BREAKING: Court Rules Against StemExpress On Undercover Planned Parenthood Videos

a reply to: burdman30ott6

So its ok to step on a pregnant mouse then? But not a pregnant puppy. Bias confirmed, thanks. Well before I confirm it let me ask your stance on killing a pregnant mouse.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

So "qualified" designates the morality of the issue does it

Qualified designates that either the mothers life was threatened by the pregnancy or something was severely wrong with the child and would be born suffering greatly. Late term abortions are almost never a matter of not wanting the child.

Then I expect to not see you on any Black LIves matter threads in the defense of anyone that was killed because the court found it

Interesting leap there...

Its like watching a movie trailer

If you watched full length versions of any then you clearly did not understand or were too emotional and reactive.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Plain as day said they get 200 bucks a volunteer as a bonus

According to Abby Johnson whom is a questionable source.

then why are they asking for certain organs and why do they "position" the fetus in certain ways as to OBTAIN them

Because if organs are developed in fetuses (qualified late term abortions) then the procedure needs to happen in a way that preserves the organs.

Let the TRUTH be heard......release everything at full length and let all be known

Full length versions of at least the first two have been released. I'm sorry to say this to you but you clearly either didn't watch them, let the source decide for you how to feel about it or you're too emotional to have fully understood what was going on.

There is no profiting going on.

why is abby johnston a questionable source? to be fair shes not the only whistle blower

Karen Reynolds of Lufkin, Texas, worked more than 10 years at Planned Parenthood. In her court complaint, she charges PPGC with “billing for medical services not rendered, billing for unwarranted medical services, billing for services not covered by Medicaid, and creating false information in medical records which was material to billing for medical services.”

Another former Planned Parenthood employee, P. Victor Gonzalez, who was chief financial officer for Planned Parenthood of Los Angeles, claimed in a 2010 lawsuit that PPLA paid “$225,695.65 for Ortho Tri-Cyclen birth control pills, yet billed the government $918,084 – for a profit of $692,388.35.” These and other actions, which he said deliberately violated the False Claims Act (FCA), amounted to $100 million in financial impropriety.

“We are very confident that there will be more cases that will come to light after people read the complaint from these three cases,” Johnson said, “and hopefully they will be able to bring forward additional information.”

www.lifesitenews.com...

Because if organs are developed in fetuses (qualified late term abortions) then the procedure needs to happen in a way that preserves the organs.

actually thats illegal

(ii) no alteration of the timing, method, or procedures used to terminate the pregnancy was made solely for the purposes of obtaining the tissue; and

www.hhs.gov...

Full length versions of at least the first two have been released. I'm sorry to say this to you but you clearly either didn't watch them, let the source decide for you how to feel about it or you're too emotional to have fully understood what was going on.

There is no profiting going on

full length AND transcripts, and yes there is profiting going on as claimed by at least 2 whistleblowers, one of which directly recieved such profit

a reply to: Vector99

Human beings do not equal dogs, mice, or crickets, friend. I find your perspective to be seriously...lacking. Most of mankind (thank the Lord) have at least enough perspective to recognize this fact.

a reply to: Kali74

ualified designates that either the mothers life was threatened by the pregnancy or something was severely wrong with the child and would be born suffering greatly. Late term abortions are almost never a matter of not wanting the child.

Seems to me those "qualifications" are flexible , in light of the information that has come out.......or have you NOT watched the videos that you claimed I havent? I mean , they do cover that......weird .....

Interesting leap there...

No its not a leap, in this case you caim that because its within legal parameters its right, yet in other cases not related to abortion, you claim that certain laws are not necessarily right........I guess thats subjective depending on the topic right?

Principles or Ideology ?

If you watched full length versions of any then you clearly did not understand or were too emotional and reactive.

says the person who just claimed that "the mothers life was threatened or something was severely wrong with the child" because in the videos the opposite can clearly be seen........which is obviously , from watching the videos NOT the case

Careful your accusations........

a reply to: ShadeWolf

Whoa...there. What happened to "my body, my choice." Kinda hypocritical is it? Not everyone "chooses" to be donated to science (ie, that's why "donor" on your a Drivers License is a CHOICE.)

The slippery slope with MANDATORY donation of organs is sci-fi meets the Sopranos..."that's a perfect match liver you got there, it's a shame you won't be needing it anymore."

Same with "harvesting" FOR PROFIT via Planned Parenthood..."gee, if we can schedule her abortion TWO WEEKS from now, instead of tomorrow, think of the organs will get!" Never, ever discount human greed.

I still can't fathom the callousness of "another boy!"

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Seems to me those "qualifications" are flexible , in light of the information that has come out.......or have you NOT watched the videos that you claimed I havent? I mean , they do cover that......weird .....

This is absolute BS! No doctor will perform a risky late term abortion on demand. They are only performed to save the life of the mother and when the fetus is "incompatible with life".

a reply to: dawnstar

Since the 60s I have seen that law used 50 ish times not once In my area Have I heard of a woman being prosecuted for a miscarriage. Plenty of abusive husbands and many drunk drivers.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: kellyjay

Right, the woman donates her aborted results. PP is compensated for their troubles, and expenses. Stemexpress, a private for profit corporation, makes a profit.

Nothing illegal or immoral there!

I read that and think MY GOD, that has to be sarcasm!!??!!

And I know you are dead serious.

We are so screwed as a society, it couldn't be more divided.

a reply to: windword

yeah but i dont think thats whats happening....a company that is based PURELY on profit...they recieve donations and just pay postage and packaging, then go on to sell the parts for hundreds and sometimes thousands of dollars and PP doesnt get a cut?

please

originally posted by: windword

That would be the same for any young child that dies, as well. They would have no say over their birth, their care or their death, or what happens to their little bodies after they die.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: stosh64

Have you ever had a very young child in your family die? Did they have a say in their treatment or their funeral plans?

So...are you now attempting to compare a young child's natural death to abortion???

a reply to: stosh64

And I know you are dead serious.

Yes. I'm DEAD serious.

Abortion is legal, and a woman has the right to decide when and if she wants a family. If a woman chooses to abort, that legal and not immoral. If she wants to donate that aborted result, that is also her prerogative.

The good that can come from the stem cells harvested far outweigh your immature "ick" factor.

Dead is dead. There is no difference in harvesting fetal organs and tissues than any other cadaver.

Grow up!

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I know exactly what I'm saying, you clearly do not.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Biased confirmed. Humans deem all forms of life less than human to be non-relevant and without right, directly conflicting relevance. Deny ignorance indeed.

Bees

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Right, I understand you would prefer a world without abortions but for better or worse that's not the world we have. Rather than deal in what each of our ideal worlds would be lets deal with reality. These abortions are going to happen regardless of any tissue donation programs. Given that that's the case, is it better that we take advantage of it and save lives in the future or should we be saying, this is ghoulish and gruesome and civilized society should not be making resources out of the dead?

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Seems to me those "qualifications" are flexible , in light of the information that has come out.......or have you NOT watched the videos that you claimed I havent? I mean , they do cover that......weird .....

This is absolute BS! No doctor will perform a risky late term abortion on demand. They are only performed to save the life of the mother and when the fetus is "incompatible with life".

Did you not see the hands and legs in the dish?

Only performed to save the mother huh?

Again as I said in a nother thread........

From WORKING in the medical field.........

If it was a danger to the mother or the child, the abortion WOULDNT be taking place at PP , It would be in an ER or Hospital facility.....

This argument is bs to the max

a reply to: stosh64

So now attempting to compare a young child's natural death to abortion??

No. I'm comparing the ludicrous idea that an embryo or fetus can consent to how its remains will be handled, with the idea that an 18 month old can consent to how its remains will be handled upon its death.

It's silly to be outraged at the lack of consent of an embryo or a fetus!

a reply to: windword

I wouldn't be so certain that NO DOCTOR would do a "risky" late term on demand. Think of the horrors of Kermit Gosnel.
abortion doctors aren't the "top" skill set...those types go into neurosurgery, oncology, cardiology...the bottom of the med school class types find their niche doing what others (with a reverence for "first do no harm"...) don't want to do.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: stosh64

And I know you are dead serious.

Yes. I'm DEAD serious.

Abortion is legal, and a woman has the right to decide when and if she wants a family. If a woman chooses to abort, that legal and not immoral. If she wants to donate that aborted result, that is also her prerogative.

The good that can come from the stem cells harvested far outweigh your immature "ick" factor.

Dead is dead. There is no difference in harvesting fetal organs and tissues than any other cadaver.

Grow up!

Immature? Grow up?

I am not the one that resorted to personal attacks. That's telling in a discussion.

Same crap in all these threads.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: stosh64

So now attempting to compare a young child's natural death to abortion??

No. I'm comparing the ludicrous idea that an embryo or fetus can consent to how its remains will be handled, with the idea that an 18 month old can consent to how its remains will be handled upon its death.

It's silly to be outraged at the lack of consent of an embryo or a fetus!

Please check who you are responding to.