Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

>announcing your own "win" of a discussion

You replied to me after I left work on Friday and I was out of town until Sunday afternoon (and still finishing work crap when I got back), but I really only post on KYM during work so you should have expected a delay either way.

But hey, I finished up my Monday AM work and now I've got a half-hour to kill discussing dead babies before lunch~

{ Its one thing to stop recording when someone gets up to leave to the washroom and another thing to start videos mid conversation. Watch the video yourself at 6:31-6:33. }

You posted the edited preview video that the Center posts as highlight reels before they release the next unedited video. Obviously the edited video is edited… that full scene can be found in the full, hours-long videos, however. You are now attempting to spread ignorance based on your own misinformation. Sad. The independent firm hired by PP themselves said there was no evidence of substantive video manipulation, the videos were not maliciously edited.

{ Sure, and if you wore a “I hate windy” shirt and have raised suspicion as being unreliable that’s probably where it will end; the obligation. }

But they WOULD follow through with the obligation, then? So why are you sitting here supporting the government refusing to even allow that much to happen? I haven't called for ending abortion rights or anything like that in this thread, all I've advocated is law enforcement officers being allowed to actually investigate the PP clinics that participate in fetal tissue donation (the locations of which PP still refuses to disclose on their own) to see if any federal laws are being broken. If there were nothing to worry about, why wouldn't PP let the authorities come see their clean and lawful operation? This whole scandal would have been over and done with, yet here we are.

{ I didn’t want to say this in the serious debate forum, but u mad. }

Declaring you've won and calling me mad, wew, it must be one of the best days of your life~
Hyperbole =/= mad, especially a hyperbole I use here often.
Yet even if I were mad, you'd still have no legitimate point. Sad again.

{ Just for fun here’s another video of her where she openly says that both sides should profit financially, but why wasn’t there a big backlash back in 2014? }

Someone's opinion that they should be profiting off something =/= actions being committed that are actually breaking a law. We don't prosecute opinions here, we prosecute actions. Now we have video evidence that could lead one to conclude federal laws are being broken, hence any normal person would expect a lawful investigation that could either clear up or confirm the allegations before any drastic actions are taken.

Instead we have a government party that blocked all investigations, leading the opposing party to attempt to take drastic action before the allegations were investigated, leading the whole thing to come to the standstill it currently sits at with four more videos still yet to be released.

ehhh that only took 10 minutes. Guess I'll go get my bagel early.

Letter from Planned Parenthood to Congress contains criminal admissions

CMP's statement on the letter

The actual letter

(side note: PP president was caught blatantly LYING to Congress yesterday, claiming that PP has never said that they offer mammogram services. They played a CNN video from the last time a bill to cut funds to PP came up, where she was interviewed saying "Cutting PP's funds will prevent women not only from abortion, but from health care services like mammograms…")

PP quotes the reimbursement law: "If an affiliate chooses to accept reimbursement for allowable expenses, *it must be able to demonstrate the reimbursement represents actual cost."*

PP then goes on to explain their costs: The clinic in California gets $60 per part. Their other four PP centers who immediately stopped participating in fetal tissue collection once the scandal broke received "lesser but comparable amounts". All others receive $45-55 per part.

They do not at all break down their actual costs, thus failing to prove that none of the $60 is profit. It was noted during the trial that she could not provide "basic information about Planned Parenthood’s abortion and fetal tissue revenue.

PP then quotes another federal law: "There is to be no substantive alteration in the timing of terminating the pregnancy or of the method used".

PP then tries to allege that their doctors always choose to perform the legal methods, but sometimes circumstances just magically happen that require their doctor to "make multiple adjustments to the method" which they say can't be counted as making adjustments to the method…

PP still refuses to release the terms of their contract between the clinics and StemExpress, and Congress has not asked for it thus far.

She did not address the footage of a PP executive officer stating right to the camera that "some clinics generate a fair amount of income doing this".

She also failed to address the video of PP workers giggling over how some women come in so late for their abortions the baby simply "falls out" on their way to the procedure room. This would suggest an unassisted live birth, yet to let a baby die of neglect (or slitting its neck) after being naturally born is legally murder.

& here are some of my fav quotes from the trial:

{ CHAFFETZ: Your compensation in 2009 was $353,000. Is that correct?

RICHARDS: I don't have the figures with me. But …

CHAFFETZ: It was. Congratulations. In 2013, your compensation went up some $240,000. Your compensation, we're showing based on tax returns, is $590,000, correct?

RICHARDS: That's not my annual compensation. I -- actually, my annual compensation is $520,000 a year. I believe there was a program that the board sort of put together for a three-year -- I'm happy -- again, I think we have been extremely forthcoming with all of our documents. }

The question immediately sent Democrats shouting MISOGYNY!! SEXISM!! for unknown reasons.

{ Chaffetz put up a chart that purported to show Planned Parenthood's breast cancer screenings going down over time as the number of its abortions spiked.

Richards appeared flummoxed, saying she didn't know where those numbers came from.

"You're going to deny?" Chaffetz incredulously replied.

Richards said she would deny those numbers because she'd never seen them.

With every exchange, Richards and Chaffetz raised their voices until both were practically yelling over each other.

Chaffetz told her he pulled them from her corporate reports. "Oh," Richards said, appearing deflated. }

And a casual reminder that it is federal law that federal funds can not be used for abortions.

Lisa I sincerely think that everyone trying to look into this are pro-life people(politicians) who wants Planned Parenthood to stop being founded if not shut down.

look at this video the republican politicians they only go to the perspective of a "life" being killed to be harvested or is against abortion.(PS: Trevor Noah decided to cross this issue of PP and the Oregon shooting because these politicians are all pro-life but they are either against gun control or tries to avoid taking about it.

"Saying pro-life people should be for gun control because guns kill people is like saying pro-choice people should be against gun control because people have the right to choose to own a gun."

Millions of people are murdered every year because of abortion. A bit more than ten thousand die by firearm.

Leave it to liberals to compare apples to oranges and still make the complete opposite point of what they meant to…

I am saying not that i agree 100% with the analogy, my problem is the pro-life people hijacking this issue and trying to end right to abortion.

Congress/pro-lifers/I push a federal 20 week/5 month term limit with a vast majority approving of exceptions for rape, genetic health, and risk to the mother's life. That in no way translates to ending the right to abortion or the war on women the liberal left desperately wants it to be. All they have is bad analogies because the majority of people in this country actually support some kind of term limit on abortions.

I'm okay with abortion up to a certain point. Like if the fetus looks like and is no bigger than a glob of snot, then I say go for it, especially in cases of rape/incest. Where I start to question the issue is with late term abortion. A baby can be born prematurely if it's been in the womb for about six months, so when someone decides to abort after that time, then I think getting an abortion is a mistake.

Now this recent scandal with PP chopping up fetuses and selling them? That's fucked up, especially late term. All in all, with the recent controversy surrounding the establishment, I'd go somewhere else.

All in all, I can understand both sides, but I'm more on the side of PP getting it's funding cut. You just don't sell pieces of fetuses for extra cash, at least without some sort of consent maybe?

It's just a bad deal all around.

Plus Margaret Sanger was a eugenicist, which makes me question PP anyway.