I thought a FETUS isnt a LIVING thing,

[eyer]

Why are tax payers funding them

Because you adore the comfort and security the federal government allows you to enjoy...

...as long as you keeping funding the baby killers.

[The govt doesn't care how much you wax hysterically...

...just as long as you keep the funds flowing in.]

Why are you paying for the very thing you protesteth so much about...

...in fact, why are you contributing more than most Americans to the baby killers?

Huh, stupid?

It's their game, their rules...

...there's nowhere on the planet you can escape their game.

Nullification nor civil disobedience are options...

...for a man who longs to remain free.

There's only one option left, besides outright revolution...

...and that's to play their game the absolute least you possibly can.

Withdraw.

 

[Busybody]

 

[eyer]

Why do you keep whining about the baby killers...

...when you obediently fund them so much?

You demand govt stop funding the baby killers...

...yet you don't even posses the integrity to stop remitting to government the very funds which enable the baby killers to continue to kill babies.

Fucking lemming...

...you so richly deserve to go down with your statist ship.

 

[Busybody]

I have no fucking clue what you are bleating about

 

[Busybody]

Murder Inc shouldnt be tax payer funded

Who ever wants to KILL BABIES should pay for it

CuntClinton and Hussein (half)Black Obama have plenty of money

 

[eyer]

Murder Inc shouldnt be tax payer funded

Yet...

...you continue to fund the baby killers.

Who ever wants to KILL BABIES should pay for it

Since you voluntarily continue to "pay for" the baby killers...

...you must really want "to KILL BABIES", or else you'd quit paying the baby killers to do exactly what you know they exist to do.

CuntClinton and Hussein (half)Black Obama have plenty of money

You obviously, too, have enough money to continue to finance the baby killers, and...

...is there even one of your Republican lemming candidates who is running on any plank for a 28th Amendment to reestablish the declarative American political principle of the inalienable right to life?

You pay for the baby killers to exist, none of your lemming leaders are campaigning to stop the baby killers (I understand PP is the patsy in this melodrama of yours, but they're only a third of the criminal problem)...

...and all you can do is keep whining.

Sup well at your own baby killing table...

...wannabe.

 

[Yardley]

I think the burden of proof lies with you. If you think anyone is profiting from fetal tissue trafficking, let's see your evidence. The video does not support that claim.

You "thinking that the burden of proof lies with you" and endlessly repeating that doesn't make it so.

Planned Parenthood would not be expending energy and resources to try to spin this as something other than what it is if the words on the video did not convey what I say they are conveying. My opinion about what that sounds like is indisputable as my (and many other reasonable people's) opinion about what it sounds like.

You jumping on board the Planned Parenthood Express and parroting their spin is your prerogative, and your OPINION.

What they are doing is no different than a mechanic selling the used oil he collects to a bulk-oil recycling center in an effort to increase the bottom line of his shop. Does his shop exist solely to recycle oil? No. Does his selling the oil partially enable him to buy tools and drums of new oil? Yes.

Money is going into their coffers, baby parts are going out. If you choose to pretend that they are donations and reimbursement of expenses related only to the actual expenses incurred solely in the collection and transport of those baby parts that are above and beyond the operating costs that they would have incurred for the abortion in question, that's your OPINION.

You know what would be facts? An actual audit of Planned Parenthood clinics. Showing what the revenue was for each abortion, what they paid the doctor, the lights, medical supplies, then what exactly they were paid for each itemized baby part. None of that was even hinted at being discussed in their press release.

When asked specifically if the differences in the numbers of body parts being moved by various clinics were due to the individual temperament, skill, or feelings of the individual providers, she says that, no, it is all about taking care of the bottom line to make their non-profits break even. In other words if it does not add to the bottom line to help defray individual CLINIC expenses, they do not bother with what you are calling "donations."

The video does not at all support your position that these are merely "donations" in the interest of science. The press release is providing your talking points and they are not "evidence," they are talking points. None of what you are saying can I see as something that can surmised by the video.

You want to read their spin into it after the fact that is your prerogative. Your "evidence" is you saying that she says this but what she was really talking about was this other thing...

That is why people pay lawyers and PR firms. To convince people like you that they should not believe their lying ears. If Planned Parenthood had simply shielded their faces and issued a terse "No comment" instead of employing a highly skilled PR firm to craft their response, you would not have your talking points to spew.

The evidence shows that you had no cogent response in this thread beyond "prove they are doing it!!!" as to how it is that the words did not show what they seemed to show until after the press release. Then you became quite certain that these are "reimbursements" (money received) for "donations" (baby parts.) Good job being a shill for the horrific practice of conveying baby parts for money.

You know what you could shill for? Thousands of pets are put down by animal control places. Meat and fur from those humane euthanasia events could be donated to third world countries in exchange for reimbursements of expenses. How about you get behind that next?

How about putting down horses that are suffering in their old age and selling...oops I mean donating the meat to Canada in exchange for expense reimbursement?

Dissecting a living human being and parting them out to labs is no less offensive than the above ideas.

 

[phrodeau]

You "thinking that the burden of proof lies with you" and endlessly repeating that doesn't make it so.

Planned Parenthood would not be expending energy and resources to try to spin this as something other than what it is if the words on the video did not convey what I say they are conveying. My opinion about what that sounds like is indisputable as my (and many other reasonable people's) opinion about what it sounds like.

You jumping on board the Planned Parenthood Express and parroting their spin is your prerogative, and your OPINION.

What they are doing is no different than a mechanic selling the used oil he collects to a bulk-oil recycling center in an effort to increase the bottom line of his shop. Does his shop exist solely to recycle oil? No. Does his selling the oil partially enable him to buy tools and drums of new oil? Yes.

Money is going into their coffers, baby parts are going out. If you choose to pretend that they are donations and reimbursement of expenses related only to the actual expenses incurred solely in the collection and transport of those baby parts that are above and beyond the operating costs that they would have incurred for the abortion in question, that's your OPINION.

You know what would be facts? An actual audit of Planned Parenthood clinics. Showing what the revenue was for each abortion, what they paid the doctor, the lights, medical supplies, then what exactly they were paid for each itemized baby part. None of that was even hinted at being discussed in their press release.

When asked specifically if the differences in the numbers of body parts being moved by various clinics were due to the individual temperament, skill, or feelings of the individual providers, she says that, no, it is all about taking care of the bottom line to make their non-profits break even. In other words if it does not add to the bottom line to help defray individual CLINIC expenses, they do not bother with what you are calling "donations."

The video does not at all support your position that these are merely "donations" in the interest of science. The press release is providing your talking points and they are not "evidence," they are talking points. None of what you are saying can I see as something that can surmised by the video.

You want to read their spin into it after the fact that is your prerogative. Your "evidence" is you saying that she says this but what she was really talking about was this other thing...

That is why people pay lawyers and PR firms. To convince people like you that they should not believe their lying ears. If Planned Parenthood had simply shielded their faces and issued a terse "No comment" instead of employing a highly skilled PR firm to craft their response, you would not have your talking points to spew.

The evidence shows that you had no cogent response in this thread beyond "prove they are doing it!!!" as to how it is that the words did not show what they seemed to show until after the press release. Then you became quite certain that these are "reimbursements" (money received) for "donations" (baby parts.) Good job being a shill for the horrific practice of conveying baby parts for money.

You know what you could shill for? Thousands of pets are put down by animal control places. Meat and fur from those humane euthanasia events could be donated to third world countries in exchange for reimbursements of expenses. How about you get behind that next?

How about putting down horses that are suffering in their old age and selling...oops I mean donating the meat to Canada in exchange for expense reimbursement?

Dissecting a living human being and parting them out to labs is no less offensive than the above ideas.

If you could bring forward one witness who will testify that they sold their fetal organs, or provide a receipt or cancelled check, you might have a valid argument.

 

[Yardley]

If you could bring forward one witness who will testify that they sold their fetal organs, or provide a receipt or cancelled check, you might have a valid argument.

If you could bring foward one accountant and the books for one clinic showing that not one cent above the cost of packaging and shipping was charged for baby parts you might have a valid argument.

You know who has access to the books for Planned Parenthood and who could easily dispel the obvious conclusion one should draw from the words on the video, if they were not, in fact, profiting from the sale of body parts? Planned Parenthood. Any guesses why they haven't provide a schedule of accounts to show what they are paid by the various companies that do sell to labs the "products" they do get from Planned Parenthood?

Which part are you having trouble with?

The part where they freely admit they dismember babies (since you like using inflammatory, demeaning rhetoric) and send the parts to labs? Specifically, liver and lungs were discussed. Last I checked those are an organs.

The part where they freely admit that they do receive money in exchange for delivery of said organs?

What do you call, "do a little better than break even?" Every business I know about they call that "profit."

Look, Phrodeau, a smoking gun!

"You don't know who was holding the gun when it discharged and you don't know if the cartridge fired a blank or a bullet!"

But the guy on the floor has a bullet hole in him.

"It is round and suppurating but it could have been caused by a bullet shaped spear!"

I can see the end of the bullet in the hole.

"It could have come from a second shooter on the grassy knoll, who left with the murder weapon. Assuming he was murdered. He could have had a fatal stroke and was collapsing as the bullet hit him."

The concept of a "smoking gun" is not that the gun is completely dispositive. The concept is that it lets you know that something is amiss and strongly suggests who the doer might be.

 

[Yardley]

Will you be calling your local clinic and asking to go over their canceled checks, or do you work for their defense attorneys?

 

[phrodeau]

I know, since they are making so much money by selling baby parts, we should cut their funding. That will show them.

 

[Busybody]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CKJY2fdUsAAj72t.jpg

 

[Busybody]

You know what THIS is?

Spare parts

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJ-81tCWIAAq-dQ.jpg

 

[Busybody]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJ6PpszUwAAp7dg.jpg

 

[Yardley]

I know, since they are making so much money by selling baby parts, we should cut their funding. That will show them.

Long on hyperbole short on substance are you?

Each of your little snide comments have been covered before you even make them. That must suck.

For example I covered exactly that with the analogy of a mechanic selling used oil to help defray expenses. Just because that is not the main thrust of his business model does not mean that it does not supplement his income.

What they are doing is no different than a mechanic selling the used oil he collects to a bulk-oil recycling center in an effort to increase the bottom line of his shop. Does his shop exist solely to recycle oil? No. Does his selling the oil partially enable him to buy tools and drums of new oil? Yes.

Of course it is not hyperbole but accurate to say the difference is he is selling a waste byproduct and you are tacitly condoning treating human remains in the same manner. It's a point of view. I just don't happen to hold that one.

Some product of the abortion as well as other medical procedures including stillbirths are effectively cremated through a process of incineration in order to mitigate the bio-hazard. Should hospitals and clinics sell those as gardening supplements, or to the lye industry, so long as they just seek to cover the cost of incineration that they already had to do?

How about specimens collected in a lab or during an autopsy? Are you cool with selling them in little jars filled with formerly as curiosities?

Mostly rhetorical, I am coming to understand you ask a lot more questions than you answer.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Long on hyperbole short on substance are you?

Each of your little snide comments have been covered before you even make them. That must suck.

For example I covered exactly that with the analogy of a mechanic selling used oil to help defray expenses. Just because that is not the main thrust of his business model does not mean that it does not supplement his income.



Of course it is not hyperbole but accurate to say the difference is he is selling a waste byproduct and you are tacitly condoning treating human remains in the same manner. It's a point of view. I just don't happen to hold that one.

Some product of the abortion as well as other medical procedures including stillbirths are effectively cremated through a process of incineration in order to mitigate the bio-hazard. Should hospitals and clinics sell those as gardening supplements, or to the lye industry, so long as they just seek to cover the cost of incineration that they already had to do?

How about specimens collected in a lab or during an autopsy? Are you cool with selling them in little jars filled with formerly as curiosities?

Mostly rhetorical, I am coming to understand you ask a lot more questions than you answer.

I'm surprised you would post that after watching the video where the doctor specifically says they will not sell any body parts and the maker of the video agrees.

 

[phrodeau]

Long on hyperbole short on substance are you?

Each of your little snide comments have been covered before you even make them. That must suck.

For example I covered exactly that with the analogy of a mechanic selling used oil to help defray expenses. Just because that is not the main thrust of his business model does not mean that it does not supplement his income.



Of course it is not hyperbole but accurate to say the difference is he is selling a waste byproduct and you are tacitly condoning treating human remains in the same manner. It's a point of view. I just don't happen to hold that one.

Some product of the abortion as well as other medical procedures including stillbirths are effectively cremated through a process of incineration in order to mitigate the bio-hazard. Should hospitals and clinics sell those as gardening supplements, or to the lye industry, so long as they just seek to cover the cost of incineration that they already had to do?

How about specimens collected in a lab or during an autopsy? Are you cool with selling them in little jars filled with formerly as curiosities?

Mostly rhetorical, I am coming to understand you ask a lot more questions than you answer.

Here's a question. How can I "tacitly condone" something that I can't be sure is really happening?

 

[Yardley]

Here's a question. How can I "tacitly condone" something that I can't be sure is really happening?

It does seem a bit odd, you jumping to their defense on a practice that you can't be sure isn't happening. I guess that press release was really, deeply convincing to you? Do you find yourself humming a lot of jingles and buying exclusively name-brands?

 

[Busybody]

Here's a question. How can I "tacitly condone" something that I can't be sure is really happening?

not tacitly

OVERTLY

its called the

Palin theorem

Lott theorem

Scallise theorem

Adkins theorem

Repoh theorem


You are a BABY KILLER and BABY LIMB SELLER

 

[phrodeau]

It does seem a bit odd, you jumping to their defense on a practice that you can't be sure isn't happening. I guess that press release was really, deeply convincing to you? Do you find yourself humming a lot of jingles and buying exclusively name-brands?

No, it isn't odd at all. I have asked you to provide evidence that it really is happening, and you've balked at every turn.

 

[Yardley]

No, it isn't odd at all. I have asked you to provide evidence that it really is happening, and you've balked at every turn.

Why would I care what you want? You have contributed nothing that would change my mind about what my lying ears heard. I stated from the outset what conclusions I drew from the tape, you are perfectly free to draw your own conclusions. The fact that you needed their press release to decide what she meant is telling. I didn't need a PR hack to tell me what she was talking about.

You wouldn't be convinced, regardless. You bought the press release. At no point have you so much as stated "If this is what they are doing, I find the practice abhorrent." Assuming for the sake of discussion, I felt like skulking through their offices in a balaclava late at night and found some evidence that they offset their overhead with $1000-$2000 or even $10,000 a month in body parts, you still wouldn't give a shit, because to you, fetuses having their brains suctioned out and torn to pieces while using an ultrasound to be sure and salvage organs is "just tissue" which is where I entered the conversation with you, and where I leave it.

You have no moral qualms about the practice, and I do.

 

[phrodeau]

Now you're talking out of your ass-holier than thou.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Why would I care what you want? You have contributed nothing that would change my mind about what my lying ears heard. I stated from the outset what conclusions I drew from the tape, you are perfectly free to draw your own conclusions. The fact that you needed their press release to decide what she meant is telling. I didn't need a PR hack to tell me what she was talking about.

You wouldn't be convinced, regardless. You bought the press release. At no point have you so much as stated "If this is what they are doing, I find the practice abhorrent." Assuming for the sake of discussion, I felt like skulking through their offices in a balaclava late at night and found some evidence that they offset their overhead with $1000-$2000 or even $10,000 a month in body parts, you still wouldn't give a shit, because to you, fetuses having their brains suctioned out and torn to pieces while using an ultrasound to be sure and salvage organs is "just tissue" which is where I entered the conversation with you, and where I leave it.

You have no moral qualms about the practice, and I do.

You've done nothing but parrot a press release verbatim since you've joined the thread.

The video has existed for a year and there were never any charges against Planned Parenthood for doing anything illegal, nor does the tape show them talking about anything illegal.


"The Center for Medical Progress, which recorded and edited the video, says the footage proves that Planned Parenthood is breaking the law by selling fetal organs. But the video does not show Nucatola explicitly talking about selling organs. The Planned Parenthood official says the organization is “very, very sensitive” about being perceived as illegally profiting from organ sales and charges only for the cost, for instance, of shipping the tissue."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...330e34-2a4d-11e5-bd33-395c05608059_story.html

 

[Busybody]

Recent Confederate flag mentions by CNN? 493. CNN mentions of @PPact's baby body parts trafficking? 7. http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/20/ideas-for-reporters-struggling-to-cover-planned-parenthood/ …

 

[Busybody]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-B4Xs1s10u60/VavyPcBJPBI/AAAAAAAAO1E/HRylGPTe8nE/s400/Mind%2B1.jpg