Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

http://www.lifenews.com/2015/07/14/shock-video-catches-planned-parenthoods-top-doctor-selling-body-parts-of-aborted-babies/

Their top doctor has been exposed for selling aborted babies bodyparts which is highly illegal.

Can't watch the vid right now, but that's utterly awful and everyone involved should go to jail, if true.

Probably best if Planned Parenthood gets a complete overhaul, as it does provide needed services to people, regardless of this mess.

edit: Reading more, it seems the sale of fetal tissue isn't illegal as long as it's not for profit purposes.

Originally posted by Robtard
Can't watch the vid right now, but that's utterly awful and everyone involved should go to jail, if true.

Probably best if Planned Parenthood gets a complete overhaul, as it does provide needed services to people, regardless of this mess.

Damn skippy we agree for a change.

It seems the story was written to illicit a response, which it did, as I initially fell for it and kneejerked.

Could very well be that while I don't necessarily agree with the practice, they're not breaking the law and if the person who had the abortion consents, it's really not much different than someone donating their body to science after they're dead.

Well, there you have it, it's a sham. Thanks, Sanc.

Thread has no purpose.

Snopes did not disprove anything.

Sanc, your argument has been wiped out.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/undercover-video-shows-planned-parenthood-exec-discussing-organ-harvesting/2015/07/14/ae330e34-2a4d-11e5-bd33-395c05608059_story.html

The Center for Medical Progress is led by David Daleiden and his associate James O'Keefe, who produced a series of egregiously misleading and severely edited videos implicating an innocent man in international human trafficking in an attempt to smear ACORN.

Three hours of footage edited from their Planned Parenthood "investigation" have leaked to YouTube, and surprise, surprise, it does not support their allegations.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The Center for Medical Progress is led by David Daleiden and his associate James O'Keefe, who produced a series of egregiously misleading and severely edited videos implicating an innocent man in international human trafficking in an attempt to smear ACORN.

Three hours of footage edited from their Planned Parenthood "investigation" have leaked to YouTube, and surprise, surprise, it does not support their allegations.

So the Washington Post is reporting lies and you are the source for truth?

This nonsense story comes around every few years, right along with microwave containers giving you cancer and high beam flashers getting murdered.

Unless Dr. Black Jack is around, I doubt anyone could pull off the successful removal and reuse of full fledged organs from terminated pregnancies.

Ah, too bad she's on camera saying it.

Poof.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Sanc, your argument has been wiped out.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/undercover-video-shows-planned-parenthood-exec-discussing-organ-harvesting/2015/07/14/ae330e34-2a4d-11e5-bd33-395c05608059_story.html

From your article:



Further the extended video posted by the group makes it clear that the doctor is only talking about storage, shipping, transportation and labor costs, not selling the fetus, which would be illegal (also if they were to sell it the price would be considerably higher).




So the video does not prove at all that anything illegal is going on, it actually suggests more than Planned Parenthood is very cautious about not profiting from the donations of fetuses to scientific research.

Of course these laws should be checked, and generally it's good they are looking into it, but the edited videos for shock value and links, which doesn't show what they say is just disingenuous (the group says it has more videos in the future, perhaps it actually catches wrong doing in some of them, but it seems unlikely, since they probably started with their strongest case, and that didn't show anything illegal).

i don't get whats so bad about selling aborted fetuses

i mean you know the old proverb... one man's trash is another man's treasure

I like how Planned Parenthood gets attacked constantly by anti-abortion groups, even though it's the organization that's easily, by far, done the best job in reducing the number of abortions while most anti-abortion groups actually raise the number (it turns out not teaching contraceptives = increased number of unwanted pregnancies).

Originally posted by Bardock42
From your article:



Further the extended video posted by the group makes it clear that the doctor is only talking about storage, shipping, transportation and labor costs, not selling the fetus, which would be illegal (also if they were to sell it the price would be considerably higher).




So the video does not prove at all that anything illegal is going on, it actually suggests more than Planned Parenthood is very cautious about not profiting from the donations of fetuses to scientific research.

Of course these laws should be checked, and generally it's good they are looking into it, but the edited videos for shock value and links, which doesn't show what they say is just disingenuous (the group says it has more videos in the future, perhaps it actually catches wrong doing in some of them, but it seems unlikely, since they probably started with their strongest case, and that didn't show anything illegal).

Too bad for you that this is only the first video released there are at least a dozen more coming out.

Out of those dozen, how many are edited to show an untruth like this one though?

Also, why would you trust people that have already shown you they're willing to use lies to push their own agenda?

Or as Bush so eloquently put it: “There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.”

Originally posted by Robtard
Out of those dozen, how many are edited to show an untruth like this one though?

Also, why would you trust people that have already shown you they're willing to use lies to push their own agenda?

Or as Bush so eloquently put it: “There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.”

Why would you trust Obama on this Iranian deal when he already lied to us about Obama care?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Why would you trust Obama on this Iranian deal when he already lied to us about Obama care?

What did Obama lie about now on the ACA?

I thought you said Obama had nothing much to do with the Iran nuclear deal?

Good dodge You don't have to answer them if you don't want.

Originally posted by Robtard
What did Obama lie about now on the ACA?

I thought you said Obama had nothing much to do with the Iran nuclear deal?

Good dodge though

"You can keep your doctor, and your plan!"

"Your premiums will not go up!"

All lies that you accepted.

Good lord, this again. IIRC, that was back in 2009 and then after all the washing and chopping the bill went through, he went on to say that some people may have to switch doctors and premiums might go up. This is just the reality of politics.

Why are you comparing that to people intentionally editing video to spread lie?

Originally posted by Robtard
Good lord, this again. IIRC, that was back in 2009 and then after all the washing and chopping the bill went through, he went on to say that some people may have to switch doctors and premiums might go up. This is just the reality of politics.

Why are you comparing that to people intentionally editing video to spread lie?

"You can keep your doctor and your plan"

Reality, you can't and now you have to pay for women breast examines and pregnancies even if your single and not married.

"Your premiums will go up not down"

Reality: Premiums sky rocket and most people that had insurance are now uninsured and the poor that had no health insurance have it, however the people that are paying for it, don't..

Priceless.

You asked me why I believe this, and I asked you why you believed other things that have proven to be lies.

Like I said, this is not the only video that will be released.

Yeah, care to substantiate your claims? Cos I don't know a single person who had insurance and lost it due to the ACA.

Why are you comparing that to people intentionally editing video to spread lie though?

Originally posted by Robtard
Yeah, care to substantiate your claims?

Why are you comparing that to people intentionally editing video to spread lie though?

What claims? Of Obamacare?


I was unaware of the video being edited. Do you have proof?

Alright, you're playing games. Good one.

Originally posted by Robtard
Alright, you're playing games. Good one.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Too bad for you that this is only the first video released there are at least a dozen more coming out.
That's literally what I addressed in the post you quoted.

Also, the Affordable Care Act has been a pretty big win for Americans overall. Premiums did not skyrocket, in fact they rose less than in the year preceding, and millions more of Americans are now insured with actual valuable insurance, not fake mini plans.

Originally posted by Bardock42
That's literally what I addressed in the post you quoted.

Also, the Affordable Care Act has been a pretty big win for Americans overall. Premiums did not skyrocket, in fact they rose less than in the year preceding, and millions more of Americans are now insured with actual valuable insurance, not fake mini plans.

Too bad you don't actually live here or have a clue and know people that are now un insured cause the deductibles are too high and had to go uninsured. I know because people I work with and in my community, friends, family, neighbors are going through this. But keep acting like you have a clue based on some bias viewpoint.

https://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/out-of-pocket-maximum-limit/

Oh no Sancty..

MjCs_gvImyw

How are you going to spin this one out.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Oh no Sancty..

MjCs_gvImyw

How are you going to spin this one out.

Well I think the main points will be:

1) This is heavily edited
2) She is still talking about compensation for the logistics (setting up meetings, finding the correct specimen, storage, delivery and staff).
3) She specifically says they are not in it for the money
4) Even if she did do something illegal (which should be investigated) it does not incriminate planned parenthood, but the for-profit she works for (although she alleges fees are for setting up connections, which is probably not illegal, although I agree it's distasteful)

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Oh no Sancty..

MjCs_gvImyw

How are you going to spin this one out.
This video has the same issues as the first. She is talking about the cost of transportation, storage etc.



"We don't want to be in a position of being accused of selling tissue and stuff like that," Gatter says in the video. "On the other hand, there are costs associated with the use of our space, and all that kind of stuff."


dZUjU4e4fUI
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/newsroom/press-releases/statement-from-planned-parenthood-on-new-undercover-video

If you say so

Its sad that most of the abortions in this country are black babies. In 2013 more black babies in NYC were aborted in born.

Yet no one cares about that.

is that what we're outraged about this hour? black abortions?

Yes

then why seek to remove the only safe means for underclass women to receive affordable contraceptive medication? doesnt that strike you as just a wee bit insane? oh sure when they're forced to give unwanted birth we can wag our finger at them and hypocritically preach abstinence, which is always fun.

Just the whole nonsense. Blacks abort more babies then are born, the kill each other more then any other race, but god damn, its the white peoples fault.

so i guess the solution really is to take away the underclass' ability to control birth and tell them that they'll just have to stop f***ing or it's their own fault. i'm sure that will work just fine

dp

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
then why seek to remove the only safe means for underclass women to receive affordable contraceptive medication? doesnt that strike you as just a wee bit insane? oh sure when they're forced to give unwanted birth we can wag our finger at them and hypocritically preach abstinence, which is always fun.

I don't think PP is the only way for women to receive affordable contraceptive medication, but even if it is, why do they perform abortions?

birth control (pills in particular) is expensive and PP make it affordable for poor people. if an individual refuses birth control but opts to abort, how is that the fault of PP?

and why would they get an abortion? same reasons white girls get abortions. most likely they either forgot to use birth control, they made a poor choice not to, or their method of contraception failed.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Just the whole nonsense. Blacks abort more babies then are born, the kill each other more then any other race, but god damn, its the white peoples fault.

Do you think that's because black people are inherently flawed in some fashion or do you think it's a social issue in the way America views/treats black people? Or feel free to insert your own reason(s).

Black people make up America, so how they view themselves is entirely up to themselves. No one makes you kill one another or your own children cept the person doing it.

sweeping generalization

TI,

You're correct, it's not a "forced" issue.

Let me ask you this in a hypothetical: Let's say that through my actions I brought a family (we'll call them the Johnsons) down to abject poverty. Now the Johnsons in order to feed and clothe themselves, starts stealing.

While no one forced them to steal and the action of stealing was solely at their hands, would you hold me responsible, partially responsible or not at all responsible for those thefts, considering my earlier actions?

How does that account for them killing one another and killing their babies?

Also we can see clear now that Obama is in office that a black man can rise up. So what excuse does everyone else have?

Alright then.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
How does that account for them killing one another and killing their babies?

I, too, would like to know why black people seem to just love killing any babies they can get their hands on.

Originally posted by BackFire
I, too, would like to know why black people seem to just love killing any babies they can get their hands on.

Interested question. Why do black people abort so many babies?

In 2012, it seems that they aborted more than they gave birth to in NYC:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/371704/more-black-babies-aborted-born-new-york-city-alec-torres


Black pastor said that the biggest danger to black lives is black mothers and he ended his statement with "Black Lives Matter."

Originally posted by dadudemon
Interested question. Why do black people abort so many babies?

In 2012, it seems that they aborted more than they gave birth to in NYC:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/371704/more-black-babies-aborted-born-new-york-city-alec-torres


Black pastor said that the biggest danger to black lives is black mothers and he ended his statement with "Black Lives Matter."

Good retort to the nonsense posted. Of coarse people wont look at the numbers. In goes the head into the sand unless of coarse it has something to do with black/white violence. Then it matters. Violence only matters when its willful, but violence on the indefensible like black babies, "shhh" don't talk about that.

What's it matter? Abortion is legal. These black people are simply using a service that completely legal. Calling it violence is a stretch.

Originally posted by BackFire
What's it matter? Abortion is legal. These black people are simply using a service that completely legal. Calling it violence is a stretch.

Lol your excusing legality over morality.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Lol your excusing legality over morality.

In this case I believe both are accurate. I don't have a moral issue if someone gets an abortion in a legal and safe manner.

Its illegal to sell body parts from abortions. Period.

The problem or disconnect is the morality gap.

Some people, like me, think abortion in most circumstances is pretty ****ing disgusting and morally depraved. Some people, like Backfire, see it as preventing an unwanted child from being born (and as a women's rights privilege, and as a money saver, etc.).

Since I view reproductive knowledge as something so fundamentally easy to obtain (and most children by 11 or 12 know enough about it to know exactly how you get pregnant), I think it is dumb and immoral that women get pregnant who fully anticipate aborting those pregnancies: the responsibility is with the men, as well. Accidents happen. That's understandable.

But abortions are being used in lieu of proper birth control approaches by the extreme majority.

Here are the top 3 reasons for abortions:

Unready for responsibility <-Birth Control
Can't afford baby now <-Birth Control
Concern about how having a baby would change her life. <-Birth Control


Hooray for uncomfortable topics.

Abortion is legal but what PP is doing is illegal.

Originally posted by dadudemon
The problem or disconnect is the morality gap.

Some people, like me, think abortion in most circumstances is pretty ****ing disgusting and morally depraved. Some people, like Backfire, see it as preventing an unwanted child from being born (and as a women's rights privilege, and as a money saver, etc.).

Since I view reproductive knowledge as something so fundamentally easy to obtain (and most children by 11 or 12 know enough about it to know exactly how you get pregnant), I think it is dumb and immoral that women get pregnant who fully anticipate aborting those pregnancies: the responsibility is with the men, as well. Accidents happen. That's understandable.

But abortions are being used in lieu of proper birth control approaches by the extreme majority.

Here are the top 3 reasons for abortions:

Unready for responsibility <-Birth Control
Can't afford baby now <-Birth Control
Concern about how having a baby would change her life. <-Birth Control


Hooray for uncomfortable topics. I think most people agree that abortion should not be used as birth control, but do you also agree that the government should fund valid birth control (in a private and uncomplicated manner) for anyone that wants it?

Originally posted by dadudemon
. Some people, like Backfire, see it as preventing an unwanted child from being born (and as a women's rights privilege, and as a money saver, etc.).


There's more to that line of argument. There's also the argument that it might be less cruel to abort a child than give it a life of misery and poverty.

Perhaps if they didn't make normal birth control so difficult to obtain (as a means to keep women under control) and men were willing to wrap their dicks, there'd be fewer abortions.

Planned Parenthood can be very helpful in obtaining said birth control. I had a friend who used to get BC pills through a PP but couldn't when the state of Texas shut down most all of the clinics.

They also help test for STDs. All of which is very expensive when you have employers that want to restrict health insurance from issuing BC based on "religious" reasons.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
There's more to that line of argument. There's also the argument that it might be less cruel to abort a child than give it a life of misery and poverty.

There's an even more wide-reaching (if distasteful) argument; there's evidence that people are aware whether they are at a good point in their lives or have the social surroundings to be effective parents and due to that selection, abortion vastly decreases the amount of disenfranchised, young people, thereby decreasing crime considerably.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think most people agree that abortion should not be used as birth control, but do you also agree that the government should fund valid birth control (in a private and uncomplicated manner) for anyone that wants it?

Yes and no.


Yes because birth control is a trillion times better than an aborted baby, obviously.

No because of religious reasons: people don't want to pay for stuff that goes against some of their fundamental beliefs.



Usually, these decisions are made based on libertarian ideals. Maximize rights. But I see two clashing ideas of freedom:

1. Some people don't want their taxes to be used in a way that directly contradicts their religious beliefs.

2. I want maximum individual rights which includes reproductive choices (such as using birth control and having the tax funding to make birth control free).

3. The right of the unborn baby is dubious, at best. Does this developing baby have any right to life? If so, when does that right to life begin?




Obviously, I listed those in ascending order of right importance.


This is such a difficult topic to work through. There is a thread for it, obviously, and I think I'm taking us slightly off topic. But I have a hard time reconciling all of the rights. How can we let everyone have maximum rights in all 3 scenarios?

I think the best outcome is free contraceptives. Especially the one where men get some shots and they don't have to worry about children for 10 years...to me, that's the best option.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
There's more to that line of argument. There's also the argument that it might be less cruel to abort a child than give it a life of misery and poverty.

IMAO, that's a poor argument, the extreme majority of the time. Almost all children are not going to be miserable, even in poverty. There will be extreme cases, clearly, but they are extreme exceptions. For the most part, they will be happy children with decent lives. Could be much better lives, of course. But I've never bought into the "they would have been miserable in poverty" argument. They won't.

Originally posted by dadudemon

I think the best outcome is free contraceptives. Especially the one where men get some shots and they don't have to worry about children for 10 years...to me, that's the best option..

So, just to clarify, you would be in favour of "free" contraceptives? Maybe more specifically, would you be for free and easy access to the pill? Most people, even religious ones, actually don't seem too opposed to condoms.

Originally posted by Bardock42
So, just to clarify, you would be in favour of "free" contraceptives? Maybe more specifically, would you be for free and easy access to the pill? Most people, even religious ones, actually don't seem too opposed to condoms.


Yes. I, personally, would love my taxes to go to pay for contraceptives. I have no religious or personal objections to approved contraceptives.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Yes. I, personally, would love my taxes to go to pay for contraceptives. I have no religious or personal objections to approved contraceptives.

Cool, cool. That's the good thing about democracy, you get to spend the minorities money even if they cry about it...(unless the supreme court intervenes, obvs, but you win some you lose some)....

Originally posted by AbnormalButSane
Perhaps if they didn't make normal birth control so difficult to obtain (as a means to keep women under control) and men were willing to wrap their dicks, there'd be fewer abortions.

Planned Parenthood can be very helpful in obtaining said birth control. I had a friend who used to get BC pills through a PP but couldn't when the state of Texas shut down most all of the clinics.

They also help test for STDs. All of which is very expensive when you have employers that want to restrict health insurance from issuing BC based on "religious" reasons.

Maybe women should be more responsible and not spread their legs for every swinging dick that passes by. Then to not have to kill off their offspring cause of their screw up.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Maybe women should be more responsible and not spread their legs for every swinging dick that passes by. Then to not have to kill off their offspring cause of their screw up.

kmgbSjLT1xE

Can't view it on my phone.

No biggie, you can watch later.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Maybe women should be more responsible and not spread their legs for every swinging dick that passes by. Then to not have to kill off their offspring cause of their screw up.

That is the most misogynistic thing I've heard in a while. Congrats.

I'm not going to respond to it because it's a preposterous statement from a loon.

I have many friends that don't even use condoms in long term relationships that avoid getting pregnant. It's called being an adult and knowing when the partner is cycling and taking birth control and not being silly. The people that go to planned parenthood for abortions are careless, irresponsible and pathetic. If you do the crime, you do the time. PP Is a get out of jail free card.

Anyways this isn't about abortions. This is about them selling baby parts to buy cars for themselves.

I might be a loon but your the screw up.

Keep making ridiculous statements and no one is going to take you seriously. Oh wait...

logic and reason is for pussies.

Hey bash I came across the creature in your avatar. Pretty cool little bug.

tardigrades rock

Only organism that can live in space. It's basically invulnerable.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Its illegal to sell body parts from abortions. Period.

Of course. But that's not what I was responding to. So unless you have a severe issue with reading comprehension, which wouldn't surprise me since so many other aspects of your mentality compare to that of a six year old, your above statement is irrelevant to what we were just talking about.

Originally posted by BackFire
Of course. But that's not what I was responding to. So unless you have a severe issue with reading comprehension, which wouldn't surprise me since so many other aspects of your mentality compare to that of a six year old, your above statement is irrelevant to what we were just talking about.

Took you almost 24 hours to come up with that retort. I expected something better. You think it's ok to abort babies so your mental comprehension would rank near Neanderthal.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Took you almost 24 hours to come up with that retort. I expected something better. You think it's ok to abort babies so you mental comprehension would rank near Neanderthal.

Yes, sadly, after 24 hours of sitting here staring relentlessly at my screen pondering the best possible response to your shameful idiocy, that was the best I could do. I'm slipping in my old age.

Drink some more blood then. I heard planned parenthood had some for sale. Probably plenty around in MB. What is shameful is you condoning abortion, legal or not.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Drink some more blood then. I heard planned parenthood had some for sale. Probably plenty around in MB. What is shameful is you condoning abortion, legal or not.

I've got a deal going with PP where they give me blood and fetal body parts for free. Them's good eating.

I have no doubt. Then again since when did zombies have a working brain.

Originally posted by BackFire
I've got a deal going with PP where they give me blood and fetal body parts for free. Them's good eating.

good for sexytime as well.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I have no doubt. Then again since when did zombies have a working brain.

Since they started voting republican.

Yea republicans ruined Califonia and gave them no water, $5.00 gas, no jobs and illegals taking over the state.

Yes, politicians caused it to not rain much in California over the last several years.

god is punishing them because gays and mexicans and stuff.

Originally posted by BackFire
Yes, politicians caused it to not rain much in California over the last several years.

Nah, it rains, they just decided to no build a single reservoir in 40 years and dump all the fresh water into the ocean for a non native non endangered bait fish, and not allow car washes to recycle, clean and reuse grey water. Just to name a few.

Keep voting democratic though. I bet you love those gas prices.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
god is punishing them because gays and mexicans and stuff.

More then likely, I don't think God Judges all illegals though, just the rapists and murdereous ones.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Nah, it rains, they just decided to no build a single reservoir in 40 years and dump all the fresh water into the ocean for a non native non endangered bait fish, and not allow car washes to recycle, clean and reuse grey water. Just to name a few.

Keep voting democratic though. I bet you love those gas prices.

Yeah, gas prices were super low when we had that republican governor.

What am I saying? Gas prices have been really low ever since those great republicans in the oval office invaded Iraq for freedom and and cheap oil.

Yes that republican governor whoever the hell it was, it's all his fault. Not Jerry Brown bankrupting the state in the 70's. And then getting another chance again!

I guess republicans put this to place.

Oh wait cap and tax was Obama, that's right.

http://cafuelfacts.com/cap-and-trade-for-fuels/

As far as Iraq guess how much oil we got from Iraq.

Zero, try again

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
More then likely, I don't think God Judges all illegals though, just the rapists and murdereous ones.

god enforcing u.s. immigration laws? fascinating.

i wish he would take an interest in white-collar crime as well.

Sure start with the bankers.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Yes that republican governor whoever the hell it was, it's all his fault. Not Jerry Brown bankrupting the state in the 70's. And then getting another chance again!

I guess republicans put this to place.

Oh wait cap and tax was Obama, that's right.

http://cafuelfacts.com/cap-and-trade-for-fuels/

As far as Iraq guess how much oil we got from Iraq.

Zero, try again

Yes, my comment about Iraq was sarcasm based on the fact that when Cheney/Bush invaded Iraq we were told it would have the side effect of cheaper oil, and then didn't. Sorry, sometimes I forget you have trouble understanding sarcasm.

Originally posted by BackFire
Yes, my comment about Iraq was sarcasm based on the fact that when Cheney/Bush invaded Iraq we were told it would have the side effect of cheaper oil, and then didn't. Sorry, sometimes I forget you have trouble understanding sarcasm.

Hence me laughing at your diluted sarcasm you tried to pass of as truth.

Which you were not, yout tried to blame California's gas prices on someone else, when it was their own fault. Cap and tax.

Like I said.

You as such a liberal should be ashamed of this

"This hidden gas tax will hurt middle and low-income families and small businesses the most, and will make it more expensive for local governments and school districts to provide public safety, ambulances, school transportation and other services upon which Californians rely."

http://cafuelfacts.com/cap-and-trade-for-fuels/

I'm sorry, are you saying that gas prices only skyrocketed in California and not the US as a whole during the Iraq war?

Originally posted by Robtard
I'm sorry, are you saying that gas prices only skyrocketed in California and not the US as a whole during the Iraq war?

That is not what I said. Try again.

It was a question, hence the question mark. You seemed to imply that the Iraq war didn't affect Ca's rising gas prices. If not, I don't see your point. Gas prices rose steadily across the US during the war; because of the war.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Hence me laughing at your diluted sarcasm you tried to pass of as truth.

Which you were not, yout tried to blame California's gas prices on someone else, when it was their own fault. Cap and tax.

Like I said.

You as such a liberal should be ashamed of this

"This hidden gas tax will hurt middle and low-income families and small businesses the most, and will make it more expensive for local governments and school districts to provide public safety, ambulances, school transportation and other services upon which Californians rely."

http://cafuelfacts.com/cap-and-trade-for-fuels/

I didn't get the impression that you were laughing at my sarcasm, I got the impression that you were laughing because you thought I sincerely thought that the Iraq War got us a bunch of oil.

Originally posted by Robtard
It was a question, hence the question mark. You seemed to imply that the Iraq war didn't affect Ca's rising gas prices. If not, I don't see your point. Gas prices rose steadily across the US during the war; because of the war.

We are speaking of present tense. Like the almost $4-5.00 gas prices out there right now vs $2.50-3 in the rest of the country.

http://www.gasbuddy.com/GasPriceMap

Originally posted by BackFire
I didn't get the impression that you were laughing at my sarcasm, I got the impression that you were laughing because you thought I sincerely thought that the Iraq War got us a bunch of oil.

Oh so you were one of those "We went to war for oil" peeps.

Gotcha.

Lets be real, California ****ed there own shit up without anyone elses help.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
We are speaking of present tense. Like the almost $4-5.00 gas prices out there right now vs $2.50-3 in the rest of the country.

http://www.gasbuddy.com/GasPriceMap

Now sure where you got that number from, it's cheapest at $2.43 in SC and most expense in CA at 3.86. So roughly $1.40 difference from both extremes.

http://www.gasbuddy.com/US

edit: or about 95 cents above national average for Ca.

how is this even elevant to planned parenthood? why did you derail the topic, robtard?

reported.

I just got gas leaving California for $4.99 so I'm not bullshitting. Here in texas I'm paying $2.59.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
how is this even elevant to planned parenthood? why did you derail the topic, robtard?

reported.

Because those trucks that carry the aborted babies that PP sells for billions in profits run on gas, duh.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
how is this even elevant to planned parenthood? why did you derail the topic, robtard?

reported.

If you reported Rob, your reported wrong, Backfire took a shit in here and I been cleaning it up.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Yea republicans ruined Califonia and gave them no water, $5.00 gas, no jobs and illegals taking over the state.

Just leaving this here so everyone can see that indeed it was you, TI, who brought up California and gas. Not Rob or I, as baby TI would have everyone believe.

Originally posted by BackFire
Just leaving this here so everyone can see that indeed it was you, TI, who brought up California and gas. Not Rob or I, as baby TI would have everyone believe.

Wrong again, you started shit throwing and name calling then started with this.

Originally posted by BackFire
Since they started voting republican.

Originally posted by Robtard
Because those trucks that carry the aborted babies that PP sells for billions in profits run on gas, duh.

this problem would be solved quite neatly if they only found a way to make truck engines run on baby blood.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Wrong again,

Yes, because as you can see, I mention both Gas and California in the statement you quoted.

Originally posted by BackFire
Of course. But that's not what I was responding to. So unless you have a severe issue with reading comprehension, which wouldn't surprise me since so many other aspects of your mentality compare to that of a six year old, your above statement is irrelevant to what we were just talking about.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Took you almost 24 hours to come up with that retort. I expected something better. You think it's ok to abort babies so your mental comprehension would rank near Neanderthal.
Originally posted by BackFire
I've got a deal going with PP where they give me blood and fetal body parts for free. Them's good eating.
Originally posted by BackFire
Yes, sadly, after 24 hours of sitting here staring relentlessly at my screen pondering the best possible response to your shameful idiocy, that was the best I could do. I'm slipping in my old age.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial


And I also mention Gas and California in those quotes as well.

Oh sure mentioning gas and California is how it ended, it started with you throwing insults. I see your in damage control now and blame shift though, be my guest.

oh stop. he made a snarky comment about republicans and now you're all like

http://i.imgur.com/rPnTfqT.gif


meanwhile you bash democrats/liberals all day here.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Oh sure mentioning gas and California is how it ended, it started with you throwing insults. I see your in damage control now and blame shift though, be my guest.

Not really.

Take a look at the last few posts. You blamed me for bringing up gas and California, I then posted a quote from you, claiming and showing that it was actually you who brought it up initially. You disagreed and then retorted by posting quotes of me explicitly not mentioning gas or California. And now I am in damage control.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
oh stop. he made a snarky comment about republicans and now you're all like

http://i.imgur.com/rPnTfqT.gif


meanwhile you bash democrats/liberals all day here.

Do you want to get me started on the dumb ass known as Lindsey "Gram"?

Originally posted by BackFire
Not really.

Take a look at the last few posts. You blamed me for bringing up gas and California, I then posted a quote from you, claiming and showing that it was actually you who brought it up initially. You disagreed and then retorted by posting quotes of me explicitly not mentioning gas or California. And now I am in damage control.

A "No you!"

You started with name calling and proceeded to go on, so I went along.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Do you want to get me started on the dumb ass known as Lindsey "Gram"?

Yes?

Start a new thread then.

Done. Just for you, buddy.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Maybe women should be more responsible and not spread their legs for every swinging dick that passes by. Then to not have to kill off their offspring cause of their screw up.
Oof. facepalm

he'd fit right in on tumblr.

I personally have no problem with abortion. We had to give speeches on certain issues in our junior year of high school that were for or against a certain issue of our choosing. My speech was about being pro choice, and you can guess how well that went over in a Catholic School.

I just wish that since after conception women have the option to terminate the pregnancy, men should likewise have some way to terminate their obligations as fathers.

it's silly of republican candidates to push the abortion issue, since it's a widely divisive topic within party lines.

i'm fine with that, of course.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Maybe women should be more responsible and not spread their legs for every swinging dick that passes by. Then to not have to kill off their offspring cause of their screw up.


Seems like people are losing their shit over this post so I'll chime in with a placating counterbalancing perspective:



Maybe women should be more responsible and not spread their legs for every swinging dick that passes by. Then to not have to kill off their offspring because of their screw up.

Maybe men should be more responsible and not raw-dog splooge into every juicy cooter that passes by. Then to not have to kill off their offspring because of their screw up.



But my actual preference is just for all men, unless they explicitly want children, to get this treatment before becoming sexually active (with repeat treatment every 8 years):

http://www.healthline.com/health-news/male-birth-control-procedure-in-trials-012313#2



I feel like a spokesperson for Vasalgel, at this point. But putting the power of birth control into the hands of men with a very easy "fire and forget" contraceptive solution, should stop tons and tons of unwanted pregnancies. In fact, when this is FDA approved, I think it should be offered to all early high school student boys for free. I see this solution as being both a financial and emotional benefit to young women. I don't think young women should have to decide to abort: they shouldn't even be in that position to begin with. It really should be a last resort in a very strange situation. And it most certainly should not be used as a birth control alternative. Also, contrary to popular belief, abortions are not as simple as getting your blood pressure checked: there is a safety factor. While we are improving, there are still other medical issues and risks associated with an abortion: why risk it?


Okay, off my soapbox.


TL : DR - Shift the burden more onto men for contraception. Seems, at least in the US, that there is too much blame put on women for getting pregnant. It is just as much the men's fault for an unwanted pregnancy.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Seems like people are losing their shit over this post so I'll chime in with a placating counterbalancing perspective:



Maybe women should be more responsible and not spread their legs for every swinging dick that passes by. Then to not have to kill off their offspring because of their screw up.

Maybe men should be more responsible and not raw-dog splooge into every juicy cooter that passes by. Then to not have to kill off their offspring because of their screw up.



But my actual preference is just for all men, unless they explicitly want children, to get this treatment before becoming sexually active (with repeat treatment every 8 years):

http://www.healthline.com/health-news/male-birth-control-procedure-in-trials-012313#2



I feel like a spokesperson for Vasalgel, at this point. But putting the power of birth control into the hands of men with a very easy "fire and forget" contraceptive solution, should stop tons and tons of unwanted pregnancies. In fact, when this is FDA approved, I think it should be offered to all early high school student boys for free. I see this solution as being both a financial and emotional benefit to young women. I don't think young women should have to decide to abort: they shouldn't even be in that position to begin with. It really should be a last resort in a very strange situation. And it most certainly should not be used as a birth control alternative. Also, contrary to popular belief, abortions are not as simple as getting your blood pressure checked: there is a safety factor. While we are improving, there are still other medical issues and risks associated with an abortion: why risk it?


Okay, off my soapbox.


TL : DR - Shift the burden more onto men for contraception. Seems, at least in the US, that there is too much blame put on women for getting pregnant. It is just as much the men's fault for an unwanted pregnancy.
Have you heard about the research on the male birth control pill?

There are some very disappointing and misogynistic comments made in this thread.

Planned Parenthood has its good parts and bad parts. But the thing most people don't seem to get is that it is not some abortion factory franchise. It provides women with access to exams and medication that they may not have otherwise. We need such a resource, especially since access to medication whether used for contraception or not is apparently something employers have the right to impede in this country.

If men don't want to get women pregnant, then they should have a vasectomy.

agreed (with exception to that weird non-sequitur at the end)

I don't consider it a non-sequitur. It's effective, prevents a potential 18 years worth of child support, and the surgery risks are on par with those of an abortion.

yes it's a viable option. so is the pill. no need to assert one as the only moral imperative for people with active sex lives. unless you're just firing back at TI's overt misogyny with subtle misandry

I'm in favor of a male pill, sure. I never said surgery was the only option. It's just the only other thing available apart from condoms right now.

Originally posted by Shinobi Popcorn
We need such a resource, especially since access to medication whether used for contraception or not is apparently something employers have the right to impede in this country.

Here's the problem:

It should not be the responsibility of employers to begin with.

Originally posted by Shinobi Popcorn
There are some very disappointing and misogynistic comments made in this thread.

Planned Parenthood has its good parts and bad parts. But the thing most people don't seem to get is that it is not some abortion factory franchise. It provides women with access to exams and medication that they may not have otherwise. We need such a resource, especially since access to medication whether used for contraception or not is apparently something employers have the right to impede in this country.

If men don't want to get women pregnant, then they should have a vasectomy.

Here is my problem though, it's always MEN told this. Not about a specific vasectomy, but about sex. "If you don't want a baby then wrap it up" is a saying I hear a lot. I never hear anyone say "if you don't want a baby get on the pill" or any of the other female contraceptives out there.

I think both people need to take responsibility. If a guy knows a woman is not on the pill, then either do not bang her or use some kind of protection unless you want a baby. But females: if you are not on the pill and you know the guy you are about to let bang you is not wearing a condom then stop and think if you want a child with this man. Stop and think if this man actually WANTS a child with you, stop and think if the man can pay to support the child, stop and think if the man would be a good father. If the answer to any of these questions is "no" or "I don't know" then do not bang him. Not enough women think it through, and why is that? Because they have a friggin out if they decide they don't want the kid.

But that is the thing, for some women in this country getting knocked up is a meal ticket. They know the government will take care of them, and they can squeeze the father for child support until he bleeds or is put in jail. Oh and that child support? No restrictions in place that I know of to stop the woman from spending it for shit for herself instead of the kid(you hear stories like this all the time about women doing this, new hair, new clothes, etc. always on the child's fathers dime).

I still think if women can terminate a pregnancy men should be able to terminate their rights as a father. Women have a certain amount of time to get an abortion in this country, men should have the same amount of time to decide if they want to sign away their rights. Fair is fair, gender equality is gender equality. If women can shirk responsibility and just terminate it after the fact then men should be able to as well. But this is an issue most people do not see as important, despite how royally f*cked over fathers in this country can become.

Originally posted by Surtur
Here is my problem though, it's always MEN told this. Not about a specific vasectomy, but about sex. "If you don't want a baby then wrap it up" is a saying I hear a lot. I never hear anyone say "if you don't want a baby get on the pill" or any of the other female contraceptives out there.

ARE YOU ****ING JOKING?

Women are constantly told to abstain, be pure, other bullshit. They get almost solely blamed for pregnancy and have to deal with the consequences. It happened in this very thread again, which even brought up the conversation.

Bacteria on the moon can be called life but a baby in the womb with a heart beat is not considered life on earth.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Bacteria on the moon can be called life but a baby in the womb with a heart beat is not considered life on earth.

You are mixing up two different meanings of the word life. Yes, plants and bacteria are life, and in the same vein, a fetus in the womb is life, legally we talk about a human life though with human rights and responsibilities, that a fetus is not.

Originally posted by Bardock42
ARE YOU ****ING JOKING?

Women are constantly told to abstain, be pure, other bullshit. They get almost solely blamed for pregnancy and have to deal with the consequences. It happened in this very thread again, which even brought up the conversation.

Yes they are told to abstain. But that isn't what I said. I said I don't often hear people saying the equivalent of "wrap it up" to them.

Not that it is never uttered, but it seems to be for women "abstain" and for men "wrap that shit up".

Originally posted by Surtur
Yes they are told to abstain. But that isn't what I said. I said I don't often hear people saying the equivalent of "wrap it up" to them.

Not that it is never uttered, but it seems to be for women "abstain" and for men "wrap that shit up".


Telling them to abstain is the same as telling them to wrap it up (and telling women they shouldn't have sex is much more common). It's a form of birth control (albeit one that is not very realistic) that people want to force on women (and usually not men as much). At any rate, campaigns for condoms are also often aimed at women (who will often also be required to supply that birth control to their lovers).

Originally posted by Bardock42
Telling them to abstain is the same as telling them to wrap it up. It's a form of birth control (albeit one that is not very realistic) that people want to force on women (and usually not men as much). At any rate, campaigns for condoms are also often aimed at women (who will often also be required to supply that birth control to their lovers).

But using abstinence as a form of "birth control" is, like you said, silly. Which is why I'd prefer people be realistic and just tell them to wrap it up.

Condom campaigns are aimed at women, but those are not female condoms, but condoms for men.

I also don't see abstinence as the same. The "wrap it up" is saying..if you are going to bang someone then use protection. The "wrap it up" implies sex will happen, so be safe. Abstinence does not discuss anything about using protection if you find yourself not strong enough to adhere to it. Just look at Bristol Palin.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Bacteria on the moon can be called life but a baby in the womb with a heart beat is not considered life on earth. The issue isn't whether it's alive but whether it should count as a person with rights equivalent to that of the mother.

Originally posted by Surtur
But using abstinence as a form of "birth control" is, like you said, silly. Which is why I'd prefer people be realistic and just tell them to wrap it up.

Condom campaigns are aimed at women, but those are not female condoms, but condoms for men.
If the ad is targeted at women, then that suggests the onus is on women...

Originally posted by Bardock42
You are mixing up two different meanings of the word life. Yes, plants and bacteria are life, and in the same vein, a fetus in the womb is life, legally we talk about a human life though with human rights and responsibilities, that a fetus is not.

Plants and animals are not a bi product of human reproduction.

Speaking of abortion I have always wondered, what if the father of the kid really wants the child. What if he has offered to take full care of it..and the guy is wealthy and they do a psych evaluation and find he is fit to be a parent. Could a woman in this situation still get an abortion?

Originally posted by Omega Vision
If the ad is targeted at women, then that suggests the onus is on women...

Yes..but that means the ad is focusing on women buying condoms..so they can go have a man wear them. That is not telling women to wrap it up. That is telling women "tell your man to wrap it up".

Originally posted by Surtur
But using abstinence as a form of "birth control" is, like you said, silly. Which is why I'd prefer people be realistic and just tell them to wrap it up.

Condom campaigns are aimed at women, but those are not female condoms, but condoms for men.

I also don't see abstinence as the same. The "wrap it up" is saying..if you are going to bang someone then use protection. The "wrap it up" implies sex will happen, so be safe. Abstinence does not discuss anything about using protection if you find yourself not strong enough to adhere to it. Just look at Bristol Palin.

Yes, because condoms for men have an advantage that the pills doesn't have (namely protection from STDs). Female condoms do offer protection from STDs, although they are much less safe than male condoms, and they cost more to buy, making them a less ubiquitous and easy choice. I still think it's good to advertise female condoms, but there are reasons for why male condoms are superior for public health and safety.