Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 17 Aug '15 02:38
    http://onenewsnow.com/pro-life/2015/07/21/livers-and-a-lamborghini-more-baby-selling-footage


    A second Planned Parenthood official has been recorded discussing the sale of baby parts, this time joking that she hopes to buy an Italian sports car with the revenue.

    The first undercover video (see bottom video) by the Center for Medical Progress showed Planned Parenthood medical director Deborah Nucatola discussing the sale of aborted baby parts, which is illegal.

    The latest undercover video (see below) features Dr. Mary Gatter, a medical director for a California abortion clinic in Pasadena. She was recorded discussing the cost of tissue samples to actors pretending to represent a research lab.

    In this second video, Gattner refers to an abortionist using a "less crunchy technique" to get "whole specimens," meaning being careful to not crush the baby's organs and limbs.



    Nucatola was caught on tape at a lunch meeting, describing how to "crush" the baby in certain places to "see if I can get it all intact."

    "I'd say a lot of people want liver," she says at one point, describing an aborted baby's organs.

    Planned Parenthood responded to the first controversial video by insisting that the non-profit abortion giant, partially funded by American taxpayers, does not profit from selling the baby parts to research facilities.

    The costs for the babies' organs and tissues are "reimbursements," the organization claims.

    In the second video, however, Gattner suggests a "specimen" price of $75, telling the "buyers" that she has to compare their $100 offer with other Planned Parenthood faciltiies before agreeing to it. The price may have to be "bumped up," she says.

    Gattner then jokes about the income. "I want a Lamborghini," she says, laughing. "I want a Lamborghini."

    Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion facility in the United States, performing more than 327,600 during its 2013-2014 fiscal year, CNS News reported.

    In a separate news report about the same time period, Breitbart News noted that Planned Parenthood reported more than $127 million in revenue and more than $1 billion in assets. Almost half of its income – 41 percent, or $528 million - came from government grants, contracts and Medicaid reimbursements.



    The abortion industry giant is known or locating its abortion clinics in low-income areas, which means most of its abortions take the lives of minority babies.

    Outrage among the Hispanic community is "unprecedented," says Dr. Samuel Rodriguez of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference.

    "It reveals the true colors of the abortion mill industry and what they really stand for," he says of the undercover videos. "It is barbaric. It is horrific."

    Republicans in Congress have repeatedly pushed to pull federal funding for Planned Parenthood and Rep. Louie Gohmert, responding to the videos, said that officials need to be held responsible for their "grotesque" actions captured on film.

    “It is utterly despicable," the congressman said, "that an executive at Planned Parenthood would cruelly joke about the remains of precious lives by haggling over their body parts using terms such as – ‘lowball’ and her desire for a ‘Lamborghini.’ These are human lives – not specimens."
  2. 17 Aug '15 02:39
    Just out of curiosity, how do abortion advocates defend this?

    Do they:

    1. Say that the film is fake?
    2. Say that the words are taken out of context?
    3. Say that selling fetus parts is OK?
  3. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    17 Aug '15 03:03 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by whodey
    Just out of curiosity, how do abortion advocates defend this?

    Do they:

    1. Say that the film is fake?
    2. Say that the words are taken out of context?
    3. Say that selling fetus parts is OK?
    Sure. If fetal parts, used with the consent of the pregnant woman, can be used in medial research, why not:

    Researchers say fetal tissue is a uniquely rich source of the stem cells that give rise to tissues and organs, and that studying how they develop can provide clues about how to grow replacements for parts of the body that have failed

    “Think of fetal tissue as a kind of instruction booklet,” said Sheldon Miller, the scientific director of the intramural research program at the National Eye Institute.

    “We couldn’t get this information any other way,” Dr. Miller said. He said the eye institute bought fetal tissue from a company, created specialized cultures of retinal tissue from it and sent them to other researchers.

    http://m.snopes.com/fetal-tissue-sales/


    Even Ben Carson thought that was A-OK (at least in 1992).https://drjengunter.wordpress.com/2015/08/12/ben-carson-did-research-on-17-week-fetal-tissue/

    Naturally the tapes are heavily edited and the right wing spin is mostly at variance with the actual discussions and with federal law. http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/07/21/latest-video-attacking-planned-parenthood-full/204524
  4. 17 Aug '15 03:16 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Sure. If fetal parts, used with the consent of the pregnant woman, can be used in medial research, why not? Even Ben Carson thought that was A-OK (at least in 1992).

    Naturally the tapes are heavily edited and the right wing spin is mostly at variance with the actual discussions and with federal law. http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/07/21/latest-video-attacking-planned-parenthood-full/204524
    Wow. You chose 2 and 3.

    Didn't see that coming.

    So it's OK to let people get filthy rich from selling fetal body parts. Duly noted.

    I sure can't see what could possibly go wrong here.

    So are you saying that this is not against the law?
  5. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    17 Aug '15 03:19 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by whodey
    Wow. You chose 2 and 3.

    Didn't see that coming.

    So it's OK to let people get filthy rich from selling fetal body parts. Duly noted.

    I sure can't see what could possibly go wrong here.

    So are you saying that this is not against the law?
    "Filthy rich"?

    You're a joke.

    No. it's not against the law:

    Health And Human Services Independent Review Board: Providers May Accept Payment "For Reasonable Expenses" With "Informed Consent." The set of standards outlined by the Health And Human Services Independent Review Board guidebook, the industry standard for medical research, explains that payment for fetal tissue may be obtained "for reasonable expenses occasioned by the actual retrieval, storage, preparation, and transportation of the tissues" (emphasis added):

    Prohibiting Payments and Other Inducements

    · Payments and other forms of remuneration and compensation associated with the procurement of fetal tissue should be prohibited, except payment for reasonable expenses occasioned by the actual retrieval, storage, preparation, and transportation of the tissues.

    http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/07/21/latest-video-attacking-planned-parenthood-full/204524
  6. 17 Aug '15 03:21 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    "Filthy rich"?

    You're a joke.

    No. it's not against the law:

    Health And Human Services Independent Review Board: Providers May Accept Payment "For Reasonable Expenses" With "Informed Consent." The set of standards outlined by the Health And Human Services Independent Review Board guidebook, the industry standard for medical research, explains t ...[text shortened]... ttp://mediamatters.org/research/2015/07/21/latest-video-attacking-planned-parenthood-full/204524
    I wasn't the one joking about buying a Lamborghini.

    Filth like Dr. Gosnell become worth millions.
  7. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    17 Aug '15 04:09
    Originally posted by whodey
    I wasn't the one joking about buying a Lamborghini.

    Filth like Dr. Gosnell become worth millions.
    I wonder if someone eventually cured of blindness because of research using the retinas of ZEFs will think the providers of such materials are 'filth".
  8. 17 Aug '15 05:33
    Originally posted by whodey
    I wasn't the one joking about buying a Lamborghini.

    Filth like Dr. Gosnell become worth millions.
    If only there was a way to ensure the profit motive does not play a role in health care provision...
  9. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    17 Aug '15 10:24
    Originally posted by whodey
    Wow. You chose 2 and 3.

    Didn't see that coming.

    So it's OK to let people get filthy rich from selling fetal body parts. Duly noted.

    I sure can't see what could possibly go wrong here.

    So are you saying that this is not against the law?
    So it's OK to let people get filthy rich from selling fetal body parts. Duly noted.

    Glad to see Whodey rejects the use of health services for profit. He is at odds of course with the majority of Americans for whom the right to get filthy rich is fundamental to the constitution, where the "pursuit of happiness" is really just a coy euphemism for the pursuit of property. Obviously, getting filthy rich is by definition a right that only at most 10% of the population is able to enjoy but the rest, whose relative (and often absolute) poverty makes this possible for the wealthy, enjoy the right all the same and would not be deprived of it by socialists advocating non profit medicine.

    Over here a Labour government minister (Mandelson) said he was relaxed about people getting filthy rich as long as they pay their taxes, but the last few words were drowned out of history and in the US, paying their taxes is something the filthy rich would not contemplate, in order for example to pay for a public service approach to medicine.

    This sudden outburst of concern about getting "filthy rich" is quite a refined thing over there. It only applies to very selective and specific cases.
  10. 17 Aug '15 10:57
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    I wonder if someone eventually cured of blindness because of research using the retinas of ZEFs will think the providers of such materials are 'filth".
    Yes I do, just like I would view the Nazi regime as filth for coming up with medical innovations at the expense of Jewish medical prisoners.
  11. 17 Aug '15 11:00 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by finnegan
    So it's OK to let people get filthy rich from selling fetal body parts. Duly noted.

    Glad to see Whodey rejects the use of health services for profit. He is at odds of course with the majority of Americans for whom the right to get filthy rich is fundamental to the constitution, where the "pursuit of happiness" is really just a coy euphemis ...[text shortened]... ch" is quite a refined thing over there. It only applies to very selective and specific cases.
    The pursuit of happiness is OK just so long as you are not murdering people along the way.

    What is ironic is, the pursuit of happiness is not OK when it comes to economic freedom according to hypocrites like you.
  12. 17 Aug '15 13:06
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    I wonder if someone eventually cured of blindness because of research using the retinas of ZEFs will think the providers of such materials are 'filth".
    Potentials aren't realities.
  13. 17 Aug '15 13:12
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    "Filthy rich"?

    You're a joke.

    No. it's not against the law:

    Health And Human Services Independent Review Board: Providers May Accept Payment "For Reasonable Expenses" With "Informed Consent." The set of standards outlined by the Health And Human Services Independent Review Board guidebook, the industry standard for medical research, explains t ...[text shortened]... ttp://mediamatters.org/research/2015/07/21/latest-video-attacking-planned-parenthood-full/204524
    Perhaps you could address the ethics of allowing abortionists to profit, whether a little or a lot, from the procedures they do, and the sale of bodies or parts that they don't own, and the fact that adult humans are disallowed from selling their organs on a free market.

    Last I heard, kidney transplants are hugely expensive, even when the kidney is donated, usually by a relative. How many more lives could be saved, as well as costs reduced if kidneys and other transplantable organs could be harvested, as dictated by wills of the deceased, or by contract of the willing?
  14. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    17 Aug '15 13:38
    Originally posted by normbenign
    Perhaps you could address the ethics of allowing abortionists to profit, whether a little or a lot, from the procedures they do, and the sale of bodies or parts that they don't own, and the fact that adult humans are disallowed from selling their organs on a free market.

    Last I heard, kidney transplants are hugely expensive, even when the kidney is don ...[text shortened]... organs could be harvested, as dictated by wills of the deceased, or by contract of the willing?
    Since they are not allowed to profit but merely to recoup "reasonable expenses" according to the law, the premise of this post is faulty.

    The other issue is for another thread.
  15. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    17 Aug '15 13:39
    Originally posted by normbenign
    Potentials aren't realities.
    Yeah medical research has never helped anyone.