That's what many people see in the Republican's knee-jerk reaction, particularly Republican politicians, to believing in the Center for Medical Progress's fraud, entrapment and creative editing, regarding Planned Parenthood. Particularly, when those politicians move to defund Planned Parenthood, without any further investigation. When they do investigate, they find, in the vast majority of cases, exactly what this article describes. No wrong doing!  

From what I understand, when Trump called into Fox and Friends, the whole matter of Megyn Kelly never came up. Amazing!  

She's on vacation.  Just like Bill O'Reilly has been on vacation all week.  Just like Martha MacCallum has been on vacation all week.  Just like Shepard Smith was the week before.

You know what month it is??? August.  The slowest month of the year for television.  It's summer.  It's vacation time.  The idea that Kelly is running from anything is as preposterous as Laffy thinking Doc Gonzo calls George W. Bush his hero.

Amazing how libs literally twist themselves into pretzels to try to find a way to rip into Fox News.  Of course there is only one plausible reason for them doing this.  Pure and outright jealousy. Face it, when you can only throw MSNBC up against Fox News, it's like throwing a teenaged girl into the ring with Ronda Rousey. The libs would kill to have a network with as much viewership as FNC.  And with the news talent -- Chris Wallace, Bret Baier, Ed Henry, John Roberts, Jennifer Griffin, etc. -- that FNC has

You're acting like someone called your mommy a dirty name!

Keep finding the liberal news sites that try to write stuff in an effort to defend Planned Parenthood's disgusting actions

What I believe is not the issue. The issue is what voting women believe!  

to abort the child but to use birth control.

There are no "oops, I get to do that over" when it comes to pregnancy.

It sickens me to see how far our standards have fallen when people use abortion as a way to cover up their laziness and carelessness when it comes to birth control.

And when people see the shit that has occurred in the Planned Parenthood videos, they are sickened as well

END OF MESSAGE

...change of pace from the usual Fox blond bimbos.  It's kinda like using your other hand, eh?

Conservatives scream about reducing the cost of Government, yet cannot seem to understand that Medicaid costs would be much higher without Planned Parenthood. Most of Planned Parenthood's work involves preventing unplanned pregnancies.
I've always wondered why dislike of abortion and support for Planned Parenthood couldn't go together.  What is so wrong with an organization that aims to cut the number of abortions and save the Government money at the same time

 

 
https://www.guttmacher.org/media/presskits/abortion-US/statsandfacts.htm

The right just can't seem to help themselves, just like the scorpion they are going to start making social issues like Planned Parenthood define the race, and then come next November they are going to be sitting there, shaking their heads,  wondering "what went wrong"

Most people consider me a conservative, and I have certainly screamed about "reducing the cost of Government" but I agree with you, this seems like money well spent to me, and if we defund Planned Parenthood, where is the plan to replace it with something else? Or are we simply supposed to pray the problem away?

END OF MESSAGE

the so-called "three percent" of their work that involves abortions and selling body parts.  Once that is accomplished, then I am in complete support of their work.

But they should not get  single dime until that "three percent" is long gone

END OF MESSAGE

We need to de-fund Medicaid because the people om that are nothing but lazy useless unemployed moochers, who have their hand out for that and other government hand-outs

You're Welcome
2016 = GO

How they can run on such a platform and expect to get any of the woman's vote or the vote of independents is beyond me?

So you might say "of course" and most of the rest of us might agree, but that doesn't mean that quite a few people, including some rather serious contenders for POTUS don't say "of course" at all. They believe ALL abortion is murder and that the life of the fetus trumps all other considerations.

If you consider a fetus to be a human being, then it shouldn't matter that it was conceived by rape or incest.  It shouldn't matter that the mother will die if she gives birth to a baby in the womb who has no brain and cannot possibly survive.  

If you consider that life to be sacred, you can have no other position.   You can't pick and choose when life is sacred.  If you allow abortion in certain circumstances you are a hypocrite.  I vehemently disagree with people who are anti-abortion in ALL circumstances, but at least they're consistent.

He's been asked directly about proposed laws that outlaw exceptions for rape and incest but allow for saving the mother's life, but he refuses to answer. He's has to be in a huge minority of religious pro-life people. Rubio has also made similar but not quite as strong "lack of comments".

Exceptions for LIFE of the mother NOT HEALTH is the ONE exception that is clearly constitutional and "biblicaly" allowed, since it would be SELF DEFENSE. Other exceptions, whether you're in favor or not, require some sort of legislative or judicial involvement.  

Other exemptions, adding severe deformation to make 4 total, introduce unintended consequences and "slippery slopes". For example, if Row v Wade were overturned with only the 4 exemptions, there would be a measurable uptick in the number of women filing false charges of rape once they discovered their pregnancy. Another relates to the judging of the severity of  birth defects. Who gets to decide? Advancing technology would impact those decisions just like technology has impacted the whole trimester viability judgments,

Talk about attempting to hijack a thread because you want me to pay attention to you... its the only possible rationale I can see for you attempting to link two such disparate topics. You are the poster child for Godwin's Law.

And you claim you aren't a reprehensible little hater...

This thread topic is the Republican war on women... not US foreign aid to Israel.

Instead of taking note of the progressive stance Israel has taken towards womens rights, Gay Lesbian and Transgenders rights despite the loud and vociferous extreme religious minority, you open your anti-Semitic little mouth because you are desperate to get a rise out of me. Why is that?

Once and for all, I will never dignify your stupid comments regarding my connection to Prime Minister Netanyahu, no matter how many verbal temper tantrums you throw or how many times you demand I respond to you. (37 and counting, since July 12)

This comment is the exception to the rule because you so blatantly tried to hijack a thread yet again. And you are allowed to get away with it because someone on the PTB read your laments on the Vegas board and feels sorry for you. Not me.
 
I am sick and tired of you running your stupid mouth and being allowed free rein; I have no fucks to give about the likes of you.

Piss off, pissant.  

Self-defense is available only when you face an IMMINENT danger. And since a doctor is needed to perform the abortion, we have a three party self-defense of others situation. So if we assume the fetus is a “person” and is endangering the mother’s life, this would work only right at the time the fetus actually becomes life threatening, or poses serious harm to the mother. Only then could the doctor come in and perform the abortion. This differs from the Roe v. Wade timeline.  

       This is also why self defense never works for those crazy killers of abortion doctors like Scott Reeder.

        We also have the problem of the fetus posing a passive and unintentional threat to the mother. Self defense does not really cover this kind of threat.

         But, even if you buy into the imminence argument, you have to deal with the converse situation – if the mother requests an abortion, the doctor could just as easily kill the mother and save the fetus. If prosecuted, he could claim self defense of third party. How does he make the choice?

       So there really is no legitimate way to handle this if you believe the fetus is a person at any time before the abortion.We have to close our eyes, declare the fetus is not a person until quite late in the cycle, and effectively murder the person

And what does "creative editing" even mean? Every single video on every single network news program every single night is edited. I have never heard you complain about MSNBC or ABC or CBS "creatively editing."

The difference with CMP, as opposed to those news organizations and virtually all others, is that they have the entire UNEDITED videos on their website and they point that out every time I have ever seen them interviewed.

They actually WANT people to see the full videos.

I dont see any deception in that, Matt.

-- Modified on 8/16/2015 8:28:42 PM

Your fake lawyer legal hat is on backwards today. I clearly stated my reasoning was based on constitutional and biblical justification (you could probably throw natural law in there as well). It was not based on any statutory reasoning. Perhaps you could wander over to the monastery basketball court locker room and receive a little biblical perspective as well.  

I AM heartened to see you are willing to at least entertain the notion that taking an unborn life is murder, except in the case of self defense that is

Than the statutory or common law right of self defense. And there is no constitutional self defense right that disposes of the imminence requirement. If there was, the statutory right would be pointless-defendants would always claim the broader right. You said "clearly constitutional".  You are way off.

And you still skip over the real problem. If the fetus is a person, than it had the same constitutional rights as the mother. Self defense for her would be murder to the child who would have an equal right of self defense.

Stick to your biblical argument.

My question is why they need goverment funding at all? It's a half a billion dollars, not chump change.

In addition to being a medical/health organization, they also happen to be a political one as well.

Why we fund political or quasi political organizations, on either side of the aisle, for those organizations to be in bed with R's or D's with tax payer money is ludicrous, imo.  

I wouldn't want the govt giving money to a Pro-Life group that may do some good in other areas of its work and I don't want money to go to Pro-Choice groups if they may do some good things as well.

And we all know the 3% is bullshit, and by you using quotes I assume you are signaling you are aware as well. Abortions are a MUCH bigger part of PP's billables then they let on as they use completely deceptive measures to account for that 3%.

I wonder why? LOL

If there's some problem with immanency that is not directly in the Constitution, that would be taken care of in the appropriate law yet written. I suppose there could be a situation where the child's life was fine sans the mother but you'd have to show me. It's got to be rare and anyhow, in that case the child would be viable outside the mother so taking it's life would not be covered, just birth it. Your reasoning is based on law that can be changed. Mine is not.

They have been trying to "catch" PP for years, sending undercover operatives and doing their best to entrap employees into a "gotcha" moment for years, and time after time PP comes up clean.

Now while I do agree that tax dollars should not be used to fund political organizations, so let's make a deal. We pull the funding for PP concurrently with revoking the tax exempt status of churches, THAT won't save us just a  half billion dollars, that will save us BILLIONS.

For the record, I "ripped" you mainly for claiming that "the facts don't matter" when you were busted for not just being wrong, but for being wrong by a factor of fifty. If some righty were wrong by even 50%, much less a factor of fifty you'd be rolling your eyes and making fun of him for months, but when YOU do it, the facts don't seem to matter, and even your "admission" was off by a factor of ten.

I just agreed with you that the PP "scandal" was nothing more than a witch hunt, are you ever going to admit you were wrong? Or do you think it would be fair if we just took all YOUR money because YOUR wealth alone is greater than the poorest 70,000,000 people combined? Don't you feel guilty living so well while so many languish in abject poverty?

For the first time the public got to see behind the scenes of the abortion industry and it aint pretty. The callousness is shocking. Remember, this is an ideology, liberalism, that gets all bent about a baby seal or how whales are treated at SeaWorld.

The vids were so shocking that even Hills herself said they vids were "disturbing" and she is tied to the hip to that group.

IDK whether they broke any laws but many legal beagles have said they should be investigated based on these tapes. But me wanting to defund them doesn't ride on the investigations.

When we are swimming in debt, a political group like PP is the LAST thing we should be blowing a half a bil on, imo.

I don't claim to read every post by you, so I must have missed that thread.

and you still cling to your position that distorting the facts is okay when you do it. Are you related to Mari by chance? He  has that annoying habit too.  

If being off by a factor of fifty doesn't matter, at what threshold does the TRUTH matter to you?

Five states have defunded PP since the airing of these tapes.  

There are NUMEROUS other investigations on going.

There are still MANY more tapes to be made public.

Does PP pay you cash under the table or do you get a check? LOL

In many moral arguments, there are dilemma's, lesser of two evils.

If a child and mother were equally at risk unless an abortion was performed, the logical and ethical reasoning stands to save the life of the mother.

That's not being a hypocrite at all. It is being rational and pragmatic.

It's the same with religion. If you are a believer you can't pick and choose which parts you believe

I think fundamentalists of any religion are some very scary people, but at least they are consistent. You can't claim to live your life as a 100% Christian yet ignore the parts of the Bible you find inconvenient. It's like saying that "God was just kidding when he said that stuff about not coveting your neighbor's wife"

"IF" you believe that life begins at conception than ALL abortion is murder, and even if the product of rape or incest you are still murdering that unborn baby. Either a fetus is a person or it's not, Let's take this a step further, what about a baby that was conceived by rape? Once that baby is born, No one is going to argue that it's okay to murder that baby because it was conceived by rape, right? Well to those who believe that fetus became a "person" the moment it was conceived, aborting it even ten minutes later is still murder.  

Hey, I don't believe any of this crap either,  but if someone wants to pick that side of the argument about abortion, they either need to take it all the way or admit to being a hypocrite. I think even our fake lawyer Mari made this same, very valid point.

The overwhelming majority of Pro-lifers do NOT believe ALL abortion is MURDER. Almost all carve out an exception for the Life (not the health, but the life) of the mother.

That's is where your logic breaks down.

The overwhelming majority of pro lifers believe that life starts at conception, using that foundation it is impossible to come up with any other conclusion other than "all abortion is murder"  

So unless your argument is that life starts at some other point besides conception, you are stuck with the "all abortion is murder" position, or you are by default a hypocrite. I am using the generic "you" of course as I don't believe that you personally believe that life starts at conception.

Sorry, but there isn't a thing wrong with my logic, it's the foundation of the Pro life's argument that is faulty.

And all the evidence isn't even in so "states finding nothing" is meaningless until the investigations are complete.

Common sense, isn't it?

The other night Megyn Kelly, in the debate said that almost 9 in 10 of Americans believe abortion should be allowed to protect the Life of the mother. I think she said 85% or so.

For sake of argument, lets assume that number is correct.

Pro-Lifers make up approx. 1/2 of the public, per Gallup.

So doing the math, an overwhelming number of Pro-life people believe that not ALL abortion is MURDER.

Yes they believe life starts at conception but they ALSO believe that a mother, in a 50/50 case of live or die, choose one, should have priority over the fetus/baby.

If you have a problem with my numbers or my logic, please point it out to me

That's what makes them true Fundies, it makes them very scary people, but as you said "barf" they are consistent.

I think there are a LOT more true Fundies in the Muslim religion which is why the Muslims of today are MUCH more dangerous than the Fundy Christians, just because of their sheer numbers and propensity for violence.

I think our slight disagreement on the subject might be our definition of the word Fundamentalist. The way I am using it is in regard to the "true believer" not just the hypocrites who "claim" to believe but still go out and lie, cheat, fuck hookers, use the word "God Damn" etc. Those people might be thumpers, but they are hardly Fundies in my book. Fundies are the "true believers" IMO. Believers in a fairy tale, yes, but true believers none the less.

It proves that over thirty percent of Americans are hypocrites on the subject.  

See how easy that is?

If a fetus is a "human life" intentionally ending that human life is MURDER. What else would you call it?

Here's the scenario:

The doctor comes rushing into the waiting room...says there has been a major complication..he tells the father to be that he HAS to perform an abortion on the baby or the mother will die.

I don't know of a single mainstream Pro-life group that would call that "murder" if the father gave that permission to the doctor.

That's not hypocricy, GaG.  

That's being faced with two bad decisions and having to make the least bad one under very emotional and trying conditions

It's not that I don't believe you, but I can hardly just take the word of a guy who thinks that being wrong by a factor of fifty is acceptable.

I eagerly await your links to the PROOF about the US raping children.

but I don't subscribe to the whole life starts at conception bullshit.

It is also the reason that all the candidates have twisted themselves into pretzels trying to answer the question, Do we have to watch the Rubio clip again? "Fundies" have painted themselves into a corner, either they are monsters for allowing the mother to die, or they are monsters for murdering an unborn baby.

and don't think it has gone unnoticed that everyone, including you, is backing off of the "in case of rape or incest" argument as well, where all the mental gymnastics in the world can't rationalize the hypocrisy.

The R's handle that badly at times.

I was only speaking for this one, nuanced argument on "life" of the mother, not those others.

Good debate

That's OK. Mari didn't get it either. The taking of the life to save the mother's is not murder. It's justifiable homicide.  

 
BTW, When DOES life begin if not at conception? That's the binary event that creates human DNA.

Now how about in the case of "rape or incest", do you feel abortion is justified in those cases?

For the record, I don't have an entrenched opinion on when life begins, or at least "life" where the wishes of the mother are trumped by the rights of the unborn "child" I lean towards "when the fetus is viable" but again, I don't have strong feeling on the subject myself.

Its harder to accept that life begins at 3 months or 4 months or whatever arbitrary number of "months" gestation.

Its also tough to argue with you when life does indeed begin.  

Rape and incest certainly cloud the picture, but if life does begin at conception, then the constitution would protect them at that point, wouldn't it?

But then I think, if there is no brain wave activity or heartbeat, how can it be "alive?"

I think both of those occur between 30-45 days or so.

I certainly can make the argument it is a human life then.

Yes, I am waffling. LOL

This is not an easy subject, for me anyway.

It's NOT an easy subject, is it?

I never meant to claim that it was an easy subject, but to point out the hypocrisy of some of the arguments.

I don't claim to have the answers, but forcing a woman to carry a baby to term just strikes me as yet another overreach by the government to control all of our lives, not just this stupid so called war on women.  Both parties want to take away our right to self determination, it's just that each party is attacking the individual from different fronts. If I am going to err, I am going to err on the side of personal choice.

Most Christians want to pick a choose what's sin and what's not. Abortion and same sex sex marriage is sin, but working and shopping on the Sabbath is not, though very little is said about the first two, in Scripture, but a lot about the later. A Biblical scholar and commentator I once read related a story about the mental gymnastics the Jews, before and during Jesus's time went through, at times. It was a sin to work on the Sabbath. And, the Pharisee's (the religious lawyers) determined that it was a sin to tie a knot, because that was considered work. Unless that is, if one tied a knot one one's belt sash, since everyone needed to do so to dress properly for the day. So, it was a sin to tie a robe to a water bucket to get water from a well or stream, but not a sin if one tied their sash to the water bucket. This is much like the argument that Jack and many Pro-lifers try to do.  

They want to dictate to a woman what she can do with her own womb, but cast her adrift, along with the newborn baby when she obeys their command and carries the baby to term.

If you REALLY want an extreme position on the subject, once upon a time jacking off was looked upon as next to murder as you never gave your sperm a chance to fertilize an egg and ejaculation was supposed to be reserved for procreation purposes only. Similarly "pulling out" was considered just as big a sin as jerking off as was all sex not done in order to make a baby.  Yeah, Christianity makes so much sense, doesn't it

Walker, and Rubio might fit that bill as well. Do you remember that I once said I "wanted" to support Walker, but I would put that off until I learned more about him? Well I have learned as much as I need to, I put him in the same thumper category as Huckabee et al.

As for the libs they have their own "nanny stater" mentality, but I was trying NOT to criticize the libs while I was busy criticizing the thumpers. if you insist however, I would be more than happy to tell you all the reasons libs are "nanny staters" too. it's just different with the libs, they want people dependent on the state, while thumpers want to control us via religion and the morality police.

Christians and Muslims. Same source, the Old Testament.

Yes, the most backward and ignorant states are trying to defund PP.  But then, both Indiana and Mass did their investigations and quickly realize how bogus the videos are.  Awkward.

Anyone with the integrity to actually read the 60 page transcript of the first "expose" can readily hear the good doctor repeat multiple times that they do not seek profit for providing legally obtained tissues to researchers who are busy saving lives.  Did you read them, or are you comfortable with self serving soundbites from an eight minute excerpt from a 3 hour video?

These videos are nothing more than a vicious smear campaign by misogynistic assholes who "care about the little babies" right up until they are born - then they quickly forget about them.  Anyone foolish enough to be duped by this nonsense should be embarrassed.  But of course, they're not.

Since presently, incest and rape only account for 1% of all abortion in the U.S. I'd be absolutely OK to provide those exceptions if it would facilitate the ending of the vast majority of the other 99%.Literally it would be a small price to pay.  

Actually, if the rape or incest is reported soon enough, legal abortifacients can be administered before ovulation and conception completes thus preventing the majority of conceptions.

But to totally answer your question one can point to any and all sorts of pain and suffering that people are forced to endure (often for a lifetime) resulting from the crimes of others. Just because it's a "simple" relief for some people, why do they get to kill an unborn person just to achieve their relief? If they didn't want to or were unable to accept the responsibility for the upbringing of the child then the laws should be written to absolutely cover the adoption, etc.

As far as when life begins, there is no other binary event (think of a light switch being turned on) that is like conception. It has been shown that human DNA exists the moment after conception but not before. Other gestational arguments are not binary in nature with the possible exception of the heart beating (which they say starts at about week 6), but the baby certainly is not dead and then comes alive at week six. All other measures, especially those the SCOTUS used in referring to trimesters and viability ALL depend upon how improving technology affects viability. No doubt some day we will have an artificial womb backing viability up, all the way to what? Conception.

STATE investigations showed no evidence of wrong doing found thus far in Georgia, Indiana, Massachusetts and South Dakota?

Never mind that the videos released thus far were made at PP locations in California, Colorado and Texas.

I think you and HuffPo should get back to us later.

They investigated based on the videos.  They found no wrong doing because they actually bothered to watch the entire videos and realized they are nothing more than witch hunts by unethical people hiding behind their religious ignorance and bigotry.

Get back to us when someone actually submits an honest, fact-based claim against PP, instead of these blatantly and transparently dishonest videos by people who want to return to back room abortions because of their contempt for both women and fetuses.

3% of PP's activities involve abortions.  Further, their contraceptive serviced PREVENT some 800,000 abortions annually.  How many abortions do these self-righteous misogynists prevent by lying?

Indiana, Georgia, Massachusetts and South Dakota can't investigate crimes that may have been committed in California or  Colorado. OK, so these 4 states have not found similar practices in their own states. What does that prove? It proves nothing in regards to California or Colorado or other potential states. It does indicate though that enough later term abortions are performed in just a few states that satisfies the existing research demand without spreading this practice to all the States.

Your lack of knowledge regarding the complete videos and lack of knowledge or mis-characterization of the motives of pro-life people demonstrates your own probable motives.

The 3% number is an internal PP statistic. I have never seen PP disclose how they arrived at it and blind acceptance of it is just silly.

-- Modified on 8/23/2015 3:15:54 PM

If your own knowledge of PP wasn't so deficient, you'd know that their practices are consistent nationwide.  There simply isn't any evidence of criminal activity anywhere in the PP structure.  The videos make that clear to anyone who bothered to actual view them for comprehension rather than speed.

I'll be delighted to match my knowledge regarding the complete videos against yours, as I took the time not only view them but to read the entire transcripts.  Virtually every objective person that has done so readily admits that there are no statements by any PP employer that even remotely implies any unlawful or even unethical activity.

This again is a witch hunt, and an egregiously dishonest one at that.  Do you even know anything about this 'group of journalists that report on medical ethics' that is releasing the videos??  It's one fucking guy in a 200sf office.  Lol.  And he's an obvious shill for the anti-woman crowd.  Have you bothered to research him?  I doubt it.

Why hasn't he released all of the several videos he claims to have?  Because his orders are to keep this dishonest story in the news throughout the election cycle, to stroke the angst of the sheep so they bleat the mantra 'Defund!'.  It's an effective strategy - if devoid of integrity.  But clearly, integrity means nothing to right wing misogynists looking for a way to feel better about themselves and their loving concern for fetuses and piously claim to be 'pro life' while they work to bring back the deadly realities of back room abortions.  Why?  Because of their ignorant, religious based contempt for women.  Jesus weeps at their hypocrisy.

This story is no better than McCarthyism.  Those behind it should be ashamed, but of course, they are not.

So we've gone in an instant to nothing to see in 4 States to nothing to see nationwide. I see you're stooping to the tactics of their other defenders; rather than actually addressing the content of the videos you choose to attack the video producers and their supporters as not being objective. I suggest if you truly want to help combat this latest effort to save lives the place to start would be to actually understand those you attack. Believing the right to life movement has contempt for women does you and your efforts a total disservice.  

Abortion's not going anywhere. This is about changing hearts and minds.

No sir.  My point is that everyone I know who actually viewed the entire videos knows that the charges leveled are spurious.  It's not even debatable.  Therefore, if you claim you have read the transcripts and still maintain that there is even smoke much less fire, then I have no choice but to conclude that you are either unable to parse the clear results of the videos, or you are being disingenuous.

Let's review.  The videos clearly show no wrong-doing.  This raises the logical question of what motive the producers would have for the contemptible allegations they make against an organization that prevents over 800,000 abortions each year.  That leads one to research the producers, which reveals them to be shills for the anti-woman cabal.

One can hardly believe there is an actual 'right to life' movement when they not only have to pander to and support lies in order to further their agenda, but also engage in pogroms that will not reduce the number of abortions, but will simply put more womens lives at risk through unsafe and unlicensed procedures.  That is not respect for life.  It's the sanctimonious evil of self-righteous Neanderthals that think they will secure the bribe of heaven if they spit on Jesus while following the misogynistic ramblings of 3500 year old goat herders.  It's a shameful hypocrisy.

Sp now you've traversed from the 4 States found no "wrong-doing to a simple flat out assertion there was no wrong-doing. While some are claiming laws were broken and some things and places still are under investigation (which BTW was my singular and original point, the point you missed), I have never asserted that any specific law was broken. But sticking to the known facts as clearly observable in the videos, your use of "wrong-doing" obviously leads to interpretation and conclusions by not just those you deem unworthy of debate but also by middle of the road persons, some on the left and even the head of Planned Parenthood to agree that the videos clearly illustrated some "wrong-doing". I get it you believe there has been no shame attributable in the more than 50,000,000 U.S. deaths since Roe. I can only hope that one day you will rectify your error.  

BTW, in spite of the issue to defund PP, this isn't about birth control. Doing good deeds does not excuse other deeds that are not, except in your world I think. pps. Do you REALLY hold the opinion Jesus is/would be OK with our abortion history and practices?

It's pretty simple.  What does Jesus say about abortion?  Especially in light of the fact that the bible features the use of abortifacients in the OT?  Further, bible god not only does not count fetuses as human beings worthy of being counted - he doesn't even count actual babies until they are 30 days old.  This 'right to life' movement is not scriptural.  It's just a make believe, feel good activity so that evangelicals can feel like they're going to heaven.  It's like prayer - a way to do absolutely nothing and still pretend that you're helping....

Hey, here's a link where the video producer is forced to admit that he LIED when he presented a stillborn baby as if it was aborted.

https://www.yahoo.com/health/undercover-anti-abortion-video-showed-images-of-127289829487.html

Do you support this dishonesty

It's good I don't base any of my objections to almost all abortion based on religion. Based on what little I do know about Jesus, I probably wouldn't start with the Old Testament to begin a discussion about his possible thoughts. You brought Him up not me. Not everyone against abortion is who you think they are. A feel good activity? Yea, I feel pretty good when someone doesn't die.

So it looks like maybe someone at CMP screwed up in their footage and they admitted their error. Interesting how that gives you justification to discredit all their work yet not for once do you seem to consider that PP is not pure as the driven snow in all this

Yes, you must feel giddy about the 11 year old rape victim in Paraguay who was forced to deliver her rapists child.  Truly a day to celebrate, is it not?  11 year old rape victims make the bestest mommies, don't they?  And of course, men are the best judges of that, aren't they.

CMP did not make an error.  You would have to be horribly obtuse to think that.  They calculated their move to fan the flames of the lemmings and simply got caught in yet another lie.  Just like the lies the videos tell by heavily editing to imply criminal activity.  It's a shameful and dishonorable tactic.  PP has been a target for decades now - and this smear campaign simply highlights the desperation of those who think women are too stupid to make valid decisions for their bodies.  Steinem had the right of it - "If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament."

It’s apparent you’ve completely lost all rationality for discussion, skipping over points you won’t or can’t address, while insinuating I’m an unobjective, rightwing McCarthyite misogynist, lacking integrity with ignorant contempt for women and pleased they get raped.  I have no idea how you could believe that anyone, let alone me, would feel joy in the plight of any rape victim.  Until now I’ve treated you with respect but it’s obvious you’re one sick fuck. There is one person I have less respect for than a fetus. You

IOW, you have no cogent rebuttal to the fact that a despicable witch hunt is being promulgated by a guy that is an obvious shill for the anti-abortion cabal, who has to LIE in order to forward their anti-choice agenda.  You cannot provide any better evidence of this bogus allegation of criminal activity on the part of an organization that prevents over 800,000 abortions each year while (gasp!) educating our society on how to prevent unwanted pregnancy.  You lack the integrity to admit that the Paraguay rape situation is the logical result of the contempt for women that has "leaders" like Huckabee re-iterating that there can be no exceptions for rape or incest.

I get it.  You have no argument.  You're dismissed

Other than you're wrong? Other than properly describing your mental attitude in my last post I wasn't the one throwing invective in my direction. Despicable? Witch hunt? Shill? Those are all your opinions not supported by the evidences of the several hours of video. The evidence of the videos speak for themselves. Simply because their are portions where the persons who were the truly despicable ones later make claims that let them off the hook for possible crimes does not make them any less despicable.  

BTW, I never made any claims that crimes were committed. You have no idea who I am yet you call me all sorts of names. You claimed I was giddy over the rape of this girl and the consequences she went through with no evidence that is at all true. I previously told you as much yet no apology, only backpedaling from you and more unfounded accusations regarding my integrity for not admitting what you see as absolute truths.  

I can honestly say I do understand your position regarding abortion and that you feel the unborn have no rights and are not human. On the other hand it's obvious you have absolutely no clue or insight into those that disagree. You can only justify your own opinions by declaring the other side is evil. Not much actual logic going on there.

You have no moral authority or logical justification to dismiss anyone. All you have is self serving emotion. I'd typically say I felt sorry for you, but it's not true. You're not dismissed. I hold you accountable for your actions. Too bad you have no idea what that means.