The Center for Medical Progress released another Planned Parenthood video today. It once again features Holly O’Donnell, a former technician for StemExpress, one of the buyers of baby parts from Planned Parenthood. The video consists mostly of Miss O’Donnell describing an incident in which a baby’s heart was still beating, and she was instructed to cut through the baby’s face so that his brain–the baby was a boy–could be removed for sale. It is utterly appalling.
The Times tries to keep alive the fiction that there is some doubt about what the videos show. The videos do not “purport” to show PP officials negotiating prices for aborted babies’ body parts. They show PP officials negotiating prices for aborted babies’ body parts. They show a lot more than that, too.
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Thursday, July 30, 2015
Carly Fiorina - Abortion
Good answer and good turn-around!
It is refreshing to hear straight talk from someone running for office!
It is refreshing to hear straight talk from someone running for office!
Wednesday, July 29, 2015
Planned Parenthood is trafficking in baby body parts, part 3
The video begins with an interview of Holly O’Donnell, a phlebotomist and former procurement tech for a company called StemExpress. According to O’Donnell, StemExpress partners with Planned Parenthood to harvest baby parts for scientific research and pays Planned Parenthood to use their facilities.
“I thought I was going to be drawing blood, not procuring tissue from aborted fetuses,” said O’Donnell.
“I thought I was going to be drawing blood, not procuring tissue from aborted fetuses,” said O’Donnell.
Wednesday, July 22, 2015
Planned Parenthood is trafficking in baby body parts, part 2
Another Planned Parenthood "sting" video was released and it add additional weight to the scale though the usual suspects line up to try and provide cover. The video is "shocking" and when viewed objectively clearly demonstrates the callousness with which those involved with PP view that "clump of cells" within a women.
A person who cares only about reimbursement will clearly disclose the costs that must be covered and leave it at that. No negotiation is necessary. Either the buyer agrees to cover the costs, or he doesn’t. That’s it.
Exactly. This was clearly a negotiation. In the video (and the unedited copy) you can clearly hear Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s Medical Directors’ Council President, Dr. Mary Gatter discuss how she needs to check what other PP groups in her area are getting. Not that she needs to verify their "costs" to make the "specimens" (i.e. fetal tissue and organs) available.
Gatter also suggests modifying the abortion procedure to get more intact fetuses: “I wouldn’t object to asking Ian, who’s our surgeon who does the cases, to use an IPAS [manual vacuum aspirator] at that gestational age in order to increase the odds that he’s going to get an intact specimen.”
Gatter seems aware this violates rules governing tissue collection, but disregards them: “To me, that’s kind of a specious little argument.” Federal law requires that no alteration in the timing or method of abortion be done for the purposes of fetal tissue collection (42 U.S.C. 289g-1).
In case you missed it, "intact specimen" is an unborn child that they are "harvesting" for its tissues and organs to be sold to medical research groups.
A person who cares only about reimbursement will clearly disclose the costs that must be covered and leave it at that. No negotiation is necessary. Either the buyer agrees to cover the costs, or he doesn’t. That’s it.
Exactly. This was clearly a negotiation. In the video (and the unedited copy) you can clearly hear Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s Medical Directors’ Council President, Dr. Mary Gatter discuss how she needs to check what other PP groups in her area are getting. Not that she needs to verify their "costs" to make the "specimens" (i.e. fetal tissue and organs) available.
Gatter also suggests modifying the abortion procedure to get more intact fetuses: “I wouldn’t object to asking Ian, who’s our surgeon who does the cases, to use an IPAS [manual vacuum aspirator] at that gestational age in order to increase the odds that he’s going to get an intact specimen.”
Gatter seems aware this violates rules governing tissue collection, but disregards them: “To me, that’s kind of a specious little argument.” Federal law requires that no alteration in the timing or method of abortion be done for the purposes of fetal tissue collection (42 U.S.C. 289g-1).
In case you missed it, "intact specimen" is an unborn child that they are "harvesting" for its tissues and organs to be sold to medical research groups.
Friday, July 17, 2015
Planned Parenthood is trafficking in baby body parts
“We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part”
Evil has a real name and it is Planned Parenthood.
The linked video and article can be difficult to read/watch. This has apparently already joined the Kermit Gosnell stories and been pushed out of site by the news apparatus. The full 3 hour video has the Senior Director of Medical Services, Dr. Deborah Nucatola, describing in excruciating detail how she sometimes performs illegal late-term abortions while retrieving fetal body parts that are then sold to researchers.
Are the women really aware that this is what is going on? Are the women in any heightened danger due the the complications of this type of procedure and are they aware and have they agreed to this? Does this go on at all PP clinics? Even those in Texas that just won the ability to not need privileges at local hospitals and don't need to be maintained at hospital standards?
According to PP and their supporters, it is well within a woman's right to choose as the item under discussion is "just a clump of cells". When was the last time a "clump of cells" was able to be the source of human livers, hearts, lungs? If you are admitting that these are human organs, you have to also admit that you are taking them from a "human". PP fights to keep from being required to "fully inform" their clients about what is actually happening to what. They fight to not have to do ultrasounds before performing their procedures. They fight to operate under more lax health and safely rules. As this video highlight, it appears that they also actively break the law.
Evil has a real name and it is Planned Parenthood.
The linked video and article can be difficult to read/watch. This has apparently already joined the Kermit Gosnell stories and been pushed out of site by the news apparatus. The full 3 hour video has the Senior Director of Medical Services, Dr. Deborah Nucatola, describing in excruciating detail how she sometimes performs illegal late-term abortions while retrieving fetal body parts that are then sold to researchers.
Are the women really aware that this is what is going on? Are the women in any heightened danger due the the complications of this type of procedure and are they aware and have they agreed to this? Does this go on at all PP clinics? Even those in Texas that just won the ability to not need privileges at local hospitals and don't need to be maintained at hospital standards?
According to PP and their supporters, it is well within a woman's right to choose as the item under discussion is "just a clump of cells". When was the last time a "clump of cells" was able to be the source of human livers, hearts, lungs? If you are admitting that these are human organs, you have to also admit that you are taking them from a "human". PP fights to keep from being required to "fully inform" their clients about what is actually happening to what. They fight to not have to do ultrasounds before performing their procedures. They fight to operate under more lax health and safely rules. As this video highlight, it appears that they also actively break the law.
Wednesday, March 19, 2014
File Under the "what the hell were they thinking" Department
Abortion nonprofit rewards donors with horrific ‘token of thanks’...
Talk about mistaken "optics", this is just plain twisted. For now, the original web page is still up at this link so that you can see that this is real. I think I understand what they are trying to say but their choice of visual is so off that I can not believe someone within their organization didn't try to stop this. Regardless of how you personally feel on this subject, I know their "intent" is / was to keep this procedure safe but their choice of "gift" appears to be glorifying this practice and making light of the procedure.
I think that this is an occasionally medically necessary procedure that has been elevated to the feminist's version of the Holy Grail. At its foundation, this is the destroying of another human life. Making this "choice" is a terrible burden on a woman and these sorts of "antics" make light of what SHOULD be a wrenching decision. A woman should not be approaching this decision with the same sort of flippant attitude that goes into selecting a lipstick color. Far too many of these procedures occur in this country. Fortunately, overall the yearly incidents are down but sorry, "fewer than last year" is just not good enough. The right answer is "only as many as was necessary and no more".
Some would say that I have no standing as am not a woman. If that is the case then there would be no standing for the ASPCA either. Having the right to do something does not make doing that thing right.
Talk about mistaken "optics", this is just plain twisted. For now, the original web page is still up at this link so that you can see that this is real. I think I understand what they are trying to say but their choice of visual is so off that I can not believe someone within their organization didn't try to stop this. Regardless of how you personally feel on this subject, I know their "intent" is / was to keep this procedure safe but their choice of "gift" appears to be glorifying this practice and making light of the procedure.
I think that this is an occasionally medically necessary procedure that has been elevated to the feminist's version of the Holy Grail. At its foundation, this is the destroying of another human life. Making this "choice" is a terrible burden on a woman and these sorts of "antics" make light of what SHOULD be a wrenching decision. A woman should not be approaching this decision with the same sort of flippant attitude that goes into selecting a lipstick color. Far too many of these procedures occur in this country. Fortunately, overall the yearly incidents are down but sorry, "fewer than last year" is just not good enough. The right answer is "only as many as was necessary and no more".
Some would say that I have no standing as am not a woman. If that is the case then there would be no standing for the ASPCA either. Having the right to do something does not make doing that thing right.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
