinking water along with the fluoride.

shrug

 

[no1tovote4]

If rich people having more kids was what it would take to eliminate poverty, they'd be having tons. They have few and that's how come they stay rich.
If the rich became the breeders, the rich would soon be poor and the poor rich. LOL!

Well, they do know what causes it nowadays. They can even prove it using all that newfangled 'Merican scientificality stuffs...

 

[Cecilie1200]

What would have happened if Planned Parenthood hard reported this – and the girl was called to testify. “Um. It was only a test. I lied to Planned Parenthood.”

The cops would have dropped it, since the girl didn't do anything wrong or illegal. Chances are good had the Planned Parenthood nurse reacted as she was supposed to, the girl would have stopped her before it reached the point of filing a police report.

 

[Amanda]

I would not want to see my idea used as a method to take babies away from poor women, only women who have too many babies.

But if the government got into the baby taking business how could you make sure that only the "right" babies were taken? And who would decide what is right in the first place?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I don't blame the nurse for following her conscience. If she truly thought what she was doing was right and intended no harm how can there be wrongdoing? I wouldn't hesitate to break a law if I thought it served a higher purpose.

How does your conscience tell you that a higher purpose is being served by hiding the felony of child molestation from the authorities and the child's parents?

And FWIW, I don't think of PP as being in the abortion business. I've visited a PP office and they were very heavy on giving info and trying to prevent pregnancy in the first place. Maybe if you show up after the fact and you're pregnant they take a different tact, but pushing abortion didn't seem like their thing to me.

The fact that Planned Parenthood does other things such as birth control distribution and pregnancy tests doesn't change the fact that the number of abortions they perform outnumbers all the other procedures they perform combined, makes up more of their income than all other procedures combined, and that they are the biggest abortion provider in the country.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If it's all said and done there's nothing that's going to change anything. If the "girl" said she didn't want anyone informed I would go along with her wishes.

Because 13-year-old girls are such mature adults and fully capable of deciding what's best for them? Do you advocate that all children at that age simply be given their legal freedom as adults, or only in the case of being impregnated by a man old enough to be her father? Shall we also give them driver's licenses and let them smoke and drink and gamble and join the Army at that age?

 

[Cecilie1200]

You were terrified of getting pregnant at 13???????

My God, I didn't even know for sure what went on during sex when I was 13. I knew the penis went into the vagina, but I had no idea what a penis looked like or what it did when it got there, if it was like an IV drip or what.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Educators are mandatory reporters.

So are medical personnel.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Maybe. It wasn't that long ago that I was 13, I remember it pretty well. I know a lot of girls don't have a good relationship with their parents. I mentioned it before in another thread (I think... ) about a friend I had that got pregnant when se was 15 and she lost the baby because of the beating she got when she told her parents. That kind of thing sends a scary message. You don't think the PP workers hear all kinds of crazy things? Could you knowingly set a girl up like that by getting the police involved? You know she's going to face consequences at home if you do it and she's already feeling alone and scared.

So instead you're going to conspire to cover up a crime against this girl because her parents - whom you don't know and against whom this girl made no allegations of abusiveness - MIGHT be upset with her?

God help us when complete strangers feel authorized to insert themselves into parent-child relationships to that extent on that flimsy an excuse. Even CPS and the cops need more evidence to go on than that, and last time I checked, Planned Parenthood didn't have the authority to make judgements about the fitness of people as parents.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Planned Parenthood is in the business of women's reproductive health care--which includes contraception as well as STD and pregancy testing and counseling.

If this OP story is true, the woman should be fired. I would be interested in interviewing the woman for her rationale to not report to CPS. That was a bad call on her part. It's possible she smelled something fishy about it and misread the signals.

Why are anti-abortionists exploiting 13 year old girls to get the goods on Planned Parenthood? What fanatic parent put her kid up to that?

Way to find out what's going on before flapping your lip. The girl in question is actually a 20-year-old college student who was posing as a 13-year-old to find out if that Planned Parenthood clinic was conforming to the legal requirements concerning child abuse reporting. It was a sting in the grand old tradition of journalistic stings everywhere.

 

[Cecilie1200]

They are called mandatory report laws for a reason. Those of us who have worked in youth-serving agencies understand there is a potential penalty directed at us for NOT reporting child abuse.

And, clearly, 13 and 31 is statutory rape, and verges on child molestation, which is a felony offense. Anyone who works in a field where they serve this age group has been REPEATEDLY TRAINED on the mandatory report laws, and realizes that they are risking their professional career, and potential freedom, for not reporting.

As the video said, in Indiana it doesn't verge on child molestation and a felony. It IS child molestation and a felony.

And you are correct. There's a reason why those laws are mandatory, and that's because they don't want anyone trying to take this authority on themselves instead of letting the proper authorities investigate and handle it. Note that the nurse herself said it was CPS - Child Protective Services - she would have to make a report to, not just the cops.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Wouldn't have happened, she would have walked out and not posted on you tube. Get real.

Probably not. She'd have gone back to her organization and told them, "They're obeying the law." I suspect, though, that they didn't just conduct this sting at random. They likely had reason to believe that PP was not obeying the mandatory report laws.

 

[KittenKoder]

what I find odd, how the hell do you mistaken a 20 year old for a 13 year old?