Just wondering: Can anyone find a conservative blog that is lamenting
the tragic turn of events in which we find that Planned Parenthood (supported by both liberals in general as well as funded by liberals with tax dollars) is selling the body parts of aborted human children or otherwise
speaking out about this great evil?
I ask because I've looked around and cannot find any.
If not, why not?
I find it disgusting that the left can get worked up over slavery as it might have existed 4,000 years ago, but not about this monstrous behavior.
I find it reprehensible that the when the left responds to acts of evil like the shooting in SC or in CT, they are quick to blame flags or guns and call for the banning of inanimate objects as if those objects are the problem. Yet when faced with the systematic evil of Kermit Gosnell or the now multitude of things from Planned Parenthood (hiding rape, giving advice on how to turn kids into sex slaves, selling human body parts for profit), they can't even work up enough gumption to suggest that we ban forceps or scissors.
It seems obvious that the American left is so much more interested in protecting and advancing abortion, that they are willing to ignore or defend this type of reprehensible behavior.
You do have to love the fact that this little scheme does have the effect or rendering the "It's just a clump of cells" argument even more foolish than it previously was.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
49 comments:
http://m.snopes.com/pp-baby-parts-sale/
"The promotional video mischaracterizing Planned Parenthood’s mission and services is made by a long time anti-abortion activist that has used deceptive and unethical video editing, and that has created a fake medical website as well as a fake human tissue website that purports to provide services to stem cell researchers,”
Read more at http://m.snopes.com/pp-baby-parts-sale/#pVqJrKP2MjOUv7eA.99
Will the Right come out against fraudulent "investigators" for lies and slander?
hmmm...
If the right is jumping the gun on this story, so are you. Snopes has it as "undetermined". Keep it in your pants, Danny. Your beloved abortionists are safe so far.
And Dan jumps to the defense of these wonderful folks.
I have no opinions about PP. I am merely not wanting to repeat gossip and innuendo, gathered by folks telling lies from the outset, as if it were fact. I'm surprised that either of you are defending that. I would have thought you better men than that.
If the right is jumping the gun on this story, so are you. Snopes has it as "undetermined".
I mean, think about this, Marshall. If the known facts are, so far, undetermined, then pointing out that these claims are not known facts, but are, in fact, undetermined, then isn't stating that these are not known facts precisely, specifically and factually NOT jumping the case?
And is pointing out that these are rumors, not facts, Craig, not a defense of TRUTH, not "these wonderful folks..."?
When did some on the Right abandon Truth in favor of innuendo, as long as it supports their agenda? Tell me that's not you guys!
I guess "they've" seen how well it works for the left and decided to give it a try.
But y'all just keep ignoring the stuff PP does, cause we wouldn't want something like trafficking in human body parts to stop abortion now would we.
What "stuff?" You mean these rumors?
You know what I hear about Al Mohler, Craig? That he molests puppies... should I post that on CNN? Because, you know, rumors are as good as news?
Again, I ask you: Are you in favor of reporting gossip and innuendo as if it were a fact? Tell me you're not that low of character!
Dan,
Get real. What is "undetermined" by Snopes is whether or not Snopes could definitively determine that the charge leveled against PP is true or false. PP kills the unborn. Why would it be so hard to imagine they might be doing other immoral things as well? The charge was leveled. PP responded (such as they did) and the accusers insist there is more to come.
It appears that you believe because PP denies the charges that we must assume the report is no more than rumor and innuendo. That pretty much indicts every freakin' report from every news service. Get a hold of yourself.
psst... hey, pal! Ya know what I hear? I hear that the fellas at focus on the family like to wear frilly women's underthings? Word on the street is, it gives them a sweet little thrill. I hear their grannies taught them how to dress... just sayin', that's what I'm hearing.
And have you heard about the nudie pics in the Christian wing of the GOP locker room?
At least you are somewhat consistent in your hypocrisy.
Even you must realize that it is one thing to videotape someone and to draw conclusions from what they actually said, as opposed to simply making things up and pretending as if there is some sort of equivalence between the two.
Of course it helps if you selectively ignore PP's long history of unsavory actions.
So, it appears that, yes, you fellas are okay with reporting gossip as if it were rumors, and with using lies and twisting the truth to support your cause.
If so, then I would suggest to you that this is contrary to sound biblical teaching and to just plain reason and morality. Be better than that, fellas.
"reporting gossip and rumors as if they were facts..." I mean.
Carry on. Or better yet, stop carrying on and start behaving.
To answer your initial question, Craig: Why haven't liberal sites reported these rumors as if they were facts? Because I, for one, don't pass on gossip and rumors. I believe that to be immoral and irrational and contrary to the cause of Truth.
Dan,
Thank you, thank you, thank you. You have more than demonstrated my point.
Of course, the fact that you don't seem to grasp the difference between putting a video of someone out for public consumption, and gossip/rumor is a bit disconcerting.
All I have is my phone, so a more thorough disection of the gross inconsistensty will have to wait for later.
Suffice it to say it will be full of your actual words, no gossip.
Dan,
You can't seem to help but lie with impunity. No one is reporting rumors as if they are fact. All reports are put forth as allegations and I don't see that this one is any different. PP denies the allegations and for you that is enough to demonize those making the allegations. Snopes cannot confirm the allegations as either true or false and for you that is enough to demonize those making the allegations. The party making the allegations cannot be held as gossipers or rumor-mongerers for reporting what they believe is true.
And here is a point that seems to elude you: If the PP rep on tape was NOT dealing in a manner suspicious, why is she even there with those posing as consumers of fetal body parts? Why did she remain to be taped at all rather than walking away from the discussion, disgusted that anyone would dare suppose she would be involved in such dealings? It seems to me that anyone who was adamantly opposed to the sale of body parts for profit would spend any time in discussing the possibility at all. They would make it clear that it was illegal and that they will not engage in illegal activity...end of discussion...have a good day.
At the same time, you are as guilty of assuming as are those who report on this taped discussion. YOUR assumption is that those taping the discussion are engaged in purposely framing PP for doing what they are not doing.
Craig poses a rational question. The left never assumes the worst about those they support, while they are quick to assume the worst about those they don't. You are no different as you accuse those who defend Biblical truth regarding the prohibition of sexual immorality as haters, oppressors and other nonsensical charges.
I don't support PP. Nor do I NOT support them. I am entirely indifferent about PP and thus, have no dog in that fight.
I am sure that there are some sincere people who try to do good work at PP. I'm sure that there are those with perhaps less-than-noble ideals who work at PP. Just as with any other organization. Regardless, just as I didn't weigh in on allegations against OJ Simpson, but chose to let his trial take its course, or just as I opt not to weigh in on a variety of people who've been alleged to have done something, I am consistently not weighing in on unsupported allegations that do not, on the face of it, appear to be true, at least for the organization.
Do I hold people with NO journalism background who are not using standard journalistic ethics/practices and who have an agenda they're trying to back, not a story they are trying to research (and yeah, I know, there are a lot of those) as less-than-competent or reliable - or at least questionable - at the outset? Yes. This is a rational starting point, it seems to me. But my position would be consistent for any group with an agenda who is obviously trying to find dirt to support their agenda, not research an actual story.
You see, this is the problem with any extremist organization who get their ideals/values not from some more rational, thought-through, reasoned evaluation of morality/harm, but from a negatively-religious/fundamentalist set of black/white rules... they find it too easy to lie, to murder, to embrace actual, obvious harm in the pursuit of their "truth" and "morality" because "god is on their side..." and that makes whatever they do "right..." Fundamentalism can be a dangerous thing, friends. We see this when "they" are the fundamentalist, using their religious texts to justify even egregious harm and injustice, but we become blinded to it when it's "our side" doing the harm.
First thing: Do no harm.
Dan,
I'm going to assume that you haven't seen the video or read the transcripts, because I cannot believe that anyone who claims to be a christian could hear/read those words without feeling some level of disgust and revulsion.
So, we you know that PP has actively protected rapists, covered up sex trafficking and child molestation, and manipulates women into abortions. Even beyond that they refuse to repudiate their founder and her racist views, and coincidentally the vast majority of the human children they abort are black. All of this is funded by and protected by the politicians which you support. So for you to claim that you just don;t have an opinion on PP is simply an act of moral cowardice. You spew expletive and vitriol at those who disagree with you about events from thousands of years ago, but can't even work up the tiniest bit of discomfort about this vile behavior that is happening right now in your own back yard.
The fact that you are more interested in demonizing the people who exposed this barbarity than in finding out the truth of the matter disgusts me. The lengths you will go to to avoid having to compromise your ideology have always surprised me, but your willingness to brush off this as if it is nothing is a new low.
now multitude of things from Planned Parenthood (hiding rape, giving advice on how to turn kids into sex slaves, selling human body parts for profit)
Interestingly, when the Bible (in a literal reading) does these same things (close to it, and worse), you are unable to admit it or denounce it.
Irony, eh?
Dan,
First of all, we can't help it you refuse to seriously and prayerfully study Scripture with an eye toward knowing and understanding it. You clearly don't for trying to make a parallel between the topic on the table and OT histories. For one thing, you still don't seem to understand what "taking the Bible literally" really means. So there's that. Then there's this:
"I don't support PP. Nor do I NOT support them. I am entirely indifferent about PP..."
Thus you support them. To not stand opposed to an organization that exists based on its willingness to abort healthy unborn children is to enable them. You are no different than the Germans of the 30's and 40's, as well as certain nations of that time who stood by while Nazis murdered Jews and invaded neighboring countries.
You have the audacity to speak out against perceived "oppression" suffered by the sexually immoral you favor while having no "dog" in the fight over abortion and the Mengeles that perform them. Well, those "dogs" are unborn children and nothing says "oppression" like literally being torn limb from limb. That you believe that anyone has the "right" to choose to submit their own children to such a heinous demise shouts your support for PP and others like them. Do no harm? Doing harm is their business and method of profiting.
It's ironic that you choose to condemn something that you perceive happened thousands of years ago while excusing and supporting those who engage in it now.
I know it's easier to bitch about something you can't change from the past than it is to deal with it in the present, but I guess politics wins out eventually.
Marshall,
The problem with this story is that it confounds the accepted narrative that the American left accepts uncritically. In this case the presumption is that abortion is good and must be protected and furthered at all costs. So, when the standard bearer for unrestricted aborting does these things, the left has to do something. If they respond with appropriate outrage, then it undermines the presumption about abortion. So, instead, they ignore it. Or try to shift the blame to the mean people who had the temerity to film someone and to make that embarrassing film public. It's all about protecting the narrative. In this case, Dan has illustrated this beautifully. On the one hand he is overly indignant about the fact that these folks aren't "journalists" with "journalistic ethics", as if he (or anyone else on the left really are concerned about ethical journalists). He's thrown out the stock charges "slander", "gossip", etc, while failing to acknowledge the nature of the actual words and the matter of fact-ness of the speaker. While on the other hand he plays the "I just don't really know a lot about this and I'm sure that most of the people at PP are just really nice folks trying to help" card. Which as you pointed out is kind of the equivalent of many Germans in the 30's.
As an aside, the most ethical journalist of the last week was Major Garret, and look at how he got slapped around for asking a tough but excellent question of P-BO. Again, it is an example of what happens when folks go against the narrative.
The other example is the recent shootings in TN. I'm sure you've noticed the distinct lack of sympathy for the victims from the left (specifically Dan). This one seems especially problematic for the left for a number of reasons.
Pro- it was a mass shooting which is always a chance to bash guns.
Con- it wasn't a sexy "assault rifle" or "high capacity magazine" or something that furthers the cause of gun control.
Pro- multiple innocent victims
Con- they were Marines, so how innocent could they really be. Additionally they were recruiting truly innocent young Americans to join the military where they will perpetuate the evil Bush foreign policy goals of conquering most of the rest of the world.
Pro- the shooter could reasonably be described as a "domestic right wing terrorist"
Con- he's Muslim and it isn't PC to refer to Muslim's as terrorists. I addition he really isn't a "domestic" terrorist.
Oh, and there is no inanimate object that can be blamed and banned.
When the folks in SC were killed, there was an outpouring of sympathy from all sides of the political spectrum, yet some on the left tried to snarkily imply that the right was callous and indifferent. Yet, now we see a decided lack of overt outcry from the left for the TN victims.
I realize how difficult it must be to be so committed to ones presuppositions that one has to stifle what should be completely justifiable outrage simply because it doesn't help your cause.
I just hope that more and more average people see this opportunistic "outrage" for what it really is. A cheap cynical way to score political points.
PS
You note Dan's call to wait for all the facts, well I didn't see anyone on the left saying that about Michael Brown, nor did I see apologies when "all the facts" became known and disproved the narrative.
I have two clarifications of items that both the AP and Planned Parenthood obscure:
(1) Planned Parenthood is still not defending itself from the most damning aspects of this story—that it routinely kills babies in utero and distributes parts of their bodies for scientists to dissect. In spite of euphemisms like “tissue donation,” Planned Parenthood admits that it is trafficking the body parts of aborted babies. In light of that fact, the AP might need a new headline. Maybe something like this: “Planned Parenthood does not dispute that it traffics the body-parts of aborted babies.” As it stands, they’ve buried the lede.
(2) Planned Parenthood is bracing itself for the release of more video footage, some of which may include video of the whole bloody business. This particular detail is barely mentioned in the AP story, but Planned Parenthood is specific in its release:
“Planned Parenthood said it expects to see… Illegal, secret recording in a highly sensitive area of a health center where tissue is processed after abortion procedures, a serious invasion of women’s privacy and dignity.”
Once you de-euphemize that statement, it translates to this. Planned Parenthood thinks that the video sting operation may have actual footage of the aborted babies as they are being prepared for distribution to researchers.
Think about what this means. Planned Parenthood has an area where they “process” tissue—which means that Planned Parenthood has little rooms where they cut up baby bodies and put the different pieces in sterile containers for storage and transport.
I can see why they wouldn’t want video of that to be released and why they are trying to blunt its impact in advance with their euphemized statement. Even if such video never emerges, Planned Parenthood itself has now confirmed that such areas exist in their clinics.
Bottom line? Planned Parenthood is not defending itself from the most damning aspects of this story—that its daily services include killing babies in utero and distributing parts of their bodies for research. Also, there may be video footage of the whole bloody business.
For example, CNN interviewed bioethicist Art Caplan of New York University:
Caplan told CNN’s Elizabeth Cohen that altering procedures in order to get tissue in the best condition would be a “big no-no.”
“In abortion the primary goal is to give the safest abortion possible,” he said. “Your sole concern has to be the mother and her health.”
He said there’s a parallel in patient care: When someone is dying, doctors shouldn’t change how they treat the patient in order to harvest good tissue for donation after death.
Reuters interviewed bioethicist Laurie Zoloth of Northwestern University:
Zoloth said it was “terribly disturbing because the physician seems to be engaged in a transaction in which the goal is to extract tissue to meet the needs of a company, rather than being focused on the core purpose of her clinic, which is to provide a safe medical procedure.”
She termed that “an obvious conflict of interest.”
Zoloth also pointed to the attitude of the physician in the video, observing, “The doctor seems extraordinarily cavalier … Having this discussion over a meal, while drinking what appears to be wine, takes this further from the realm of professional clinical medicine and into the realm of business.”
Unlike Dan, there appear to be some on the left who might be a little less dismissive of this.
PP speaks of the dignity and privacy of the woman, referring to things like consent from the mother to use the child's remains for donation. I don't get it. If it isn't a child, why the need for permission? If I have a gangrenous leg amputated, am I really going to care if they use the thing for research? If the child is just a clump of cells, how is the woman's dignity impaired by the public knowledge that the "clump" is sold to someone who wants it? It seems they want it both ways. Wow. How unusual for leftists.
So, you now support selling human body parts as long as there is no profit? You realize that even without the profit this still violates US law. It is illegal to abort a baby in a manner that will preserve particular human organs or tissue for sale or other use. This is why there has been such a large debate around human cloning etc. To prevent people from getting pregnant with the intent of aborting the child to harvest organs or tissue.
This still ignores the previously documented problems with PP. This still leaves you defending an organization that sells human body parts. This still leaves you defending an organization that actively covers up cases of rape. This still leaves you supporting and voting for politicians who financially support this with tax dollars.
Oh and by the way, PP has been misleading people for years about how much money they make for abortions, but based on one link you are willing to blindly believe them and continue your support.
It would seem that my enforcement of your commenting rules hasn't quite sunk in yet.
"However, federal law prohibits the sale of body parts of aborted babies. In fact, the sale or purchase of human fetal tissue a federal felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $500,000 (42 U.S.C. 289g-2)."
"Nucatola admits to Planned Parenthood illegally performing partial-birth abortions, which Congress banned and have been banned in numerous states."
You keep shilling though.
The fact that you can sit there and not be shocked by the blatant evil of what is happening while still calling yourself a follower of Christ is honestly beyond me
There is no possible way that anyone can rationally not condemn this practice as evil and immoral.
The fact that it clearly violates federal law just makes it worse.
You'd have much more credibility had you not jumped on the various bandwagons regarding Michael Brown etc and swallowed the narrative hook line and sinker without waiting for the facts to come in, of course you excusing the rioters falls right in line with your excusing and support of PP and those who fight to use tax dollars to support this incredibly profitable company.
FYI, I am not in any way suggesting that PP be deprived of legal due process, this should be thoroughly investigated and appropriate judicial punishment meted out if they are found guilty.
At this point I am so incredibly disgusted as a human being and a Christian that my condemnation is purely on that level. Abortion in general is bad enough. The fact that PP aborts a disproportionately high number of black babies, is bad enough. The fact that the original intent of PP was to eradicate blacks is enough. To hear Hillary Clinton tout Margret Sanger as a hero is enough. PP has plenty of things they could be condemned for, without going into this latest issue. The fact remains that you and those of your political stripe will continue to defend PP blindly as long as they keep aborting children.
Dan,
Your ignorance of the story is showing. No one ever suggested that the barbarous behavior was happening in every PP office in every state. Simply that it is happening and that high level officials are condoning it. Am I pleased that the folks in Indiana have not gone down this road, sure. Does one investigation in one state provide support for your blanket defense of PP, not hardly. Unlike P-BO I'm sure you're aware that there are potentially 49 more state plus federal investigations that are possible. Further the law they admit violating is a federal law so Indiana wouldn't be involved in that anyway.
So you keep up your cheerleading for this. It just bolsters my point.
Why would I apologize, because one investigation in one state found nothing? You do realize that they didn't investigate the PP locations where the videos were filmed? You do realize that this was not a blanket exoneration of PP nationwide, don't you?
The question is not what it would take for me, I would hope that there would be investigations in the jurisdictions where it is appropriate. Since a violation of federal law is the issue, it would seem that some sort of federal investigation would be in order. It seems reasonable that when there is video evidence of violation of laws, that the circumstances should be investigated.
The real question is at what point do you work up the tiniest bit of discomfort and stop this quest to exonerate these people?
I see two possible motives.
1. You have some strange desire to prove me wrong and will celebrate anything that you thinks moves you toward that strange goal.
2. You can't get past your progressive political bias to call this what it is.
Given your refusal in other cases to sit back, take your time, wait for all the facts to come in, then evaluate (Michael Brown for example), it rings hollow to hear you call for that now. Not that being inconsistent has ever gotten in the way of you staking out a position before.
Again, if the people at PP are exonerated through some sort of legal process, I'll gladly reconsider. But to suggest that one investigation, of two affiliates wipes the slate clean, is intellectually dishonest.
"Now let me give you a recent example of the persisting insularity of liberal thought in the media. When the first secret Planned Parenthood video was released in mid-July, anyone who looks only at liberal media was kept totally in the dark about it, even after the second video was released. But the videos were being run nonstop all over conservative talk shows on radio and television. It was a huge and disturbing story, but there was total silence in the liberal media. That kind of censorship was shockingly unprofessional. The liberal major media were trying to bury the story by ignoring it. Now I am a former member of Planned Parenthood and a strong supporter of unconstrained reproductive rights. But I was horrified and disgusted by those videos and immediately felt there were serious breaches of medical ethics in the conduct of Planned Parenthood officials."
C. Paglia
It's refreshing to see someone who is a dyed in the wool liberal Democrat who has the guts enough to be honest about this kind of thing.
You all are so afraid to say anything against the official narrative that you end up condoning and defending the indefensible.
When you have someone on tape admitting that they violated federal law, that seems like something to investigate. You seem so fixated on this one state investigation that you are prepared to exonerate the entire group.
Beyond that if you insist on trying to put words in my mouth, you just continue to look like the shill you are.
In several places the PP executive clearly describes altering the abortion procedure in order to preserve the human body parts for sale. This is against federal law.
"However, federal law prohibits the sale of body parts of aborted babies. In fact, the sale or purchase of human fetal tissue a federal felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $500,000 (42 U.S.C. 289g-2)."
Perhaps if you were less interested in excusing barbaric behavior and more interested in what is actually happening, (oh and in actually reading my responses), you'd be a bit more aware.
"I'll bet this is another example of your cultural biases leading you to make claims that reality does not support."
And, you'd be wrong. But even if it was, do you realize that you just condemned me for having a cultural bias in favor of NOT selling human body parts. For that matter a cultural bias against NOT killing and dismembering human babies.
So, yeah if having a cultural bias against killing and dismembering the most innocent and helpless among us is a bad thing, then I'll take that any day.
Oh, and let's not forget the comment about what happens when the abortion produces one that's "intact", or in layman's terms "born alive", they go right ahead and kill them anyway.
Yup, these people are on your side politically. You voted for the folks that use tax dollars to subsidize this kind of thing. You are the one trying to excuse it.
At least someone like Paglia has the intellectual honesty to stand against the tide on this one and call out the vast majority of the left who are silent or actively trying to excuse what is going on.
Dan,
I doubt you'll see this here, but I have to give credit when liberals get things right, so I will post a link to the second liberal I've seen that is appalled by what PP is doing.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/10/i-don-t-know-if-i-m-pro-choice-anymore.html
This is the pull quote.
Over time, I made refinements—going along with waiting periods and parental notification laws at the state level, and coming out against the barbaric practice known as partial birth abortion.
As I’ve only realized lately, to be a man, and to declare yourself pro-choice, is to proclaim your neutrality. And, as I’ve only recently been willing to admit, even to myself, that’s another name for “wimping out.”
At least that’s how my wife sees it. She’s pro-life, and so she’s been tearing into me every time a new video is released. She’s not buying my argument that, as a man, I have to defer to women and trust them to make their own choices about what to do with their bodies. To her, that’s ridiculous—and cowardly.
“You can’t stand on the sidelines, especially now that you’ve seen these videos,” she told me recently. “That’s bullshit! These are babies that are being killed. Millions of them. And you need to use your voice to protect them. That’s what a man does. He protects children—his own children, and other children. That’s what it means to be a man.”
It's interesting that you can't be bothered to make comments in the appropriate thread, yet you wonder why you get deleted.
The problem with your gleeful discovery is that the videos were all shot at specific PP affiliates in specific states so while a large scale investigation is appropriate, the fact that there has been nothing found in places where no specific evidence exists is not necessarily surprising, nor does it mitigate the actions documented on video in the locations identified.
Perhaps it would be better to temper your glee, wait for a more comprehensive and final result, and reflect on why the sale of human body parts doesn't bother you enough to stop defending it.
Given your almost gleeful reports whenever you think PP has been vindicated, I have to wonder if you've ever troubled your self to watch the videos. It seems that you like to refer to quoting people as gossip, which seems a strange definition of the word gossip. One also wonders how your concern for the least of these gets put on a shelf when you hear what these people say. Obviously it is a manifestation of grace to deliver an intact baby with a beating heart and then dissect the child to sell the parts. You have a strange way of showing compassion.
Post a Comment