Planned Parenthood Sells Dead Baby Parts

a reply to: windword

So she's a trailblazer and a hero with liberals who just happened to advocate racial genocide. Got it. Thanks.

originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Here is the video from the link.

I will respond when I am a little more informed.
Watching vid now.
Thanks for the thread MBTM

Donno if its a bad audio sync or what, but the lips were not matching the words spoken at all.
So either a very poor audio sync, or it is a very bad attempt at lipsyncing over some other conversation.

__
As for my view: I am not in favor of selling fetal parts. donations for research and blind donation for medical, sure....make it not profitable and strictly humanitarian.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: Gryphon66

Henry Ford didn't invent the automobile, anymore the ol' Margie Sanger invented abortion.
BUT, just as Ford institutionalized the mass production of automobiles, Sanger created institutionalized mass-abortions of black babies.

HER goals were to abort what she believed was an inferior race.
Hillary Clinton lauds her vision.
Sorry, but those are all FACTS!

Get some relevance for yourself.

Why are you so concerned with your opinion of me? Leave the personal commentary to the side.

Yes, Sanger was a racist, if you only take into account certain communications at a certain point in her life.

She was also a eugenicist.

And neither of those were at all rare in 20th century America, particularly in the early decades.

The accomplishments of Planned Parenthood in the following century after its founding have far outstripped whatever failings its founder might have had. (That, unsurprisingly, was my point about Ford. Also, not unsurprisingly, you misstated what I said ... Ford Motor Company DID invent the Mustang, right? My initial comparison was the connection between Henry Ford's racism and what the company that he founded was doing almost 50 years later?)

But I don't think you're interested in facts. You think you've found a "gotcha" scenario ... and you want to ignore the wide-spread, significant, positive effects this organization has had across the country on women's health for the last hundred years, because you want to twist biographical data about its founder.

I'd call you a liar, but that would be rude and without decorum. You are, however, not telling the whole truth.

Not even close.

Kind of like the OP and the linked video.

a reply to: Bone75

That fetal tissue belonged to someone, and not the mother. Its not her's to donate.

Then by that logic, people who donate their umbilical cord blood and placenta after their baby is born shouldn't be allowed to make that decision, because that is also "fetal tissue". I guess they should probably just wait until their infant is all grown up and can decide what to do with his/her cord blood so that we make sure everything is kosher, right?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Thank you. I didn't realize liberal progressives believed in an expiration date on the avocation & promotion of black genocide and White Supremacy.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: Gryphon66

Thank you. I didn't realize liberal progressives believed in an expiration date on the promotion black genocide and White Supremacy.

Continuing to misrepresent the truth I see.

The closest "political group" that has generally promoted Black genocide and White Supremacy is the modern (post 1972) Republican Party. This is easily shown, but off topic.

Planned Parenthood has not promoted Black genocide, and neither did Sanger. She promoted birth control in the Black community. You, the right-wing mainstream media, have followed suit with Herman Cain in perpetuating this nonsense.

New York Times - Was Sanger a Racist?

Margaret Sanger worked for social and racial justice at a time when segregation was the law of the land. She was invited by African American leaders to help provide health care to women in the African American community and her work was praised by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr,” said Veronica Byrd, director of African American media. “For all her positive work, Margaret Sanger made statements some 80 years ago that were wrong then and are wrong now. Those statements have no bearing on the high quality health care Planned Parenthood provides today.

But why let the facts get in the was of good ol' belief-based nonsense and dishonesty, eh?

The hardest challenge in introducing Sanger to modern audiences, who take this idea [contraception] for granted, is to explain how absolutely destabilizing it seemed in her own time. As a result of largely private arrangements and a healthy trade in condoms, douches and various contraptions sold under the subterfuge of feminine hygiene, birth rates had already begun to decline. But contraception remained a clandestine and delicate subject, legally banned under obscenity statutes, and women were still largely denied identities or rights independent of their relationships with men, including the right to vote.

Does correlation imply causation? Not in this case, certainly.

Black women do have much higher abortion rates than white women, but that is linked to the fact that they have much higher rates of unintended pregnancies — not where clinics are located.

So, now, if we're done with the harangues on Sanger, anyone want to get back to the facts of this matter, i.e. that the video is faked, the title of the thread is an utter misnomer, and that the only "fascists" posting here are those who want to dictate to (some) women, whom they deem unworthy, what will happen with their own bodies?

There is a striking kinship between our movement and Margaret Sanger's early efforts. . . . Our sure beginning in the struggle for equality by nonviolent direct action may not have been so resolute without the tradition established by Margaret Sanger and people like her. (Martin Luther King, 1966).

Now, anyone who wants to argue that Dr. King was in favor of Black genocide and White Supremacy?

Link

... or perhaps ... all this is just out-and-out lies?

Published Statements that Distort or Misquote Margaret Sanger

Through the years, a number of alleged Sanger quotations, or allegations about her, have surfaced with regularity in anti-family planning publications:


“More children from the fit, less from the unfit — that is the chief issue in birth control.”

A quotation falsely attributed to Margaret Sanger, this statement was made by the editors of American Medicine in a review of an article by Sanger. The editorial from which this appeared, as well as Sanger's article, "Why Not Birth Control Clinics in America?" were reprinted side-by-side in the May 1919 Birth Control Review (Sanger, 1919b).


“The mass of ignorant Negroes still breed carelessly and disastrously, so that the increase among Negroes, even more than the increase among whites, is from that portion of the population least intelligent and fit, and least able to rear their children properly.”

Another quotation falsely attributed to Margaret Sanger, this was actually written for the June 1932 issue of The Birth Control Review by W.E.B. DuBois, founder of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Taken out of the context of his discussion about the effects of birth control on the balance between quality-of-life considerations and race-survival issues for African Americans, Dubois' language seems insensitive by today's standards.


“Blacks, soldiers, and Jews are a menace to the race.”

This fabricated quotation, falsely attributed to Sanger, was concocted in the late 1980s. The alleged source is the April 1933 Birth Control Review (Sanger ceased editing the Review in 1929). That issue contains no article or letter by Sanger.

... or perhaps someone would rather explain how WEB DuBois was a racist and White Supremacist?

a reply to: reldra

I don;t think they ask you that until you make the decision to abort. Like a hospital doesn;t ask the family permission to donate until the person is dead.

Negative. If the person is dead, his/her organs are useless. They are asked after brain death has occurred so that they can keep the body on life support while they run compatibility/organ viability testing for transplant. An entire body can be distributed to many different people; eyes, bones, liver, pancreas, lungs, heart are just a few examples...if they do not keep the body on life support, that tissue will die and will be no good to anybody. The family has to consent while the patient is still alive.

That is why the idea of removing organs from something the size of a kidney bean after the fetus has been removed from its life support is so ridiculous; the only way the tissue would be salvageable would be for research because it is dead tissue. They don't just pull a whole baby out and start chopping it to pieces...abortions don't work that way, and the vast majority of abortions are done between 6 and 12 weeks, so the organs are not even formed yet and ditto most of the rest of the body. There is no targeting specific parts in a fetus that size, and the people who made the video knew that already. They only care about pushing their agenda, not about what lies they have to tell to do so.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: pyramid head

Well, maybe not, but I do know the difference between possessive pronouns and contractions.

Actually no, despite whatever a "Nazi thought" is ... You're just applying words and terms you don't understand.

Swing and a miss in the ad hom department.

Do you have any facts to present?

So you make an uneducated comment, I call you out, and your reply is to nitpick my grammar and play dumb?

If your going to make an uneducated "gotcha" reply, make sure the other person is also uneducated, otherwise you look dumb.

I've spent more than one thread and a quick wiki search reading about Sanger and the origins of planned parenthood, and to suggest I "present facts" shows how little you know on the subject.

We can't really have an intelligent conversation on the subject because you have no idea what you talking about. If we were discussing a claim about a statement she made, or a specific interview/ speech, sure I'd put some links. You want a history lesson, which is why you should be commenting less and reading more.

a reply to: pyramid head

Uneducated comment? That's a hoot!

You don't appreciate having your specious historical comments corrected? Look up that wiki page you're so fond of.

You didn't appreciate having your poor grammar corrected? Type it into a word processor before you post.

Based on your posts, the only things you've "researched" about Sanger is what you've read on right-wing propaganda sites.

You got schooled on a few basic points, and now you're doubling down on the personal commentary.

I will certainly agree with you that the chance of an intelligent conversation is unlikely here, as your posts are so immersed in arrogant ignorance, there's really no where to go.

Instead of silly personal attacks because you got your feelings hurt by having your mistakes pointed out, make an argument and leave the crap to the side.

Or not. /shrug

a reply to: infolurker

Did you actually watch the hidden camera video?

Yes, the long version, and they were discussing fetal tissue donation for research purposes. Not cutting out specific baby parts and selling them for some profit. The OP video was a deliberate lie. Science fiction, just like I said.

a reply to: windword

Who said that a pregnant woman isn't carrying a human fetus?

Biology says they aren't "thinking" in the complex way your adjective "horror" suggests. You're just projecting hyperbole.

We're not talking about 'carrying them', the topic is abortion and god forbid, selling the remains.

As far as calling them "human fetuses", I'm not confused about whether they are human or not.

And as far as complex thinking, fear and pain are more basic than that.

Minimizing their perspective about life and death is your prerogative.

a reply to: beezzer

My son was born with a birth defect that has caused blindness.

Why in the hell would that matter? We're talking about major, debilitating birth defects. The type that cannot be treated. Being born with only a brain stem or severe physical deformation that would severely limit a child's quality of life. Blindness is not on that list, so get over yourself.

You are making baseless blanket assumptions about people you don't even know. I'm sorry that you feel your son's blindness is such a problem, but for the rest of us I think it's safe to say something like that is not cause to terminate a pregnancy, no matter how much you think it is.

a reply to: tigertatzen

Thanks for not wanting to murder my son.

I appreciate that.

I have not seen this yet.

The lunch, he said, is just the beginning: The Center for Medical Progress plans to release a new video every week for the next few months.

This could get interesting.

a reply to: tigertatzen

…they were discussing fetal tissue donation for research purposes.

That conversation began talking donation… Until they got to the price range of thirty to a hundred dollars a 'specimen', set by the good 'doctor'' herself.

When she spoke of livers, lungs, hearts, extremities or (muscles) and craniums, they weren't discussing the menu at the restaurant they were seated in.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: reldra

Okay. It is "sanctioned" murder. Is that better?

No. Still not any kind of murder.

Ok,It is killing.

a reply to: intrptr

By the first trimester they are formed, heart pumping, blood pumping, all their digits, so who's to say they aren't thinking? Ask moms about fetus 'behavior' in the womb.

For my part, I was 4 and 1/2 months (18 weeks?) along before I felt the flutter of the butterfly in my abdomen. Even then, I wasn't sure what it was. But, I will never forget that day for the rest of my life.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Magic, thanks for sharing that, mom.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: beezzer Lucky for you, you will never face this decision.

And unfortunately for every woman, those making the majority of the laws on abortion will never have to face the decision. If men had the babies, abortion would have ALWAYS been a legal CHOICE.

........



Let me guess "Teh patriarchy" right?
.. puhlease..