Planned Parenthood executives joke about decapitating fetuses in new video

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Krazysh0t

As I have said before, you are welcome to believe what ever you wish.

This isn't about belief; it's about facts. CMP is in LOTS of legal trouble right now for doing shady #. The releasing of this video while under an injunction specifically prohibiting its release is just another example of their ever present shadiness. Clearly you only want to believe the stuff that appeals to you.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Legal trouble does not mean wrong doing.

Why don't we wait for the jury to decide?

a reply to: seasonal

It's pretty open and shut. They weren't allowed to release the video under a judge's orders. They ignored that order and released it. What more information is needed exactly?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

a verdict

a reply to: seasonal

So until then you are going to refuse to believe that your boy Dave and his organization are shady but will blindly believe their videos procured from shady means trying to pass PP off as shady?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

:Like so many things in life, I disagree with about half the US

a reply to: seasonal

That sounds like a politician answer. A non-answer that doesn't answer my question in the slightest.

a reply to: seasonal
have you found the video that you discussed in the op yet?? or is this like comey's memos and trumps recordings, we're just supposed to assume that they exist and take someone's word for what they say??

by the way, judge, or judges, not sure, it's been awhile, have watched alot of these recordings and they say that they don't support the accusations that cmp is making against NAF or planned parenthood.
and, I think I remember the circumstances surrounding the release the other NAF videos that were released after the order was given for them not to be released. if I am remembering right, they came out shortly after the judge gave permission for cmp to release them to on of the congressional committees making people wonder if it wasn't members of that committee that released them.

if I am remembering right, this may be a rico case, it'd be interesting to have a bunch of republicans identified as co-conspirators!!!

a reply to: dawnstar

I looked on you tube, I found the other videos. For now that is enough for me. Link it if you want.

a reply to: dawnstar

Well they got caught editing videos. Remember when they released a video than eventually the fill video came out and you saw the editing.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

a reply to: seasonal

Keep deflecting, all you are doing is cementing my initial assumptions about you into my head. I tried giving you the benefit of the doubt and let you defend your beliefs about wanting facts and rationality, but now it appears that you are just trying to wiggle out of answering because you know that you only want to believe one side of the argument.

PS: You seem keen on passing judgement on PP without a verdict, and they aren't even on trial. CMP is.

a reply to: seasonal
already said I wouldn't...
but it's not that hard to find, didn't find it on you tube though, no...
try the pro-life sites.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I think we can agree to disagree.

I always deflect when someone is hell bent to get a result I will not give.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Krazysh0t
I always deflect when someone is hell bent to get a result I will not give.

So much for your claims about wanting rationality. Just shutdown when the arguing gets too tough.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Not tough, just pointless.

I am watching my cat try to jump through the storm door window to get the swallows that are yet again trying to build a nest above our entry door. I will wipe the mud off this evening.

Do you see a similarity between my cat and this argument? Or the swallows still trying to build their stupid nest above my entry door?

Neither one is going to go anywhere. I respect your view, I just disagree. And that is allowed.

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: seasonal


A 12 week fetus' brain, eyes, ears, nose and throat, aren't well enough developed to be useful in regard to medical usefulness, other than student research. Stem cells can be extracted whether or not the fetus and /or its head is in tact.

Actually stem cells are not needed anymore. We can manufacture them. The only thing us medical research such as learning how organs form. People want to make you think there us a huge market. There is not organs can't be used we don't need stem cells when they can be grown. So even medical research is limited.

What is your field of expertise, that you can make that claim.

What kind of expertise do you need to read science reports?

The technology to reverse-transition epithelial cells into pluripotent stem cells has been around for a few years and has been steadily advancing.

This is advantageous for numerous reasons:
1) No ethical quandry
2) No immuno-rejection
3) No risk of cancerous transformation
4) Cost effective

There are more but that's off the top of my head. And if you question my credentials I'm a biologist. Satisfied?

a reply to: Teikiatsu

Nice.

a reply to: Teikiatsu

Fetal tissue research declining, still important

But scientists also said that for some studies, fetal tissue remains essential, and that efforts to reduce an already-scarce supply could set back research on birth defects, spinal cord injuries, Parkinson's disease, eye diseases, and vaccines and treatments for HIV/AIDS, to name a few.
....
Scientists say that newly developed stem cell technologies using adult cells have not yet been fully validated, and they still need to run tests with fetal cells to ensure their quality.

Last year, for example, Harvard Stem Cell Institute reported that neuronal stem cells extracted from fetal tissue and transplanted into the brains of Parkinson's disease patients helped them remain healthy and functional for as long as 14 years.
   
Researchers have also had success using fetal stem cells to treat spinal cord injuries.

Insoo Hyun, a bioethicist at Case Western Reserve University, said the newer, lab-derived cells have not been perfected and researchers still need fetal tissue to ensure that the reprogrammed cells are of comparable quality.

a reply to: windword

Story is from 2015