Planned Parenthood Director caught on tape selling aborted baby parts

Try again. You got it backwards. Why am I not surprised?

"Business Library reports that “there are up to 36 couples waiting for every one baby placed for adoption.

In the USA, there are approximately two million infertile couples waiting to adopt, many times regardless of the child’s medical problems such as Down Syndrome, Spina Bifida, HIV infection or terminally ill. Dr. Brad Imler, President of America’s Pregnancy Helpline, confirms the challenge of waiting couples by stating: “Only 1% of the Helpline’s annual 40,000 clients inquires about adoption.”

 

So, getting back to the thread topic, all of these videos have been shown to be misleading, correct?

 

Can we go a bit off topic again. Giddyup, I wanted to get your opinion on something I asked earlier because you have obviously spent a lot of time thinking about these right to life issues and you seem well versed in the arguments from both sides.

How is miscarriage reconciled with the view that life begins at conception as we learn more and more about things that are likely to cause miscarriage or life choices which result in vastly higher chances of miscarriage?

 

False! You can't blame people for trying. Nature takes its course. We'll never know the whys.

I know this will break the hearts of some of you. My older brother is almost five years older than me. My younger brother is but 13 months younger than me. After my older brother's birth, my mother suffered three miscarriages that broke her heart.

Still she and my dad persevered and my brother and I came into this world as a result. Happy day!. We have each brought four great kids into this world.

To paraphrase a famous, humorous line: you almost didn't have giddyup to kick around... :grin:

Pretty sure that every one of us, even GladiatorRowdy, would disapprove of a pregnant woman having a couple of drinks every evening How dare we tell her what to do with her body!!

We draw the lines in the sand to ensure the outcome that we want. Sometimes those lines are solid and we don't cross them. Sometimes they are "broken" and we cross them when we need to: we can't tell anyone what to do with their bodies until there is something we want to tell them NOT to do with their own body like drinking alcohol or shooting heroin while pregnant.... or aborting children.

 

Are you talking about the reckless, heartless and irresponsible choice of advocating jail time and bans that are proven to not work? The irrational specter of enforcing control over people's bodies without a shred of evidence or perspective?

The heartless choice of preferring jail time that would cost you more rather than actually putting your money where your mouth is and supporting women, mothers, and family and actually making a difference in reducing abortion rates?

This "system" has reduced abortions, created medical research boons, and saved the lives of countless mothers. You have no credible alternatives--and so long as that is the case your line of irrational, data-devoid thinking will not change anything in this world an iota.

And the world will be a better place for it.

(your stat "there are up to 36 couples waiting for every one baby placed for adoption.” links to a bunch of pro-life publications that link to a dead link. "Business Library" doesn't seem to exist. I believe you got your source from this link. When I click to the link to Business Library it goes to http://www.search.com/search. That very same pro-life blog then refers to this fact "The recent article and its author are correct. We kill our unwanted kids 12 to 23 times more frequently than we save them." i.e their melodramatic way of saying the abortion rate is 12 to 23 times the adoption rate.

Please verify your sources more carefully.)

 

I'm not particularly a strong advocate of jail-time, although maybe a sentence to terminate on the due date of the baby would be a powerful message. You guys keep trying to back me into that corner OR just say it for me! Remember, I'm the one who once willingly and knowingly married a woman who had had an abortion...

My main focus is to change the perception about the abortion industry. Proponents want to romanticize it while I want to publicize the actual destructiveness and selfishness of it. You don't want me to do that; I get it. Tough ****! I'll carry on.

I support children and women and families up to and not past the point of killing someone. If you are going to engage in sex, be prepared to birth a child. Whether you keep it or not is not as important as that you not kill it. There is someone to love that child.

That link goes to a search engine. NEWS FLASH: that is not the first dead link found on the internet. I've seen them on page 1 of a Google search before.

Every abortion that saved a mother also killed a baby. How many of those abortions actually saved mothers' lives. Check your links or I'll call foul.

 

You, pressed for solutions, alternated between proposing jailing women and saying the issue was too complex. I don't exactly know why you think anybody is painting you in a corner by stating what you've said back to you.

"I support children and women and families up to and not past the point of killing someone."

--> support with your condemnation or your tax dollars?

Fair enough that links go dead but your source doesn't even seem to exist, period, and I can't find any other mention of that stat, and sources that cite your source find some way to, in almost the same breath, contradict themselves. So far as I know, that hasn't happened to any of my links, but let me know if that does.

As a parting note, I'm honestly indifferent now to what you do: I personally think it's a whole bunch of misguided thinking, but it's been made abundantly clear to me that you're not going to take impactful steps. If shaming others gives you purpose, keep on shaming, I suppose. I don't think you have anywhere near enough cause to feel good about it though.

 

My clearest statement on this was to admit that it was a complex issue and to recognize that the horses were already out of the barn. That is why my focus on changing behavior that puts women at the crossroads of this decision and then, should they find themselves there, having a heart for the life they've created and a sense of a greater responsibility than doing what is easiest for them.


How do those links contain stats that contradict them selves?

 

It is only a "life" to you and your ilk. It could be something else entirely for the woman facing a choice.

No, I have and will continue to fight to make sure that women have the right to make that decision for themselves with you being unable to affect that decision.

It is hardly audacity to think that a soul would be better off in heaven than being born to a woman who actively doesn't want to carry the pregnancy to term.

How about erring for the person who has to bring the fetus to term and bear it (the line at which it becomes a "life" to me)? She doesn't share your opinions and beliefs and you have no right to impose them on her.

 

No, I would leave those choices up to the woman, her doctor, and her God, along with anyone else who she chooses to include in the decision making process.

Her choice, not yours.

 

Have you adopted any babies? There are some available: http://www.adoptionservices.org

 

The audacity lies in making the choice of life and death for an innocent child not in the simple thinking about it. C'mon... get serious. Funny how you'll do it for the little baby but not for yourself.

 

I'm not making any life or death choices, I leave that up to the woman. I will defend the woman's right to make that decision for herself as long as I draw breath.

I'll consider the fetus "life" once it is alive.

 

Ahh, "fetus", what a convenient term for people to feel free from guilt about themselves, when they're supporting killing babies.

 

Yes, what would we do without words which accurately describe what we're talking about.

You're welcome to use inaccurate language if you like, I prefer to be as descriptive as possible.

 

I don't have to define anything. What is is; you are the ones having to carve out these definitions to justify your action. Your line, your definition of alive is arbitrary as hell, but it gets you what you want.

Whatever happened to "First do no harm?"

 

I didn't ask you to.

I didn't define these words, I just use the dictionary definitions. I'm pretty sure the dictionary isn't trying to justify abortion.

No, it doesn't. What I want is zero unwanted pregnancies. That would make everyone happy, but instead of being able to concentrate on the actual problem, I instead have to fight for a woman's right to choose with people who insist on forcing their beliefs on others.

To the woman making the choice, it isn't harmful, it is helpful. When one is faced with choices that range from "bad" to "horrible," sometimes you have to choose a bad option.

 

1. Multiple choice; choose only one answer: Who defined the term fetus?

A. A colony of beat poets
B. the scientific community
C. the National Association of Den Mothers
D. Fans of Box Turtles

2. Anyone and everyone wants ZERO unwanted pregnancies. You try to make yourself out to be some national hero.

3. Is the birth of a child "bad" or "horrible?" What are the stages between those two? Do you really shoe-horn "miraculous" into the middle of those two disheartening perspectives?

 

I'm certain they didn't define the word "fetus" because they had a pro-abortion agenda given that it has been used for hundreds of years.

I'm not making myself out to be anything. I am better than someone who chooses the Quixotic battle of an abortion ban that would do nothing but make the situation worse.

From the perspective of the woman who doesn't want the pregnancy, the answers are all on the negative side of the good-bad scale.

"Miraculous" would be from the perspective of a woman who has been told she will never be able to get pregnant and then does.

Perspective is everything.

 

Making daily decisions that impact the life or death of innocent beings is the topic. The fact that you think deaths that add to the convenience in your life are "loose tangential tie-ins," but you're worried about the "audacity of making the choice of life or death" when it comes to a fetuses death illustrates the basic hypocrisy of the no-abortions-ever position.