Remember that planned parenthood video ?

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

From 1973-2010, 421 women have died as a result of legal abortion (CDC).
I guess we can say women consistently die from abortion .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Before Roe v Wade how many women died each year from illegal abortions?

[PaulS]

5000
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Sure you are…read the link, there's a continuous history of threats and attacks.


He's like a cat.


At this point would you wager that the accused shooter, who has admitted to the police he's anti-abortion and anti-government, and who's widely being reported as speaking about politics and "no more baby parts" afterward, was just some random crank?

I wouldn't be making that bet.

I would assume he targeted PP because of their participation in abortion. I would NOT bet that he was motivated by the one video that has been discredited, namely the one claiming to show a baby born alive.

If he was inspired by the series of videos showing that PP did indeed sell baby parts (and that's still a big 'if' at this point), then your claim (that he was inspired by a dishonest video) is 100% false. All of the other PP videos that were released to show that PP sold baby parts for money, were valid. We know this, because after the videos came out, PP announced that they would no longer take $$ for selling baby parts. So there was only the one dishonest video. I have seen exactly zero evidence to support your claim that this guy only did what he did, because of that one discredited PP video.

Again, you made the claim that the dishonest video was getting people killed. I ask you to support that, and all we get is pure speculation. Yet when we have irrefutable proof that Hilary lies when it suits her, you will not concede that she's a liar.

In other words...you speculate when it serves your agenda, you ignore facts when it serves your agenda, you rely on facts when it suits your agenda. Anything, anything, anything, to promote liberalism. Always. No exceptions. Ever.

I have said I think conservatives are wrong on gay marriage and gun control. I challenge you to tell us when you have similarly thought for yourself.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Before Roe v Wade how many women died each year from illegal abortions?

The pro-life crowd is hardly responsible for what those idiots did to themselves. People get killed robbing banks, right? Are you implying that lawmakers who write the laws making bank robbery illegal, are to blame for the deaths of people who die while robbing banks?

Jeesh.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by buckman

From 1973-2010, 421 women have died as a result of legal abortion (CDC).
I guess we can say women consistently die from abortion .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Where did you get the 421 number? The total between 1973 -2011 was 50 MILLION. Currently we're pushing 58 Mil. Makes PaulS's number of 5000 per year before 1973 equal to about a week's worth currently.

[Sea Dangles]

Spoken like a true catholic
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Where did you get the 421 number? The total between 1973 -2011 was 50 MILLION. Currently we're pushing 58 Mil. Makes PaulS's number of 5000 per year before 1973 equal to about a week's worth currently.

Huh?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Huh?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Ooops. Misread women for aborted babies. My numbers are for numbers of abortions.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Before Roe v Wade how many women died each year from illegal abortions?

If PaulS's number of 5000 is correct, it even more so fit Buckman's "I guess we can say women consistently die from abortion."

His point wasn't the actual number so much as pointing out the loose way the word "continuous" is used. I think, perhaps I've misread again, I think he meant continuously rather than consistently, although either would make his point.

And, as you induced Paul to give us a vastly higher number of deaths from illegal abortions, then women even more continuously or consistently died from abortion pre-Roe v. Wade.

Which more than validated Buckman's statement.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Spoken like a true catholic
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

True, I am a deeply flawed Catholic. We can't all be as purely Catholic as one who advertises in his on-line signature that he supports the slaughter of millions of innocent unborn.

I have some sympathy for these women, not a ton. It's my understanding that before Roe V Wade, abortoin was legal in the cases of rape, or when the life of the Mom was in danger. In other words, all these women pursuing black market abortions, had (1) engaged in consensual sex, and (2) were healthy enough to give birth. In other words, every single one of them wanted an abortion for nothing more than personal convenience. So while I sympathize with anyone who feels any kind of despair, I save most of my sympathy for the innocent, defenseles baby. That's the victim. But spin that as "hating women" if it makes you feel less ghoulish about your position.

[Sea Dangles]

OK Taliban Jim
If that was meant to educate,intimidate, or shame me then consider it a waste of time. I have no problem stating my position on this issue as you know. Next time I spill some jizz I will be thinking of you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

OK Taliban Jim
If that was meant to educate,intimidate, or shame me then consider it a waste of time. I have no problem stating my position on this issue as you know. Next time I spill some jizz I will be thinking of you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

My post was intended to refute yours. Why you would think I meant to intimidate is beyond me.

"Next time I spill some jizz I will be thinking of you."

Next time I do anything, rest assured I won't be thinking of you.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

OK Taliban Jim
INext time I spill some jizz I will be thinking of you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Gay
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

Gay
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Lmao good to see we still have a sense of humor . I bet you've been saving that one 😀
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

LOL !!!
Someone is gonna go to jail.

http://usat.ly/1VlTWN4
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Nebe

LOL !!!
Someone is gonna go to jail.

http://usat.ly/1VlTWN4
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

On abortion, in general, I don't have firm opinion. Same for Planned Parenthood, except I absolutely do not want taxpayer money funding it. It should strictly be a private, either voluntary or for profit, organization. Selling baby parts, to me, is creepy. To say the least. But that's a personal opinion.

As for someone going to jail over the videos, that remains to be seen who:

http://theresurgent.com/a-harris-cou...cff4-266050641

[Nebe]

Tax payer funding never went to fund abortions.

My stance - abortions have their place in society. Completely banning it would be foolish. I'm a parent so you can know I chose life
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[DZ]

This could actually be good for the Center for Medical Progress and was no doubt anticipated. They will get to call many witnesses from Planned Parenthood and grill them on procedures. All of it will probably be broadcast live. Great PR for their cause that could expose PPs procedures.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Tax payer funding never went to fund abortions.

My stance - abortions have their place in society. Completely banning it would be foolish. I'm a parent so you can know I chose life
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Tax payer funding never went to fund abortions. "

Taxpayer funding frees up other PP funds to go to abortions. That's like saying "I didn't take water out of your side of the pail, I took it out of my side of the pail".

No one is going to jail for making the videos. They were indicted (justly, it would seem) for obtaining fake ids to fool their way into PP.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

No one is going to jail for making the videos. They were indicted (justly, it would seem) for obtaining fake ids to fool their way into PP.

And trying to illegally buy fetal tissue. I don't think the court will care if it was a sham sting operation or legitimate attempt. It's like soliciting for prostitution...

[spence]

Originally Posted by DZ

Great PR for their cause that could expose PPs procedures.

The grand jury already found no wrong-doing on behalf of PP, I don't think that's likely.

The link Detbuch posted is incredibly deceptive, terrific spin…or, just a lie.

[Fishpart]

Tyranny!!

Have we really descended to the point where we bring the law down on someone who exposes the organization that one of the TX State prosecutors sits on the board of..


According to Steven Ertelt at LifeNews dot com, one of the prosecutors in the Houston district attorney's office is a board member of the exact Planned Parenthood which was targeted by Center for Medical Progress.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

It's like soliciting for prostitution...

Not a bad analogy. And it doesn't mean that the prostitute isn't a morally bankrupt POS.

[DZ]

Originally Posted by spence

The grand jury already found no wrong-doing on behalf of PP, I don't think that's likely.

I understand that Spence, selling fetal tissue is not against current law. What The Center for Medical Progress is doing is trying to affect public perception of Planned Parenthood and its procedures. These videos exposed that practice to many who had no idea this program existed. Now the details will potentially come out from Planned Parenthood witnesses who will be under oath.

[Nebe]

I think a lot of people don't understand that that video was selectively edited to show something that they would never do.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Nebe

I think a lot of people don't understand that that video was selectively edited to show something that they would never do.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Then the editor is an absolutely magician . I saw the videos ,
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Nebe

I think a lot of people don't understand that that video was selectively edited to show something that they would never do.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not sure what you are referring to. But after the public outcry, PP announced that they woul dno longer accept money in exchange for baby body parts, which means that previously, they WERE accepting money for baby body parts. Which means PP was doing exactly what the videos showed.

I keep hearing about 'selective editing', have never seen any explanation.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/planned-...sue-1444744800

Selling th ebaby body parts isn't illegal. I, for one, recognize that some scientific research needs to take place, and that to mak ethat happen, sometimes this might be necessary. It was the ghoulish and casual attitude of the PP staff that shocked the nation.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by buckman

Then the editor is an absolutely magician . I saw the videos ,
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Correct. Steven Spielberg has nothing on whoever edited those videos.

[wdmso]

Funny the Conservatives got caught hook line and sinker and went berserk for week over the edited videos. remember over a Video

and some here happy praise their skills..

Yet it was completely impossible not a snow balls chance in Hell .. that a Video could outrage people or have any influence what happen in Benghazi.. or any other place in the world

And I am not saying it did or it didn't just pointing out Conservatives tend to see others actions easily but they become instantly Blind when they do the same thing