It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Republicans on the special House panel investigating the transfer of fetal tissue from aborted babies will present evidence in a hearing today that breaks down the price per body part.
With release of this evidence, Republicans say, they have enough documentation to show that several abortion clinics and middleman procurement businesses may have violated federal law.
“It is just horrifying,” Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., who leads the House’s investigation of the fetal tissue industry, told The Daily Signal. “They are putting a dollar value on these organs from these children—unborn children that have been aborted. It is just beyond belief.”
Because that actually WOULD cause people to get abortions for gross reasons.
originally posted by: ketsukoYou know though, it seems to me that if we are marketing this, and it's sick to do, then why isn't the mom making the money
Because it's unethical? Donating your organs after death doesn't matter to the dead person. Donating an aborted fetus's tissues affects neither the fetus, NOR the decision to abort the fetus in the first place. But if you're suggesting it should be legal to sell the organs while they're alive, that's when we get into dystopia territory.
and why don't we allow people to market off their other organs?
Why is a baby special?
originally posted by: Bluntone22
Hey now!
Those are just shipping and handling charges...
Whether abortions are legal/ethical or not is not the issue at hand here, which is what your post boils down to. It doesn't matter why the fetus is dead; it's dead now. It's tissues are of no use to it.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes
I would agree except that the fetus didn't ask to be aborted or donated making the entire market unethical for any tissue other than that from spontaneously aborted or medically necessary tissue.
Because they grew up and acquired beliefs and legal rights.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes
So then why aren't all the people who die likewise made into automatic donors whose various body parts and tissues are to be sold by the medical facility in question?
As you say, they are dead and what happens to them makes no difference.
A child does not have the same legal rights an adult has. A child cannot sign a legally binding document. And again, the point is moot, because we are not talking about a living being. Are you repulsed by the mother that allowed her deceased child's heart to be donated to a recipient, and then visited the recipient to hear the heart beating in their chest? The kid didn't have a say in that, because it was a kid.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes
A human being has legal rights regardless of what it does or does not know. It has those rights because it is human.
To think otherwise is to say that a human in a vegatative state has no legal rights.
NCBI - Costs - Organ Procurement and Transplantation
Similarly, the expense of transporting an organ will vary considerably depending on the distance and mode of travel. The GAO found that the costs of transporting organs varied from a few hundred dollars for ground travel to several thousand dollars for air travel. The committee assumed that the expense of organ acquisition would be increased under broader sharing because of the sharing of organs over a greater geographical area. However, the committee was unable to estimate the magnitude of this change, given uncertainties about how the Final Rule will be implemented, how much larger the new geographical areas will be and how they will affect travel times, and how the organ acquisition practices of transplant centers might change over time. The potential increase might appear significant in absolute dollars. However, as shown in Table 7-3, expenditures for procurement are a relatively minor component of overall expenditures for transplantation. Therefore, such an increase would likely have a marginal impact on total cost.
originally posted by: olaru12
a reply to: xuenchen
Apparently someone has sold their brain to even consider that a publication from the Heritage Foundation has anything but agenda driven, right wing propaganda.
Show us another source please....