PP - injecting minced baby brains into mice, growing fetuses outside wombs, etc.

originally posted by: fixitwcw
a reply to: Gryphon66

i believe the woman would have much more say over the body of their dead child/ their fetus/part of their body.
it is irrelevent how the video was obtained (2 party recording state?... nice try.) we both know they don't want this being common knowledge. so take a page from your mentors book...... "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.?

i would like to hear your reasoning behind why PP has more right to a womans dead childs body/a womans fetus/ sac of cells made by her body that happened to fall out than she does herself......HOWEVER YOU WANT TO SPIN IT, you can't talk about that (insert name here) without acknowledging who created it, and who it belongs to.

now you "law lovers" (hypocrites) know it's against the "law" to desecrate a corpse. the insanity of a malicious, malignant government knows no bounds.

it is good to know where you stand.

So it is your belief that is the critical issue now? Okay.

It is not "irrelevant" in any way, legally, ethically, intellectually or philosophically how the "videos was obtained."

I'm sure that fits your agenda better, but there's no basis in it.

Don't want what being common knowledge? That fetal remains are used in research? That a non-profit has the right to recover costs involve in the process of tissue preparation? This has ALL been brought up (by some of the same fraudsters and zealots) before. The investigations showed nothing illegal or wrong being done then, and there's no reason to believe that the investigation will be any different this time.

Certainly not the "evidence" in these chopped-up hit-piece videos.

What are you babbling about? A woman donates her tissues to research. I understand that's done on a consent form.

What else do you need to know? What other "reasoning" do you require?

So, I take it you're not a "law lover" then since you're repeating the same meaningless phrase?

Do you consider yourself an anarchist or a criminal?

Or perhaps both?

Or perhaps you'd like to try a little bit harder not to sound like some folksy rube and explain what you're trying to communicate in standard English?

Or not. I'm actually good with not.

a reply to: grandmakdw

If your argument regarding pro-choice vs pro-abortion were correct, then every single person who is pro-life should also be against killing in self defense, all wars, and the death penalty, and we know THAT isn't true.

As I said before, I personally hate guns and would never own one, but I believe in a citizen's right to own guns if they so choose. Does that make me pro-gun? No, it makes me pro-personal liberty.

a reply to: grandmakdw
does it say how many of those 9,000 babies that are aborted after that time frame are done so because major birth defects are found? and well, of those 9,000 babies, what if the mother doesn't wish to have them? what should we do with them? just wondering here....
who's gonna be financially responsible for hundreds of thousands of dollars it would cost to correct some of these major birth defects? since well, unless they are adopted, as I see it the only alternative would be they be placed in foster homes. funny thing about foster homes.....when children are placed in them, the parents paychecks are garnished to help offset the cost of care for the child. it could conceivably send a family from being one that is doing relatively well to one that is fighting for survival and since well, they are making so much money before the garnishment, I am not sure, but I don't think they would be qualified for any help from the gov't.

tell me, just what do we do with 9,000 babies??


and well, if you don't like the trade of fetal tissue (something which I imagine the other abortion providers (who account for the other 70% of abortions) are doing also, then I suggest that you forget about planned parenthood and contact your representatives in congress and tell them you want the law that enables it to be changed!!!

originally posted by: grandmakdw


For those of you who are pro-abortion, would you
be for allowing the mother to profit from the fetus
and not have to pay for her abortion, all she has
to do is sign a waiver. If PP is getting thousands
for intact tiny babies, why not let the mothers
get free abortions or make money from the
abortions (a donation to the mother for her
pain and trouble) from whomever they choose,
in exchange for the tiny body parts? Lots of
research facilities would open up free abortion
clinics if that were legal. What would be the difference
between this and PP getting more money than it
costs to extract the fetus? Why is PP even charging
women for abortions when they make more money
off the sale of the baby parts? Why not cut out the
middle man and let the women sell their own
tiny baby parts? Would that really be any less
ethical if you are pro-choice?

How do you know PP is getting more money than it costs to extract the fetus? How do you know they are making more money off the sale of baby parts? Do you have access to some budget numbers that the rest of us don't?

a reply to: grandmakdw

Why are you blaming Planned Parenthood for what the buyers do with their product? Do you blame Smith and Wesson for selling a gun to a maniac who turns around and shoots a bunch of people?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

actually they didn't they sold it to a company, probably a middle man, who then sold it to a store, who then sold it to the maniac....
same thing here,
the bad, bad, person opted for an abortion, chose to allow bad, bad, planned parenthood to donate the tissue, to a middle man like stemexpress, who did a little processing, and then sold it toa research company, who will then hopefully develop an awesome cure for some horrible disease and make a ton of money!!!
notice how the ones donating are bad, oh so very bad,.....
and the ones making a profit, well, they are upstanding companies!!! providing a great service for humanity!!!

a reply to: dawnstar

I always think it is funny how somehow the women getting the abortion are assumed to not know that these aborted fetuses are being sold off.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Krazysh0t

actually they didn't they sold it to a company, probably a middle man, who then sold it to a store, who then sold it to the maniac....
same thing here,
the bad, bad, person opted for an abortion, chose to allow bad, bad, planned parenthood to donate the tissue, to a middle man like stemexpress, who did a little processing, and then sold it toa research company, who will then hopefully develop an awesome cure for some horrible disease and make a ton of money!!!
notice how the ones donating are bad, oh so very bad,.....
and the ones making a profit, well, they are upstanding companies!!! providing a great service for humanity!!!

The point you are making about the companies who create chimeras is spot on.

The pro-abortionists think that they are providing a great service to humanity.

Taking tiny human baby brains and putting the cells into mice creating
a human/mouse hybrid or chimera. Part human/part mouse.

The woman who have the abortions are not bad,
if they knew that their 16 week plus old fetus
would be sold, resold, resold, and then used
to create a mouse with the brain of their child,
I think they would be horrified.

It is the people who knowingly sell the baby
brains and other parts, knowing that, as is shown
in the video, PP knew the brains would be used
to create chimeras, and other parts might be
made into chimeras; that are doing a great
evil or allowing a great evil to happen.

The purposeful creation of mice with human brains
using the brains of aborted babies, supplied
knowingly by PP is downright evil, in my opinion.

But the pro-abortionists see it as saving the world
through the research done on these mice with
human brains taken from tiny human beings;
as wonderful and a gift to humanity.

Here are quotes from a pro-chimera research journal article:
Using not only human/mouse chimeras, but also human/monkey chimeras

"(using the brain tissue that could only be obtained through abortions)
Among the most ethically charged forms of human-animal chimerism are those that incorporate human neurons into the host central nervous system (CNS).
Human-animal neural chimeras have been generated in two fundamental ways: (1) human fetal brain cells are used directly, cultured as neurospheres to isolate neural stem/progenitor cells, or sorted using cell surface markers and transplanted into embryonic or newborn animals; ...
Extensive neural and glial brain chimerism was documented using human fetal brain tissue transplanted directly, as a single cell suspension, or first cultured in vitro as a monolayer or as neurospheres, into the cerebral brain vesicles of wild-type fetal rats (Brüstle et al., 1998). Human fetal brain tissue has also been dissociated and then sorted for human central nervous system stem cell (hCNS-SC) activity... and injected into the lateral ventricles of newborn NOD-SCID mouse brains.
Differentiated human neurons were found throughout the brains of these human-mouse neural chimeras up to 7 months posttransplant.
To investigate the ability of human fetal brain cells to engraft a primate brain, human-monkey chimeras have been generated by transplantation of human fetal neural stem cells into the lateral brain ventricles of fetal monkeys (Ourednik et al., 2001). Analysis of the host brains 1 month posttransplantation revealed the presence of human neurons and glia and undifferentiated donor cells.
...
The sum of these findings on human-animal neural chimeras
is that human neural cells can incorporate into the host animal CNS,
differentiate into specific neuronal subclasses, and execute neuronal functions.
This raises the possibility of using human-animal neural chimeras for studies of human neural development, neurodegenerative diseases, and therapeutic drug development."
www.sciencedirect.com...

Such a gift to humanity
so worth the cures
to create
human/monkey hybrids - chimeras
human/mouse hybrids - chimeras
Humanity has so grown and developed into
such a wonderful species as to create
human/mouse and human/monkey
chimeras to research on
thank God for abortion! Right!!!!

a reply to: grandmakdw

They are not making half mice half child beings lol.
Really? Lol moronic if you think they are lol.
How is the bottom of the barrel? Got anything as bad?.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: dawnstar

I always think it is funny how somehow the women getting the abortion are assumed to not know that these aborted fetuses are being sold off.

Are they being properly informed?

Do you think that they are told that
their "donation" might become
a part human/part mouse
or a part human/part monkey
chimera?

You are certain they are fully informed
as to the implication of the donation?

Just saying - going to research,
is that fully informing the women
whose baby's brains are being
put into monkey's and mice
that live and are experimented on;
what do you think would happen
if they were really fully informed?

So you are certain they are all fully informed?
I mean really fully informed?
That a being may be created with the brain
of their baby and may live with the brain of
their baby and be tortured for research purposes?

Is not telling them really giving informed consent?
Really?

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: grandmakdw

They are not making half mice half child beings lol.
Really? Lol moronic if you think they are lol.
How is the bottom of the barrel? Got anything as bad?.

Umm, yes they are.

I posted a link to a science journal that explained that they are doing just that.

A chimera isn't necessarily half and half.

What they are doing is growing human brains in the body of a mouse.

So the mouse body now hosts the brain of the fetus that was removed
through abortion.

Not only mice it turns out from the article I lined to, but also monkey
bodies are being infused with the brains of humans (aborted humans)
to be used in the research you value so highly and think is worth
whatever happens to the tiny little humans.

a reply to: grandmakdw

I'll take Baseless Fear-Mongering for $1000 please, Alex.

ANSWER: Clueless over simplification and hypocrisy.

QUESTION: What are the only effects of this post?

Now, quoted from the "actual science" source rather than imaginary paraphase:

Ironically, human-animal chimeras with human blood, neurons, germ cells, and other tissues have been generated for decades. This has facilitated human biological studies and therapeutic strategies for disease.

originally posted by: grandmakdw
Are they being properly informed?

Do you have any reason to believe that they aren't?

Do you think that they are told that
their "donation" might become
a part human/part mouse
or a part human/part monkey
chimera?

Why is it necessary to tell them the possible directions that scientific research may go? That's like asking to predict the future.

You are certain they are fully informed
as to the implication of the donation?

Well yea... PP is always under tons of scrutiny. I'm sure that they are VERY careful about these things because of situations like this. Again, why do you believe they aren't informed of this? Because CMP told you?

Just saying - going to research,
is that fully informing the women
whose baby's brains are being
put into monkey's and mice
that live and are experimented on;
what do you think would happen
if they were really fully informed?

Irrelevant, nor do I care.

So you are certain they are all fully informed?
I mean really fully informed?
That a being may be created with the brain
of their baby and may live with the brain of
their baby and be tortured for research purposes?

I'm getting tired of repeating myself here...

Is not telling them really giving informed consent?
Really?

The last time you donated money to a charitable organization did they tell you everything that money could be used for broken down to a the smallest iteration?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: grandmakdw

I'll take Baseless Fear-Mongering for $1000 please, Alex.

ANSWER: Clueless over simplification and hypocrisy.

QUESTION: What are the only effects of this post?

Now, quoted from the "actual science" source rather than imaginary paraphase:

Ironically, human-animal chimeras with human blood, neurons, germ cells, and other tissues have been generated for decades. This has facilitated human biological studies and therapeutic strategies for disease.

True, they have been taking brains from tiny little humans
and putting them in mice and monkeys for decades.

How long as abortion been legal, through the 40th week in
some states? Let's see,,,,, decades.

Does that make it ethical?

Do the mothers of the tiny little humans have a right to
be informed that their baby's brains may be injected
into mice or monkey's and then subsequently tortured
and researched on? (that is what the research does,
a form of torture)

Just because it has been done since abortion was made legal
that now makes it ethical and right to do?

Ok, you have a far different view of what is right and wrong than I do.
I think creating any chimera with the brain of a human is sadistic, immoral, and wrong.

You are free to disagree and tell me how it is moral and good for humanity if you like,
but I will never, ever agree with you.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: grandmakdw
Are they being properly informed?

Do you have any reason to believe that they aren't?

Do you think that they are told that
their "donation" might become
a part human/part mouse
or a part human/part monkey
chimera?

Why is it necessary to tell them the possible directions that scientific research may go? That's like asking to predict the future.

You are certain they are fully informed
as to the implication of the donation?

Well yea... PP is always under tons of scrutiny. I'm sure that they are VERY careful about these things because of situations like this. Again, why do you believe they aren't informed of this? Because CMP told you?

Just saying - going to research,
is that fully informing the women
whose baby's brains are being
put into monkey's and mice
that live and are experimented on;
what do you think would happen
if they were really fully informed?

Irrelevant, nor do I care.

So you are certain they are all fully informed?
I mean really fully informed?
That a being may be created with the brain
of their baby and may live with the brain of
their baby and be tortured for research purposes?

I'm getting tired of repeating myself here...

Is not telling them really giving informed consent?
Really?

The last time you donated money to a charitable organization did they tell you everything that money could be used for broken down to a the smallest iteration?

Ok, I get your point of view and knew that would be your point of view.

You don't think it is relevant to the pro-abortion supporter
that the brains of tiny little humans (aborted fetus')
are being injected into mice and monkey's
to create a human brain in mice and monkey's

I understand that you have no ethical or moral qualms
about the whole thing. I knew from your previous posts
that your view of what is moral and ethical is quite
different from my view of what is moral and ethical.

You do not think the two are in any way related,
the creation of chimera using aborted humans
and abortion itself
or the selling of aborted humans.
I understand where you are coming from but
vehemently disagree.

I feel fully informed consent is needed,
when PP takes pre-orders, which has
been proved, and know from the pre-orders
what the pre-ordered part will be used for,
because they harvest the parts in specific
ways for specific pre-ordered uses.

But I understand it is irrelevant to you
and you feel the mother does not need
to know if her baby's brain in put into
a mouse or monkey and the brain tissue,
ie brain lives. I understand how you don't
want the mother to know or don't think she
should know. But again I vehemently disagree.

a reply to: TheLegend

I'm pro-choice or, as you want to connotationally charge it, pro-abortion. 100%.

Some situations are out of our hands and in my opinion, it's the woman's final decision -- she's the one who has to carry the child for 9 months. Regardless of what a "man" may think or feel, he doesn't have to carry the child for 9 months in his body, hence why, in my opinion, the woman gets the deciding vote in any choice.

As for using body parts in research --I'm with boymonkey74. The fetus is dead and is being used to help understand and potentially cure incurable diseases and illnesses. I'm all for it.

a reply to: Gryphon66

I think grand thinks they are making teenage mutant ninja mice.

a reply to: grandmakdw

Yea, because I don't attach needless ethics to dead tissue. Dead is dead. That's why I'm an organ donor. I WANT my dead tissue to go towards medical research that can save other people's lives. Apparently you don't like modern medicine as much as I do.

originally posted by: noonebutme
a reply to: TheLegend

I'm pro-choice or, as you want to connotationally charge it, pro-abortion. 100%.

Some situations are out of our hands and in my opinion, it's the woman's final decision -- she's the one who has to carry the child for 9 months. Regardless of what a "man" may think or feel, he doesn't have to carry the child for 9 months in his body, hence why, in my opinion, the woman gets the deciding vote in any choice.

As for using body parts in research --I'm with boymonkey74. The fetus is dead and is being used to help understand and potentially cure incurable diseases and illnesses. I'm all for it.

What about the brain that lives?
You are also for the brain being injected into
mice and monkey's and allowed to grow and
develop and live? Then the mouse or monkey
with the live human brain, experimented on.
You have no ethical qualms because of the potential
cures?

So all of you who believe that it is just dead worthless tissue -
are perfectly fine with using brain cells,
which then develop into human brains,
being used as chimeras. That it is worth it for the research?
These brains are not dead tissue, they are live human brains,
live working human brains, or they would be worthless for
research.

Ok, Joseph Mengele also thought his research on
live human tissue was worth it because of all of the
cures and advances in medicine it might produce.

Ethics are after all, so useless and needless aren't they?

Page 4: Godwin's law has arrived.