Largest US abortion provider caught on tape selling body parts

Dr Jack · 21 Jul 2015 at 17:59

spudbynight said:
Second Planned Parenthood Senior Executive Haggles Over Baby Parts Prices

Given how radically dishonest the last video these clowns released was, why would we give any credence to their new one? They are deliberately editing the video to mislead.

Tosno · 21 Jul 2015 at 18:03

Amp34 said:
Besides, the big point is still that a foetus is extremely unlikely to be able to survive outside a womb at 20-24 weeks..

Baby has over 50% chance of surviving from 24 weeks, I remember feeling more relaxed when Mrs Tosno passed 24 weeks (after all the horror stories from doctors saying she will have a pre-mature birth and must take antibiotics, she didn't take and all was fine, Thank God)

spudbynight · 21 Jul 2015 at 19:11

Mr Jack said:
Given how radically dishonest the last video these clowns released was, why would we give any credence to their new one? They are deliberately editing the video to mislead.

The last video wasn't dishonest. I did post the full, unedited video. Did you watch it?

Tefal said:
there are many people who are unable to live at any age without external support, be that medication such as insulin or temporally having a respirator breath for them .

do they lose sentience the point they cant survive without support?

Well, quite. I am shocked that "ability to live without assistance" is being used by some people as a metric to gauge whether someone has the right to life.

Should Stephen Hawking be killed? (In fact, should he have been killed when his ALS first presented)

Xordium said:
Where did I say it was funny?

What I said was funny was a great majority of you are arguing this rather important subject with the biological knowledge of a gnat. Add into that basic philosophy and logic too.

On these forums all the time people laugh at peoples' IT knowledge and how poor it is whilst woefully ignoring how amazingly ignorant they are about other subjects themselves. These abortion threads always highlight that as do the evolution ones.

I agree with you, the knowledge of people in favour of abortion has been severely lacking.

Amp34 · 21 Jul 2015 at 19:21

Tefal said:
there are many people who are unable to live at any age without external support, be that medication such as insulin or temporally having a respirator breath for them .

do they lose sentience the point they cant survive without support?

Sentience and the fact you can't survive without support are two different matters. Not sure why you're trying to mix them up.

Can babies survive even with medical support (in many cases, not just random individual ones once in a blue moon) at 19 weeks? No idea.

Amp34 · 21 Jul 2015 at 19:22

Tosno said:
Baby has over 50% chance of surviving from 24 weeks, I remember feeling more relaxed when Mrs Tosno passed 24 weeks (after all the horror stories from doctors saying she will have a pre-mature birth and must take antibiotics, she didn't take and all was fine, Thank God)

Which backs up the point I was making.

Tosno · 21 Jul 2015 at 19:26

Amp34 said:
Which backs up the point I was making.

I wouldn't call 50%~ extremely unlikely to be able to survive outside, single digits maybe.

Amp34 · 21 Jul 2015 at 19:28

And yet the youngest baby to survive (apparently) was 21 six days in 2008

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...eks-legal-abortion-limit-clung-life-odds.html

I'd say a baby born at 20-22 weeks is extremely unlikely to survive (note I wrote 20-24 weeks, not just 24 weeks).

EDIT:

A better source - just

http://www.birth.com.au/premature-baby/survival-of-preterm-babies-gestation#.Va6PbHg-BE4

Less than 24 weeks
Babies born less than 24 weeks gestation have only a very small chance of surviving (about 2 to 3 percent). Decisions regarding intensive care treatments for babies this premature need to be discussed with your caregiver.

Your caregiver may ask you at the birth if you want the staff to make attempts to try and save your baby. Alternatively, you may be advised to just wrap your baby warmly and cuddle them until they are no longer breathing. Sometimes staff will make initial attempts to save the baby (on their own judgment or the parent's request), but the decision is then made to discontinue life-saving treatments after a few hours or a few days or more. It is important that you obtain as much information as possible about the short and long term health prospects for your baby and are involved in making these decisions.

Single figures it is.

There appear to be significant step changes over just matters of days, for example

24 to 26 weeks
Babies born around this time are regarded as extremely preterm and at high risk of developing complications and/or having long term health problems. About 45 to 50 percent of babies born at 24 weeks will survive and 44 to 65 percent of babies born around 25 weeks will survive. These babies need access to Level 3 Intensive Care hospital facilities to give them the best chance of survival.

Even then they need significant medical intervention.

It doesn't bode well for foetuses before 20-24. Remember also that most abortions are carried out way before that limit.

(unless Xordium can set us straight?)

Dr Jack · 21 Jul 2015 at 19:36

spudbynight said:
The last video wasn't dishonest.

Yes, it was.

I did post the full, unedited video. Did you watch it?

No, I haven't. It's three hours long and I have better things to do with my life. I have read a detailed description of the many, many times it had been dishonestly edited and seen some examples.

Amp34 · 21 Jul 2015 at 19:39

Some more stats, this time from the NHS on Abortion numbers

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ortion_Statistics__England_and_Wales_2013.pdf

Page 19 has a useful table.

Abortions by gestation period

3-9 Weeks - 79%
10-12 Weeks - 12%
13-19 Weeks - 7%
20 and over - 1%

So 92% of Abortions in 2013 in this country were carried out before 12 weeks and 99% before 20 weeks.

Dr Jack · 21 Jul 2015 at 19:45

Amp34 said:
So 92% of Abortions in 2013 in this country were carried out before 12 weeks and 99% before 20 weeks.

And, if you drill further into the stats you find that a much larger proportion of late term abortions result from medical issues of one kind or another.

spudbynight · 21 Jul 2015 at 20:04

Amp34 said:
Some more stats, this time from the NHS on Abortion numbers

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ortion_Statistics__England_and_Wales_2013.pdf

Page 19 has a useful table.

Abortions by gestation period

3-9 Weeks - 79%
10-12 Weeks - 12%
13-19 Weeks - 7%
20 and over - 1%

So 92% of Abortions in 2013 in this country were carried out before 12 weeks and 99% before 20 weeks.

The total number of abortions in the UK was 185,331. 1% of that figure is 1853 at 20 weeks and over.

Even if I agreed with you about abortions before that point (I don't) at what point do people care about nearly 2000 unborn children being killed?

We care more about the treatment of dogs than unborn children in this country and I personally think that is screwed up.

spudbynight · 21 Jul 2015 at 20:11

Mr Jack said:
Yes, it was.

No it wasn't. (See I can use that as well)

Mr Jack said:
No, I haven't. It's three hours long and I have better things to do with my life. I have read a detailed description of the many, many times it had been dishonestly edited and seen some examples.

It is three hours long so you can see for yourself what has been said. The facts remain, Planned Parenthood is intentionally harvesting organs. It is changing the way it performs abortions to maximise the chances of successfully harvesting organs. It is selling those organs for a profit.

We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact./quote]

This is what she said. Are you suggesting that the video was edited in some way to falsify this? Are you suggesting she didn't say this?

Planned Parenthood is the organisation that in 2013, testified against the Born Alive Infants Act in America. They testified in favour of post birth abortions - or what most people would recognise as murder.

StriderX · 21 Jul 2015 at 20:15

spudbynight said:
The total number of abortions in the UK was 185,331. 1% of that figure is 1853 at 20 weeks and over.

Even if I agreed with you about abortions before that point (I don't) at what point do people care about nearly 2000 unborn children being killed?

We care more about the treatment of dogs than unborn children in this country and I personally think that is screwed up.

Whats more appropriate,

The possibility of death of both mother and/or child.
Severely disabled child that may suffer beyond reason.

A qualified doctor will advise, unless its absolutely necessary to save life, it's ultimately the mothers choice.

Dr Jack · 21 Jul 2015 at 20:22

spudbynight said:
It is three hours long so you can see for yourself what has been said. The facts remain, Planned Parenthood is intentionally harvesting organs. It is changing the way it performs abortions to maximise the chances of successfully harvesting organs. It is selling those organs for a profit.

All three of those claims are false.

"We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact."

This is what she said. Are you suggesting that the video was edited in some way to falsify this? Are you suggesting she didn't say this?

The part they cut out is the part where she said that she won't put anyone at risk, or compromise the procedure to do this. What exactly is bad about this anyway? Providing tissue for medical use is a good thing that they're doing.

And they're not profiting from it; they charge their costs to the recipient.

Angilion · 22 Jul 2015 at 00:06

Amp34 said:
[..] Can babies survive even with medical support (in many cases, not just random individual ones once in a blue moon) at 19 weeks? No idea.

Sufficiently advanced medical support could ensure survival from any point, so that's a purely technological issue and therefore not anything to do with sentience.

Angilion · 22 Jul 2015 at 00:15

Tefal said:
regarding sentience how do you actually measure it?

is a new born baby sentient, i mean i dont see how you could test it.

We don't actually measure it (which is probably your point). We don't even really know what it is, not properly. It's philosophy, not science. Not yet, at least.

Tefal · 22 Jul 2015 at 04:44

Amp34 said:
Sentience and the fact you can't survive without support are two different matters. Not sure why you're trying to mix them up.

Can babies survive even with medical support (in many cases, not just random individual ones once in a blue moon) at 19 weeks? No idea.

Because you seemed to be using the fact they can't survive without assistance as a supportive argument.

Columbo · 22 Jul 2015 at 05:21

spudbynight said:
I think the intentional killing of an innocent human is morally wrong.

How about judging others for taking lawful decisions based on their own circumstances and life in a free society, is that morally wrong, because thats exactly what you are doing?

Are you also aware that the God you believe in so much aborted the first born child of a hell of a lot of Egyptians for nothing other than revenge?

Tefal · 22 Jul 2015 at 07:34

Columbo said:
How about judging others for taking lawful decisions based on their own circumstances and life in a free society, is that morally wrong, because thats exactly what you are doing?

well no its not, is it?

would you judge a person who cheats on their partner?

or the billion of other things that are "lawful" but we judge people for.

Amp34 · 22 Jul 2015 at 08:28

Angilion said:
Sufficiently advanced medical support could ensure survival from any point, so that's a purely technological issue and therefore not anything to do with sentience.

Not with current medical technology though. When someone develops an artificial womb them that may be the case.