Donating aborted fetal organs

[formerly33]

Okay, I'll try to be rational here. I know I'm addressing a predominantly liberal audience, so I'm posting the link to the article I found on the Chicago Tribune. It's pretty good, though of course I don't agree with the author on this subject, but yeah, I know you're not going to want to read a delirious rant in some conservative paper.

 

My take on it is that this has nothing to do with whether or not abortion should be legal. Scrap the argument over whether unborn babies are alive or not, forget about bickering about whether it's a moral or philosophical concern, and focus on the issue at hand.

 

The actions of Planned Parenthood are illegal, according to the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. This is appalling news, and in my opinion it can't be argued about based on each individual's political views, though to tell the truth I'm expecting to see plenty all over the internet until this simmers down (who knows what will ultimately come of it).

 

As one person tweeted on the subject, "calling vivisection of babies and selling their organs 'medical research' is akin to calling cannibalism 'alternate cuisine.'"

 

Take that as you will. Here is the link to the Chicago Tribune's take on it:

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-huppke-planned-parenthood-video-20150715-story.html

 

There are a few points I find to be interesting. First, I thought that people knew about this before, but since it blew all out of the water the other day it's on my mind more than it was last Wednesday. Maybe I was wrong ... ?

 

Secondly, I don't know how much can be done with the evidence at hand since I'm pretty sure it was obtained illegally. Obviously I could be plenty wrong, though. Thoughts?

[drjim]

Abortion is a terrible, terrible thing.

 

I'm really bothered that it has gotten to the point where there can be no moderation or nuance in discussion on how to prevent the maximum number of abortions - starting with cheap/free birth control and a secure safety net for mothers, to significant adoption credits (on both sides), to laws that restrict the most barbaric practices (such as quoted above) and perhaps even hard stops in the second semester outside of danger to the mother or perhaps proven abuse/incest to the mother (and even that I waver).

 

It seems much of the movement (both ways) happens in sneaky ways with huge battles over even the most low hanging fruit ways to prevent actual abortions.

[TheLeviathan]

Great post Jim. Id suggest the real source of this is one side has turned abortion into a right (read: good thing) and the other into an unquestioned evil. Neither allows room in between.

[Squirrel]

Here's another point of view on the original post:

 

 

 

[Craig Arko]

 

Here's another point of view on the original post:

 

Snopes has it listed as 'Undetermined' so the veracity is still, well, undetermined.

[Squirrel]

 

Snopes has it listed as 'Undetermined' so the veracity is still, well, undetermined.

Okay ... here's the Washington Post response ...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/07/15/dont-rush-to-judge-planned-parenthood/

 

 

[formerly33]

Here's another point of view on the original post:

 

TL;DNW

 

But, in all seriousness, this is hardly a debate over whether Dr. Nucatola has a heart or whether Planned Parenthood is doing this for profit. I'm not sure why, but a lot of people are trying to draw the attention away from the fact that Planned Parenthood is performing partial birth abortions, which by law are illegal. If you want to defend Planned Parenthood in this specific issue, tell me why partial birth abortions, even if performed for fetal organs to save lives, are okay. I won't agree, but I'll be more willing to watch 15 minutes of professionalism on that subject than 15 minutes of deliberate caricature as shown here.

 

You may agree with the news anchor that as a conservative, I don't really believe in life after conception - all I really want is for girls who have sex to get pregnant and "suffer the consequence." This is hardly what I believe. Look at it this way: if I thought that, I would also want to see people who experimented with drugs to suffer from severe drug abuse and addiction so that they would suffer the consequence of their bad choices. I would want someone who touched drink to become an alcoholic. I would want all homosexuals to get AIDS. I do not want that of anyone.

 

Back to suffering the consequence of getting pregnant, though ... I will say that I am extremely hesitant to judge people who have sex outside of the context of marriage, even if I, as a born again Christian, choose a different lifestyle. And the same applies to the other topics I alluded to. Grant it, in my humble opinion anyone who experiments with drugs is ... well, dumb, for lack of a better word ... but I'm not going to point my finger and shout, "You're a sinner!" Hey, you know, in reality, even the word dumb is too harsh. In a lot of instances, you could replace that with the phrase "under a lot of stress." And that is not sin.

 

To put it simply, I am a firm believer in not judging lest you be judged.

 

And by the way ... I kind of like your new signature. I suppose you could apply it to me and say that this is pointless dialogue since obviously I'm not going to convert you or anything. But in point of fact, I am not making even the slightest attempt to convert you. I think I'm smart enough to know that I could talk until I'm blue in the face and type until my fingers fell off and I still wouldn't convince you that what I believe is right. Therefore, that should make writing this pointless dialogue. But I find it to be slightly offensive that you have such a contorted opinion of me as a conservative ... not that it matters what you think of me ... but I'd thank you to be aware that people can strongly disagree on a subject without either of them being idiots.

[Willihammer]

Am I the only one that thinks the idea of donating aborted fetuses for scientific research is totally fine?

[twinsnorth49]

Am I the only one that thinks the idea of donating aborted fetuses for scientific research is totally fine?

Nope

[Squirrel]

 

Am I the only one that thinks the idea of donating aborted fetuses for scientific research is totally fine?

Nope.

[Willihammer]

My bad. After actually reading through the links, the implication is about Planned Parenthood profiting off the black market sale of aborted fetuses  ("Sale," not "donating"), which is obviously total bunk and why are we even talking about **** like this? Honestly, if this type of stuff even hits your radar - how does it hit your radar? This is pretty radical, fringy stuff.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Planned Parenthood is performing partial birth abortions, which by law are illegal.

This is false.  Although the Partial Birth Abortion Ban does make Dilatation and Extraction of the fetus illegal, Intact Dilatation and Excavation is still legal--where the fetus is, well, cut up and excavated.  The alternative poses more risks to the woman, however, it is supposed that she can better retain her dignity having been spared the partial birth  Source on the differences between partial birth procedures.   It's after this Intact D & E, that material might be useful for stem-cell research or prospective organs could be recovered.  (IMHO, the Partial Birth Abortion Act doesn't materially alter the abortion dilemma, but rather poses more risks to the women, leaving more gruesome choice to her in the second trisemester--it's passage is a symbolic bone to pro-life advocates.)

 

If Planned Parenthood had violated the Partial Birth Abortion Act, there's numerous outfits including many State Attorneys who would happily file suit.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Am I the only one that thinks the idea of donating aborted fetuses for scientific research is totally fine?

Nope.

[Craig Arko]

 

Am I the only one that thinks the idea of donating aborted fetuses for scientific research is totally fine?

Donating, fine. Selling, obviously not. This is one place where letting the market decide is a real bad idea.

[drjim]

 

Am I the only one that thinks the idea of donating aborted fetuses for scientific research is totally fine?

 

I think that is fine in theory, but I would be adamantly opposed to anything that provided an incentive for more abortions.

 

Providing aborted fetuses for research opens out all sorts of potential for corruption. 

[Squirrel]

 

Donating, fine. Selling, obviously not. This is one place where letting the market decide is a real bad idea.

They aren't selling. If you've read everything on this, they are donating. The fees assessed are not for profit, they are to cover shipping and handling and that was made clear. Seriously … $30 is a black market price? Really? 

 

And don't get me started on the making of that video and the timing of its release.

[Craig Arko]

 

They aren't selling. If you've read everything on this, they are donating. The fees assessed are not for profit, they are to cover shipping and handling and that was made clear. Seriously … $30 is a black market price? Really? 

 

And don't get me started on the making of that video and the timing of its release.

I think we're on the same side here. I just also accept drjim's precautionary that there is potential for corruption with this, as in all things.

[twinsnorth49]

 

Providing aborted fetuses for research opens out all sorts of potential for corruption.

Providing tissue from aborted fetuses is an incredibly useful and beneficial tool in understanding human cell biology. It has played a vital role in the development of vaccines as well as research into genetic disorders and cancer, amongst others.

 

Your statement makes it sound like this is some kind of new thing.

[drjim]

 

Providing tissue from aborted fetuses is an incredibly useful and beneficial tool in understanding human cell biology. It has played a vital role in the development of vaccines as well as research into genetic disorders and cancer, amongst others.

Your statement makes it sound like this is some kind of new thing.

 

I certainly appreciate the science and I"m not naive to (most of) what happens.

 

I'm concerned about corruption that provides incentives for more abortions and organizations that may push for more abortions because of said incentives. Medical benefits of discarded fetuses aside, my personal hope for humanity is zero abortions.

[Squirrel]

I certainly appreciate the science and I"m not naive to (most of) what happens.

 

I'm concerned about corruption that provides incentives for more abortions and organizations that may push for more abortions because of said incentives. Medical benefits of discarded fetuses aside, my personal hope for humanity is zero abortions.

What incentives? Do you think women are 'being talked into' more abortions for this purpose? No one is being paid for this. It's not like someone is being paid to donate blood platelets. And fetal tissue is being donated with consent. Consent they gain AFTER a woman has decided to have an abortion not before.

[drjim]

 

What incentives? Do you think women are 'being talked into' more abortions for this purpose? No one is being paid for this. It's not like someone is being paid to donate blood platelets. And fetal tissue is being donated with consent. Consent they gain AFTER a woman has decided to have an abortion not before.

 

Yes, I do think women are being talked into more abortions, and yes, I do think people and organizations are being compensated for this.

 

I don't think it is systematic and overt, but corruption rarely is.

[Craig Arko]

This Center for Medical Progress (producers of the video) sure does look and sound bogus from where I sit.

[Squirrel]

 

This Center for Medical Progress (producers of the video) sure does look and sound bogus from where I sit.

I think that's already been established, no? Which puts the whole video into question.

[Craig Arko]

 

I think that's already been established, no? Which puts the whole video into question.

I prefer to check things out for myself. Call it the natural skeptic in me.

[Squirrel]

 

I prefer to check things out for myself. Call it the natural skeptic in me.

Well … I did by reading several sources. And in the OP the story came from the Chicago Tribune … not a good newspaper; not even in the least. It's one of the two things you'd expect a city of Chicago's size to have and it doesn't … a good newspaper. Takes the fun out of still getting a newspaper. But mostly I read it for local interest stuff, not news. Oh, and the other thing Chicago doesn't have … great radio stations. Brian … Chicago needs your helps!

[Craig Arko]

Oh, geez, now apparently a House committee is being formed to investigate. I smell the real dollars changing hands here.

[Squirrel]

 

Oh, geez, now apparently a House committee is being formed to investigate. I smell the real dollars changing hands here.

Exactly. This was all timed out to do the worst damage … and isn't even credible. The original post I made, which you couldn't 'snope approve' points all this out. While it's not the most credible source, they call it pretty accurately.

[Willihammer]

The economy? Education? Diplomacy? Nah we're going to focus on this big fat zero because it FEELS bad to voters and its trending on Twitter. Honestly we deserve exactly the politics we get sometimes.

[Craig Arko]

The economy? Education? Diplomacy? Nah we're going to focus on this big fat zero because it FEELS bad to voters and its trending on Twitter. Honestly we deserve exactly the politics we get sometimes.

 

 

[drjim]

 

The economy? Education? Diplomacy? Nah we're going to focus on this big fat zero because it FEELS bad to voters and its trending on Twitter. Honestly we deserve exactly the politics we get sometimes.

 

Without question we get the politicians and political system we deserve. The good news is that local governments are generally really competent relative to the rest of the world, so it has minimal impact on day to day lives of most people.