Pro Life / Pro Choice Debate

[jhmd2000]

No.

Pretending that the practice is something that it is not in order to score some points against a gruesome tale of a straw man is quite troubling, however.

Uhm, this is a little awkward. There actually is a video (this time). It's like Benghazi Cover Story, but for real.

 

[myDeaconmyhand]

CHANGE!

7 years in I think he's beginning to make good on that promise.

 

[deacvision7]

Uhm, this is a little awkward. There actually is a video (this time). It's like Benghazi Cover Story, but for real.

Yeah, I've seen the video too. Nowhere was it said that Planned Parenthood is going out recruiting women to get pregnant just so they can then have an abortion for Planned Parenthood to donate the organs for research and be reimbursed for the transportation fees.

That just isn't happening no matter how many times you bizarrely pretend that it is.


These are abortions that were already going to take place, for a multitude of reasons, and the women agreed that their fetus' organs could be given away for research and science. It's like a silver lining around a very dark cloud.


Also, Benghazi? Didn't you just lambast others for mentioning other topics on this thread? Let's stay on point and have this debate.

 

[jhmd2000]

Yeah, I've seen the video too. Nowhere was it said that Planned Parenthood is going out recruiting women to get pregnant just so they can then have an abortion for Planned Parenthood to donate the organs for research and be reimbursed for the transportation fees.

That just isn't happening no matter how many times you bizarrely pretend that it is.


These are abortions that were already going to take place, for a multitude of reasons, and the women agreed that their fetus' organs could be given away for research and science. It's like a silver lining around a very dark cloud.


Also, Benghazi? Didn't you just lambast others for mentioning other topics on this thread? Let's stay on point and have this debate.

Not that I'm going to get my hopes up, but do you have any evidence of this position being taken on this thread? Like ANY whatsoever? This practice is horrid, whatever the motive. You should either defend it or not defend it. No one has alleged that mothers of these children are being recruited (and it wouldn't any be less horrible if they did).

Your argument in defense of this practice just sucks. Sorry 'bout it.

 

[BigTreeDeac]

the practice of harvesting body parts, or tissues, will inevitably increase the number of people who have an interest, financial or scientific, in abortions being performed

this will make abortions more likely, contrary to the wishes of most people, who claim that they don't like abortions

Tissue harvesting=more incentive for future abortions. Seems like this post is indicative of the stance you think nobody has taken

 

[ONW]

Yeah, I've seen the video too. Nowhere was it said that Planned Parenthood is going out recruiting women to get pregnant just so they can then have an abortion for Planned Parenthood to donate the organs for research and be reimbursed for the transportation fees.

That just isn't happening no matter how many times you bizarrely pretend that it is.


These are abortions that were already going to take place, for a multitude of reasons, and the women agreed that their fetus' organs could be given away for research and science. It's like a silver lining around a very dark cloud.


Also, Benghazi? Didn't you just lambast others for mentioning other topics on this thread? Let's stay on point and have this debate.

Could not agree more with these two points.

 

[jhmd2000]

Tissue harvesting=more incentive for future abortions. Seems like this post is indicative of the stance you think nobody has taken

He said "recruiting". Please prove the point alleged, thanks.

 

[Wakeforest22890]

Also to your point Wrangor, I think consent is a huge issue. Your brother is over 18 and can consent on his own to legal options. A fetus cannot consent and there is no law against terminating the pregnancy. In your case it's illegal to do and in this case it's not illegal. Again though if you believe that any abortion is murder then that's a consistent view for you, but it's not what BBD is "admitting to" since he doesn't seem to believe that abortion of a fetus is illegal.

 

[BigTreeDeac]

He said "recruiting". Please prove the point alleged, thanks.

Let me spell it out for you.

Fetal tissue donations = increased financial and scientific interest in abortions.
Increased financial and scientific interest in abortions = more abortions in the future. What he has laid out is a common "A leads to B and B leads to C, ergo A leads to C" form of reasoning.

Now let us dissect it for a moment so we can find your "recruiting" angle? In his scenario, increased abortions (in the future) are the result of increased financial and scientific interest in obtaining fetal tissue. Who is the actor driving that increased interest (and thus the increased abortions he is worried about)?

Is it the mother? Nope. She is neither paid for the donation nor is she a scientist using the tissue. No increased financial or scientific interest here.

How about the doctor/clinic? Well they are the ones getting the reimbursement so there is the financial interest.

What about the scientist? Well they are receiving the tissue, so there is the scientific interest.

So in Sailors mind, abortions will increase in the future because clinics and/or scientists will encourage more people to have abortions for their own interests. I think most people would consider "encouraging somebody to do something" as a form of recruitment.

 

[Deacaholic]

Let me spell it out for you.

Fetal tissue donations = increased financial and scientific interest in abortions.
Increased financial and scientific interest in abortions = more abortions in the future. What he has laid out is a common "A leads to B and B leads to C, ergo A leads to C" form of reasoning.

Now let us dissect it for a moment so we can find your "recruiting" angle? In his scenario, increased abortions (in the future) are the result of increased financial and scientific interest in obtaining fetal tissue. Who is the actor driving that increased interest (and thus the increased abortions he is worried about)?

Is it the mother? Nope. She is neither paid for the donation nor is she a scientist using the tissue. No increased financial or scientific interest here.

How about the doctor/clinic? Well they are the ones getting the reimbursement so there is the financial interest.

What about the scientist? Well they are receiving the tissue, so there is the scientific interest.

So in Sailors mind, abortions will increase in the future because clinics and/or scientists will encourage more people to have abortions for their own interests. I think most people would consider "encouraging somebody to do something" as a form of recruitment.

I think the point about the mother is interesting , because at this time, there is no immediate financial incentive for the her have an abortion (although I think some would argue that there is financial incentive for her long-term, as it is one less child after I take care of, but I don't want to tackle that one at this time).
Now that mothers know that Planned Parenthood is benefiting financially off their dead child, isn't a logical next step that the mother will want to be reimbursed as well?

 

[BigTreeDeac]

And in either case, it is a really stupid argument because it isn't true. People won't be more likely to have an abortion because clinics are receiving compensation from researchers for costs. Trust me, my lab tries to recruit people on a daily basis to donate blood or cheek swaps or tissue samples for scientific purposes. And you know what, we never get as many as we want in spite of the fact we pay these people AND most of the people I recruit are associated with the biomedical field (it is even harder to get average citizens to donate). So I can't even get enough people with direct financial and scientific interest to donate 20 mLs of blood but I'm supposed to believe people will just start signing up for abortions they otherwise wouldn't because of fetal tissue harvesting. Just a ridiculous argument for anybody to try to make.

 

[BigTreeDeac]

I think the point about the mother is interesting , because at this time, there is no immediate financial incentive for the her have an abortion (although I think some would argue that there is financial incentive for her long-term, as it is one less child after I take care of, but I don't want to tackle that one at this time).
Now that mothers know that Planned Parenthood is benefiting financially off their dead child, isn't a logical next step that the mother will want to be reimbursed as well?

Sailor was talking about financial interest as a result of tissue donation, so I did not include long-term financial interest because that exists whether tissue is destroyed or donated.

I mean I suppose some women may start asking for compensation but they aren't likely to get it. And I really don't think that is what Sailor was talking about. But if it was, I still don't think it moves the needle much. As my anecdote above says, I can't even get enough people to give blood (which replenishes quite easily) in spite of paying them $20 for 20 mLs so I find it nearly impossible people will have an abortion (they otherwise wouldn't) because some compensation is on the table. I could be wrong though. Certainly wouldn't be the first nor last time such a thing has happened to me.

 

[Deacaholic]

I don't disagree with you, it may not move the needle much. But suddenly, for those who were going to have an abortion anyway, a baby COULD become a commodity to be sold to the highest bidder.

 

[Deacon923]

Umm, selling fetal tissue is a federal crime. You guys know that right? Like you go to federal pound me in the ass prison. It is legal to reimburse a clinic for the actual costs of providing the tissue to the researcher, which is what the person in the video was talking about (and apparently she said at least 10 times in the edited-out parts "we do not sell tissue). It is illegal to pay a mother to abort her fetus to harvest that tissue and illegal to sell it to someone else. Has been for years, is now, not gonna change (nor should it). So what the hell are we talking about paying mothers for fetal tissue for?


Oh right we're slaying a strawman of gigantic proportions. Forgot for a minute. Go back to your regularly scheduled activities.

 

[jhmd2000]

I think the point about the mother is interesting , because at this time, there is no immediate financial incentive for the her have an abortion (although I think some would argue that there is financial incentive for her long-term, as it is one less child after I take care of, but I don't want to tackle that one at this time).
Now that mothers know that Planned Parenthood is benefiting financially off their dead child, isn't a logical next step that the mother will want to be reimbursed as well?

I mean, it's "her body", right?

 

[BeachBumDeac]

I think the point about the mother is interesting , because at this time, there is no immediate financial incentive for the her have an abortion (although I think some would argue that there is financial incentive for her long-term, as it is one less child after I take care of, but I don't want to tackle that one at this time).
Now that mothers know that Planned Parenthood is benefiting financially off their dead child, isn't a logical next step that the mother will want to be reimbursed as well?

They are not benefiting financially.

 

[Deacaholic]

So why don't they just give it away, then?

Why are they haggling over price is?

This is an honest question, not trying to troll.

 

[BeachBumDeac]

So why don't they just give it away, then?

Why are they haggling over price is?

This is an honest question, not trying to troll.

They are trying to not lose money on the transaction.

Organizations that prepare tissue and organs for donation are regularly reimbursed their costs. This is not something new or unique to Planned Parenthood

 

[Deacaholic]

I would expect Planned Parenthood, as large as it is, would know what it costs to abort a baby and prepared for a research company in terms of time, manpower, resources, etc. why would they not go to the company and say these are our costs we will gladly sell the baby to you for this price?

If there were a disagreement and the cost, they could always get an independent group to come audit their costs and show that they are actually true.

Whenever I see situations where people seem to be negotiating on the price of something, it makes me think there is profit to be made or lost.

 

[deacvision7]

Not that I'm going to get my hopes up, but do you have any evidence of this position being taken on this thread? Like ANY whatsoever? This practice is horrid, whatever the motive. You should either defend it or not defend it. No one has alleged that mothers of these children are being recruited (and it wouldn't any be less horrible if they did).

Your argument in defense of this practice just sucks. Sorry 'bout it.

This comes close:

The aborted fetuses would be aborted with our without the donation of the body parts for research and medical purposes. Nobody, as far as I know, is getting pregnant just to go through an abortion that they usually pay for, just to have body parts donated to science. That isn't happening. Stop pretending like it is for some sick reason.

Opposing this practice sickens you?

No.

Pretending that the practice is something that it is not in order to score some points against a gruesome tale of a straw man is quite troubling, however.

Uhm, this is a little awkward. There actually is a video (this time). It's like Benghazi Cover Story, but for real.

And to sum up and to reitterate that point that all you are doing is making shit up in order to attack it instead of the actual thing being done with the aborted fetus' tissue:

Oh right we're slaying a strawman of gigantic proportions. Forgot for a minute. Go back to your regularly scheduled activities.