Planned Parenthood Selling Dead Babies for Parts

[Troglodyte]

Are you one of those?

No, for starters I wasn't conceived as the result of a rape so my life is sacred.

 

[Vader]

No, for starters I wasn't conceived as the result of a rape so my life is sacred.

Never said anything about sacred, rape or how you were conceived. I don't see what gives you the right to decide that people need to be aborted. I notice that people that ***** about too many people etc... never want to be the one to bite the bullet. It's everyone else that needs to go.

 

[Superman]

what happens when a woman goes to abort a female baby?

Wouldnt the womens rights activists be hypocrites either way?

 

[Troglodyte]

Never said anything about sacred, rape or how you were conceived. I don't see what gives you the right to decide that people need to be aborted. I notice that people that ***** about too many people etc... never want to be the one to bite the bullet. It's everyone else that needs to go.

So you assumed it was about overpopulation? No.

Our legal system decides people need aborted all the time, especially Texas.

I was just saying it would have been better for society if those people (and many others) would have never been born in the first place.

 

[steel dino]

what happens when a woman goes to abort a female baby?

?

that's called....womanslaughter.

 

[Sarge]

My issue with abortion is using it as a form of birth control for people who act irresponsibly.

 

[Vader]

So you assumed it was about overpopulation? No.

Our legal system decides people need aborted all the time, especially Texas.

I was just saying it would have been better for society if those people (and many others) would have never been born in the first place.

If you're talking about execution then your terms are screwy. The legal system decides nobody needs to be aborted. They decided that people who made bad decisions and took another person's life deserve to die. Abortion is killing a person who hasn't done a damn thing against anyone. The mother made a decision in 99.9% of cases to **** without protection and wants an easy out because she made a poor choice. So she kills her baby for convenience not because the baby did something wrong.

Which gives a lot of insight to the liberal mind. Kill a person and give a life for a life is bad. But killing an unborn innocent baby for convenience is good.

 

[Superman]

My issue with abortion is using it as a form of birth control for people who act irresponsibly.

yes. that's my issue as well.

 

[IndySteel]

I don't want my tax dollars to fund that evil ****, or about 80% of everything else the government funds.

 

[Troglodyte]

If you're talking about execution then your terms are screwy. The legal system decides nobody needs to be aborted. They decided that people who made bad decisions and took another person's life deserve to die. Abortion is killing a person who hasn't done a damn thing against anyone. The mother made a decision in 99.9% of cases to **** without protection and wants an easy out because she made a poor choice. So she kills her baby for convenience not because the baby did something wrong.

Which gives a lot of insight to the liberal mind. Kill a person and give a life for a life is bad. But killing an unborn innocent baby for convenience is good.

It was a euphemism.

Many aborted baby's would grow up to be productive members of society, but many others would grow up to be ne'er do wells, thugs or monsters. (People who should have been aborted).

 

[Vader]

It was a euphemism.

Many aborted baby's would grow up to be productive members of society, but many others would grow up to be ne'er do wells, thugs or monsters. (People who should have been aborted).

Doesn't negate my point. Since no one knows who is who then it's a moot point.

 

[Troglodyte]

Doesn't negate my point. Since no one knows who is who then it's a moot point.

I guess, if you're willing to disregard demographics. Ask a NICU worker when they discharge a baby to it's moron of a mother if they feel hopeful about the kid's future.

 

[deljzc]

I love the hypocrisy of those here arguing a 1" fetus is life so worth saving yet in other threads want to bomb Iran into oblivion (like that wouldn't kill millions of children).

Maybe we should just allow abortions for non-christians? How about that as a compromise?

 

[IndySteel]

I love the hypocrisy of those here arguing a 1" fetus is life so worth saving yet in other threads want to bomb Iran into oblivion (like that wouldn't kill millions of children).

Maybe we should just allow abortions for non-christians? How about that as a compromise?

The difference is that a baby is killed while being totally defenseless. Terrorists have forfeited their right to life. Nice to see that you love terrorists and hate babies.

 

[deljzc]

I thought all life was sacred? Didn't I hear that from EVERY republican on the stage last night?

I guess only christian lives are sacred. That's REALLY what you mean, right?

Again, let's just pass a law that only christians aren't allowed abortions and then leave it at that. That seems to be a compromise everyone would be happy with. We hand a survey to every woman walking into Planned Parenthood and if you believe in Jesus as the Son of God then you can't get an abortion. Simple as that.

 

[Rod Farva]

I love the hypocrisy of those here arguing a 1" fetus is life so worth saving yet in other threads want to bomb Iran into oblivion (like that wouldn't kill millions of children).

Maybe we should just allow abortions for non-christians? How about that as a compromise?

Neither should be killed. Neither is at any fault. But it's the actions of the attendant adults that compromise both. In one case it's far too often simply the adult deciding to relinquish to their most base desires without taking very simple, very readily available precautions.

In the other it's savage, barely above Neanderthal murderous scum doing the savage, barely above Neanderthal scum things they do with full knowledge that they are exposing their own children and the children of others to becoming collateral damage from retribution and not caring. So yeah, your moral equivalence thingy needs work.

 

[deljzc]

Neither should be killed. Neither is at any fault. But it's the actions of the attendant adults that compromise both. In one case it's far too often simply the adult deciding to relinquish to their most base desires without taking very simple, very readily available precautions.

In the other it's savage, barely above Neanderthal murderous scum doing the savage, barely above Neanderthal scum things they do with full knowledge that they are exposing their own children and the children of others to becoming collateral damage from retribution and not caring. So yeah, your moral equivalence thingy needs work.

Rod, if you have a great magic wand to make people smart, I'm all for that.

But it's easy to preach from a position of opportunity and experience to those with neither and just say "I know best, you are wrong". The religious right talks all about keeping government out of our lives, yet they LOVE to legislate to 20-somethings their moral superiority. That is so hypocritical to me.

I'm not pro-abortion. I don't want MORE abortions in this country. I hate women (and there are a few) that abuse the right to an abortion and use it as birth control. That's obviously not the intent most pro-choice people want to see happen.

But I also know what it was like in this country when abortions were illegal. How the rich and privileged still had access to safe abortions yet the poor and middle class were stuck being lectured to about how evil it is and how mothers killed themselves trying to do it at home. That's not a system I want to go back to. And I don't believe the religious-right for one second that if they get their way, repeal Roe-vs.-Wade and outlaw abortions 100% that they will follow through and apply that law equally to all citizens. That the white elite will still have access when needed for their sons and daughters. That unwanted pregnancies won't still happen to good people and derail otherwise extremely promising and productive lives that maybe abortions could save (and teach a lesson). That unwanted children won't be born into lives of poverty and despair and neglect with zero chance of success (and not be put up for adoption like the Utopian idea being sold).

I don't believe any of that rainbow will happen if you guys get your way. None of it.

Sometimes making something illegal doesn't make it go away.

 

[Troglodyte]

The difference is that a baby is killed while being totally defenseless. Terrorists have forfeited their right to life. Nice to see that you love terrorists and hate babies.

The similarity of banning abortion and killing terrorist is that both are very expensive.

 

[Yinzerlyn]

I know a child who was born at 24 weeks. He weighed 1 pound, one ounce at birth. Spent 86 days in the hospital. Has some health issues, but he's alive. And happy. And thriving.

IIRC, there are some on this board (and some famous liberals) who would think that at 24 weeks, it's a fetus and non-viable. That there is no way it could live outside the womb and therefore it's OK to abort.

I refer back to my first set of statements on this post to refute that belief.

 

[Rod Farva]

Rod, if you have a great magic wand to make people smart, I'm all for that.

But it's easy to preach from a position of opportunity and experience to those with neither and just say "I know best, you are wrong". You know you don't have a corner on the compassion market. Regardless of my station in life, one of opportunity as you state, but one that wasn't always so, I have an enormous amount of compassion for people which is why I feel so fiercely protective of the very most innocent of them. And experience shouldn't be used as a teaching tool? As a means of saying "don't make this mistake because I did and here are the repercussions"?The religious right talks all about keeping government out of our lives, yet they LOVE to legislate to 20-somethings their moral superiority. See, I don't believe I've brought federal regulation (or actually any government regulation for that matter) into this debate....but I absolutely believe that it is a state issue to regulate.) That is so hypocritical to me.

I'm not pro-abortion. I don't want MORE abortions in this country. I hate women (and there are a few) that abuse the right to an abortion and use it as birth control. That's obviously not the intent most pro-choice people want to see happen.

I vehemently disagree that the majority of pro "choice" people don't want to see exactly that. I have no figures to back it up but I get the sense that most of them have come to believe that abortion should be a viable (and yet another) means of birth control. The canard of "reproductive health" is a complete misdirection intended to soften the visceral impact of "abortion" on the public.

But I also know what it was like in this country when abortions were illegal. How the rich and privileged still had access to safe abortions yet the poor and middle class were stuck being lectured to about how evil it is and how mothers killed themselves trying to do it at home. That's not a system I want to go back to. And I don't believe the religious-right for one second that if they get their way, repeal Roe-vs.-Wade and outlaw abortions 100% that they will follow through and apply that law equally to all citizens. That the white elite will still have access when needed for their sons and daughters. That unwanted pregnancies won't still happen to good people and derail otherwise extremely promising and productive lives that maybe abortions could save (and teach a lesson). That unwanted children won't be born into lives of poverty and despair and neglect with zero chance of success (and not be put up for adoption like the Utopian idea being sold).

I don't believe any of that rainbow will happen if you guys get your way. None of it.

Sometimes making something illegal doesn't make it go away.

Sigh......again, this debate began over the SALE of legs, thighs and wings......oops,sorry, those are chickens ( I think there's still a distinction).....lungs, hearts, livers, etc. and the callous, reprehensible, inhuman methods used to "harvest" them like a crop from very well developed, healthy human beings and the callous, reprehensible, inhuman providers discussing it cavalierly all while using taxpayer money to fund it.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Rod, if you have a great magic wand to make people smart, I'm all for that.

But it's easy to preach from a position of opportunity and experience to those with neither and just say "I know best, you are wrong". The religious right talks all about keeping government out of our lives, yet they LOVE to legislate to 20-somethings their moral superiority. That is so hypocritical to me.

I'm not pro-abortion. I don't want MORE abortions in this country. I hate women (and there are a few) that abuse the right to an abortion and use it as birth control. That's obviously not the intent most pro-choice people want to see happen.

But I also know what it was like in this country when abortions were illegal. How the rich and privileged still had access to safe abortions yet the poor and middle class were stuck being lectured to about how evil it is and how mothers killed themselves trying to do it at home. That's not a system I want to go back to. And I don't believe the religious-right for one second that if they get their way, repeal Roe-vs.-Wade and outlaw abortions 100% that they will follow through and apply that law equally to all citizens. That the white elite will still have access when needed for their sons and daughters. That unwanted pregnancies won't still happen to good people and derail otherwise extremely promising and productive lives that maybe abortions could save (and teach a lesson). That unwanted children won't be born into lives of poverty and despair and neglect with zero chance of success (and not be put up for adoption like the Utopian idea being sold).

I don't believe any of that rainbow will happen if you guys get your way. None of it.

Sometimes making something illegal doesn't make it go away.

There absolutely can be a middle ground, and there should be. I'm tired of this tired argument that there can't be.

But consider this. What if you could only have one of the two outcomes - the old way, as you describe it, or the way it is now, which would you take?

I would take the way it was. Yes, it was awful when women would die, yes it was awful when they would commit suicide, yes it was wrong that not everyone had access to the same care. But those losses PALE in comparison to 58 Million lost lives we've had since Roe v. Wade. We've allowed the loss of 58 million little lives vs. tens of thousands of adult lives. And now we have to deal with the industry having built a dead-baby-parts market.

Sometimes you just have to weigh the outcomes to find the right answer.

I digress...there CAN be a middle ground and you Liberals pretend that isn't possible...whether defined by early vs. late term abortions, etc. Let's do away with "convenience" and "economic" abortions. That's just murder.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

It was a euphemism.

Many aborted baby's would grow up to be productive members of society, but many others would grow up to be ne'er do wells, thugs or monsters. (People who should have been aborted).

Considering that far more Democrats and Liberals get abortions than Conservatives and blacks get 37% of abortions while being 12.8% of the population, I'm good with it. In case anyone wonders why I'm a pro-choice Republican.

 

[Stewey]

I love the hypocrisy of those here arguing a 1" fetus is life so worth saving yet in other threads want to bomb Iran into oblivion (like that wouldn't kill millions of children).

Maybe we should just allow abortions for non-christians? How about that as a compromise?

I'm really ******* sick of that argument.
Yes, all life is "sacred"...that's why "murder" is illegal. The problem here is that you and others confuse "killing" with "murder"...you use them interchangeably. A cop shooting a criminal in self defense is "killing". War is killing.
Abortion is murder.

The Bible allows for killing, not murder.
http://www.biblestudy.org/question/what-does-thou-shall-not-kill-mean.html

It is often heard that Cain "killed" Abel...actually he murdered him,
The commandment "Thou shalt not kill" is really not as general as the King James version would indicate. The commandment actually refers to premeditated, unjustified killing - murder.

And abortion is just that...premeditated and unjustified.

And I'll give you a compromise...let only liberals abort their offspring. You people have caused enough damage.

 

[Stewey]

I'm really ******* sick of that argument.
Yes, all life is "sacred"...that's why "murder" is illegal. The problem here is that you and others confuse "killing" with "murder"...you use them interchangeably. A cop shooting a criminal in self defense is "killing". War is killing.
Abortion is murder.

The Bible allows for killing, not murder.
http://www.biblestudy.org/question/what-does-thou-shall-not-kill-mean.html

It is often heard that Cain "killed" Abel...actually he murdered him,
The commandment "Thou shalt not kill" is really not as general as the King James version would indicate. The commandment actually refers to premeditated, unjustified killing - murder.

And abortion is just that...premeditated and unjustified.

And I'll give you a compromise...let only liberals abort their offspring. You people have caused enough damage.

And why stop? I'm on a roll!
The liberal idea that conservatives are hypocrites because we are pro-life yet support the death penalty is stupid as well.

I'm sure most of us rational people have heard .that song and dance that "we are no better than the murderers we are putting to death".

Gee, that must mean when the police take a kidnapper into custody, the police are no better than the kidnapper because they are kidnapping him.


Ok now I'm done.

 

[tapeANaspirin2it]

Rod, if you have a great magic wand to make people smart, I'm all for that.

But it's easy to preach from a position of opportunity and experience to those with neither and just say "I know best, you are wrong". The religious right talks all about keeping government out of our lives, yet they LOVE to legislate to 20-somethings their moral superiority. That is so hypocritical to me.

I'm not pro-abortion. I don't want MORE abortions in this country. I hate women (and there are a few) that abuse the right to an abortion and use it as birth control. That's obviously not the intent most pro-choice people want to see happen.

But I also know what it was like in this country when abortions were illegal. How the rich and privileged still had access to safe abortions yet the poor and middle class were stuck being lectured to about how evil it is and how mothers killed themselves trying to do it at home. That's not a system I want to go back to. And I don't believe the religious-right for one second that if they get their way, repeal Roe-vs.-Wade and outlaw abortions 100% that they will follow through and apply that law equally to all citizens. That the white elite will still have access when needed for their sons and daughters. That unwanted pregnancies won't still happen to good people and derail otherwise extremely promising and productive lives that maybe abortions could save (and teach a lesson). That unwanted children won't be born into lives of poverty and despair and neglect with zero chance of success (and not be put up for adoption like the Utopian idea being sold).

I don't believe any of that rainbow will happen if you guys get your way. None of it.

Sometimes making something illegal doesn't make it go away.

How about we start with none of my tax dollars going to pay for it. Could you imagine the uproar if gun stores were given tax dollars? And guns are a specific right granted by the Constitution.

Churches and faith based charities help more people every day than PP could ever dream. Of course, PP was never meant to help people. They were formed to "assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit."

In “The Morality of Birth Control,” a 1921 speech, Sanger divided society into three groups: the "educated and informed" class that regulated the size of their families, the "intelligent and responsible" who desired to control their families however did not have the means or the knowledge and the "irresponsible and reckless people" whose religious scruples "prevent their exercising control over their numbers.” Sanger concludes “there is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped

Your tax dollars support this group. Any wonder why they'd be down with selling dead babies?