Planned Parenthood is organ farming

[Malcolm]

Feds legally kick Utah in the balls.

Republican Gov. Gary Herbert cut off cash last fall for sexually transmitted disease and sex education programs following the release of secretly recorded videos showing out-of-state employees discussing fetal tissue from abortions.
...
The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver decided Tuesday there's a good chance the governor's order violated the group's constitutional rights.

Suck it long and suck it hard.

[Malcolm]

PP and the jack-asses would like to thank the CMP for their vids.

To back up this argument, Sackin cites polling that shows that support for Planned Parenthood has risen in the past year and notes that “voters in key swing states saying that opposing care at Planned Parenthood actually makes voters less likely to support a candidate.”

[GORDON]

What do you expect when all news sources say the conversations were taken out of context without stating the entire unedited videos were available online the whole time.

[Malcolm]

What do you expect when all news sources say the conversations were taken out of context without stating the entire unedited videos were available online the whole time.

Uh, no. They made it clear the vids released were edited and then pointed out what happens when you watch the longer versions. I see no attempt at deception except from the CMP.

The group that recorded a secret video of Planned Parenthood’s senior director of medical services says it shows “how Planned Parenthood sells the body parts of aborted fetuses, and admitting she uses partial-birth abortions to supply intact body parts.” But their own transcript contains several clear statements to dispute that. Some key excerpts below.

[GORDON]

Are you claiming that MSNBC is committed to the unbiased truth? The unedited, full-length videos were on their website before they were court-ordered to pull them.

[Malcolm]

Are you claiming that MSNBC is committed to the unbiased truth? The unedited, full-length videos were on their website before they were court-ordered to pull them.

I didn't claim the first thing you stated. I claimed the media made no effort to cover things up as you insinuated. As for the second sentence of yours, the media doesn't have control over what the courts do.

On July 31, 2015, the National Abortion Federation sued CMP and Daleiden. A Los Angeles judge placed a temporary restraining order on the release of further videos of employees of StemExpress, one company which Planned Parenthood does business with, based on California's anti-wiretapping law.

Feel free to rail against Cali laws, but no reporter did that. By the by, here's what the unedited version has:

StemExpress CEO Cate Dyer explained the discrepancy as a misuse of terms by CMP operatives:

As anyone can see and read, the entire discussion was, in fact, about "intact livers",... My use of the term "intact cases" is a medical term of art that refers solely to "intact livers", as there was absolutely no mention of "intact fetuses" at any point in over two hours of illegally recorded video.

[Vince]

Don't remember where this was brought up here, but I've seen it elsewhere. The notion that only 3% of PP's services are abortion. We had both of our puppies fixed. One neutering and one spaying. Looking at the itemized bill, they did blood work, gave anesthesia, clipped nails, gave antibiotics, prescribed antibiotics for after, prescribed pain pills for after and used laser incisions for the procedure. Using the PP method, less than 13% of the services offered by my vet to spay and neuter my dogs was actually spaying and neutering my dogs.

Just to keep in mind when they say abortion is only 3% of PP's provided services. This is the method they use to come up with that figure.

[TheCatt]

Actually, the 3% is a percent of services, not itemized $. So it's like your vet performing checkups for $50, and a spay for $500. If he performed one of each, it'd be 50% spay services. But from a revenue perspective, it's 89%. PP is using the 50% #.



More details here

[Vince]

Actually, the 3% is a percent of services, not itemized $.

Yes. They itemize everything that's part of the abortion, but only count the actual abortion in that 3%. Every procedure that was a support procedure for the actual abort counts to shrink the percentage number counting as percentage of actual abortions.

[Troy]

Actually, the 3% is a percent of services, not itemized $.

Yes. They itemize everything that's part of the abortion, but only count the actual abortion in that 3%. Every procedure that was a support procedure for the actual abort counts to shrink the percentage number counting as percentage of actual abortions.

I had to take my dog to the vet last month and received all those pet-related services, sans-neutering (he got in a fight). I think the vet mostly fucks us over a barrel by itemizing stuff like that and blowing up the bill.

Where do you figure those other services are reflecting on the graph? I'm very for abortions rights, but having never had an abortion I don't know the full list of what the "package" would be.

I figured they would put it into "Other Women's Health", but I checked and that's classified as : “Other women’s health services” are pregnancy tests and “prenatal services,” which are described as “care you receive from a health care provider, such as a doctor or midwife, during pregnancy.”

[TPRJones]

Yeah, it's not like there's a huge "other items" category there that is likely to be hiding all that money, Vince. Do you think they charge a tiny part as "abortion" and put the rest under "contraception" and "STI treatment"? Maybe they consider a fetus to be a sexually transmitted parasite? Really the worst case scenario along these lines is that a small portion of "prenatal care" under the "other services" category is where they hide it all, but even then that can't be more than a couple of percentage points if so.

It seems more likely that they are counting each person-visit as one type of thing, not an itemized listing, or there'd have to be categories like "disposable gloves" and "doctor fees" to hide all that extra abortion cost in. And there isn't.

[Vince]

It seems more likely that they are counting each person-visit as one type of thing, not an itemized listing, or there'd have to be categories like "disposable gloves" and "doctor fees" to hide all that extra abortion cost in. And there isn't.

I'm not talking about the money. I thought I was pretty clear on that, but apparently not. I'm talking about the "3% of services rendered are abortions" claims. They are not claiming 3% of their money comes from abortions. No one is talking about money with these 3% stories.

From my understanding, like the above vet bill, there are either 3 or 4 services that are included as part of every abortion performed at PP. I know one is a pregnancy test but I forget what the others were. So because of how they are doing their accounting on this, even if the only thing they did were abortions they'd be able to claim that only 20% of their services are abortions.

[TPRJones]

That may have validity if you assume that those women would not have come in for a pregnancy test or STI treatment or to get contraception or whatever else if they had not also needed an abortion. I'm not sure that is so in most cases.

All because you buy some eggs at the store when you went to get whiskey it doesn't mean those eggs are now a form of liquor.

[Troy]

I agree the 3% is misleading, especially when you don't explain the details. Here's some more stuff I found on this.

A better break down - of the services anyway. This is 2011. Abortions have fallen nationwide since then - probably because all those other services.



One I keep seeing: 1 out of 10 woman who go to PP gets an abortion. 10% - maybe a more useful number?

PP still can't use any of the federal funding it gets for abortions, right? So that money is coming from the states + local or out of pocket.

[TPRJones]

To be fair, some people would consider "Emergency Contraception Kits" to be a form of abortion through medication. I don't think that's correct, but some would.

[GORDON]

To be fair, some people would consider "Emergency Contraception Kits" to be a form of abortion through medication. I don't think that's correct, but some would.

I could be wrong.... aren't those actually pills to try to prevent contraception, after the deed is done?

[GORDON]

Does anyone else roll their eyes when the discussion of federal funding for planned parenthood gets turned into the claim that "they are trying to outlaw abortions!" I do, I just wonder if anyone else does.

[TPRJones]

I think those are the pills they mean, yes. But that just stops implantation of a blastocyst. At that point it's just a bundle of barely-differentiated stem cells, and isn't even considered a fetus yet.

Without the pills about 50% of blastocysts don't implant anyway. The pill just makes sure that one is one of those 50%.

[Troy]

Does anyone else roll their eyes when the discussion of federal funding for planned parenthood gets turned into the claim that "they are trying to outlaw abortions!" I do, I just wonder if anyone else does.

The problem is that the type of people that spearhead pushes to cut said funding normally DO want that.

Our current Vice President:

“I’m pro-life and I don’t apologize for it,” he said during a town hall meeting here. “We’ll see Roe vs. Wade consigned to the ash heap of history where it belongs.”

[GORDON]

I think those are the pills they mean, yes. But that just stops implantation of a blastocyst. At that point it's just a bundle of barely-differentiated stem cells, and isn't even considered a fetus yet.

Without the pills about 50% of blastocysts don't implant anyway. The pill just makes sure that one is one of those 50%.

grrr, i meant to say "block conception."