• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been [W: #109]

Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

Everyone has their reason for rationalizing terrorism, Henrin, and you've found yours. All terrorists think they're freedom fighters.

So true. . . .
many take their own selfish, and most times factually wrong opinions and use them for justification to support or rationalize terrorism or trampling on the rights of others, this is no different.
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

Innocent? How are they innocent? How many deaths do you think an abortion provider piles up over their career?

Despite the perversion of rationalizing the deaths of Planned Parenthood workers, how would you describe the death of the officer and the other two civilians? "Regrettable but necessary?"

When you step back and look at your own words, is there any measurable difference between your rhetoric and the rhetoric of any separatist or Muslim terrorist, except that in this case you happen to sympathize with the cause?
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

All the violence has come from one side exclusively

Nope. The side you're cheerleading employs violent, lethal levels of force to kill innocent human beings every single day.

By contrast, the occasional vigilante is a blip.
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

The side you're cheerleading employs violent, lethal levels of force to kill innocent human beings every single day.

By contrast, the occasional vigilante is a blip.

More OPINIONS pushed as fact which in turn makes them factually wrong LMAO
Your post fails again
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

Despite the perversion of rationalizing the deaths of Planned Parenthood workers, how would you describe the death of the officer and the other two civilians? "Regrettable but necessary?"

People that work at Planned Parenthood may not be the man doing the abortion, but they are part of the organization that ensures that the service is provided. They are no less the enemy of peace than the abortion providers themselves. As for the the officer in question, he was in the way.

When you step back and look at your own words, is there any measurable difference between your rhetoric and the rhetoric of any separatist or Muslim terrorist, except that in this case you happen to sympathize with the cause?

There is a considerable amount of difference. My words are in support of an action meant to restore peace in a situation where the people involved in violence have made it abundantly clear they have no intention to stop. With that mind, the only course of action to take to restore peace is to make them stop by force. If that means they must die then that is what it means.

On the other hand, terrorists commit acts of violence towards people doing otherwise peaceful behavior and therefore are the aggressors in the situation and not the party acting to defend peace.
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

Here. There are many other links as well. But it wont matter, because you will just dismiss them all...wont you?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/28/us/abortion-planned-parenthood-videos.html?_r=0

So the fact that 'you're saying that' does not reflect well on your ability to separate your emotions and beliefs from reality.

But if you have 'counter-evidence' that the videos were not altered, by all means....provide.


According to the investigation, the reviewers could not determine “the extent to which C.M.P.’s undisclosed edits and cuts distort the meaning of the encounters the videos purport to document.”
The analysis commissioned by Planned Parenthood covers the first four videos and transcripts from the Center for Medical Progress, which were recorded in California, Colorado and Texas.
there were over 10 videos as I recall and nobody ever argued that the videos weren't edited for time.
Some ran over an hour.
Content is what matters and the participants said what they said.
Did you watch the visdeos?
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

The only people who are "trying" to make a big deal out of it are anti-choicers, and they're trying to attach some sort of grand faux pas signification. I say trying, because they're not succeeding. It fails on all fronts because it's a practice of laboring over dunghills.

If fussing over word choice is the best they have - we're in good shape.


Regarding the post ...
IRONY: An expression or utterance marked by a deliberate contrast between apparent and intended meaning
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

There is a considerable amount of difference. My words are in support of an action meant to restore peace in a situation where the people involved in violence have made it abundantly clear they have no intention to stop. With that mind, the only course of action to take to restore peace is to make them stop by force. If that means they must die then that is what it means.

Are you saying you support killing people in abortion clinics?
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

The only people who are "trying" to make a big deal out of it are anti-choicers, and they're trying to attach some sort of grand faux pas signification. I say trying, because they're not succeeding. It fails on all fronts because it's a practice of laboring over dunghills.

If fussing over word choice is the best they have - we're in good shape.

I know. I totally didnt even register it at all. Some pro-life people imagine alot of things...like little 'people' inside women and that we're just making up that the videos werent faked.
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

It's both. You can't perform abortions and then in public act like what you do is not controversial or constantly do stupid **** that makes you look subhuman.

They dont do stupid things or perform anything that makes them look subhuman. If you choose to have that opinion, good for you...it shows you really dont know the difference when it comes to people and the unborn, lol
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

It's a fact that the majority of abortions kill human life. What other science do you think I need? Let me guess, developmental arguments that you believe put no value on the unborn. Yeah, go ahead and tell me your value judgement is based on science and not opinion. :lol:

Actually, it's a fact that ALL abortions end human life :doh

Well, if I'm mistaken, please tell me which ones dont...sorry, maybe I misspoke.

And then pleae tell me at which point the science applied any value to the unborn...or any stage of human life?
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

Ahem..they're business revolves around violence. Try again.

What violence?
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

What violence?

I believe we have already been over that in past threads.
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

Actually, it's a fact that ALL abortions end human life :doh

Well, if I'm mistaken, please tell me which ones dont...sorry, maybe I misspoke.

And then pleae tell me at which point the science applied any value to the unborn...or any stage of human life?

The word abortion is used when speaking about removing dead fetuses if I am not mistaken.
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

I believe we have already been over that in past threads.

Oh yeah...here:

What in the hell is it then?

violence - behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

There is no someone, except the woman. And flushing an embryo from the womb is not much physical force...unless cutting your lunch sandwich in half is violence! LOL

Hey everybody! Cutting your steak at dinner is violence! You have to damage it to get it in your mouth! No wait! Holy crap...everyone....STOP EATING! You are committing violent acts with every bite that damages the food!
http://www.debatepolitics.com/abort...enthood-arson-confirmed-4.html#post1065097386

You are the one crying about 'violence' against flushing something that feels nothing. A minimum of force that is completely legal, unlike your example of harming a person shoving them down the stairs or beating?

According to you and your provided definition, the 'degree' of violence apparently doesnt matter. Apparently, according to you, ALL violence is wrong and you had better stop eating if you dont want to commit violence (according to your definition) on a daily basis.

And the supposed violence you claim against the unborn is just as meaningless. That's what happens when you use words frivolously and ridiculously loosely...they lose their meaning and impact. If you *choose* to call abortion violence, then you compare it to cutting your dinner steak which fits the same definition that you provided....you actually minimize any actual import or distinction behind your claim.

Well done! (The conclusions you've enabled me to develop...not steak. I like that rare :) )
You claim that flushing an embryo from the womb is 'violence'. Then you provided a definition that very clearly stated that ANY force against someone or something was 'violence.'

Oh well. I'm not the one misinterpreting. If you dont agree with your definition as I've shown...apparently abortion is NOT violence. Or if you do agree, then many things we do everyday, like eating, are violence.

Ya need to think this stuff thu before posting, lol. You cant present outrage against something and then present a definition that minimizes it, lololol.
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

The word abortion is used when speaking about removing dead fetuses if I am not mistaken.

Is it? Got a source for that? (could be...maybe. Let's see)

Abortion is ending a pregnancy....if the unborn is dead, the pregnancy is over.
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

Oh yeah...here:




http://www.debatepolitics.com/abort...enthood-arson-confirmed-4.html#post1065097386

You are the one crying about 'violence' against flushing something that feels nothing. A minimum of force that is completely legal, unlike your example of harming a person shoving them down the stairs or beating?

According to you and your provided definition, the 'degree' of violence apparently doesnt matter. Apparently, according to you, ALL violence is wrong and you had better stop eating if you dont want to commit violence (according to your definition) on a daily basis.

The degree of violence doesn't matter when we are discussing what is and isn't violence. It also doesn't matter what violence is acceptable and what violence is unacceptable when we are speaking about what is and isn't violence.
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

People that work at Planned Parenthood may not be the man doing the abortion, but they are part of the organization that ensures that the service is provided. They are no less the enemy of peace than the abortion providers themselves. As for the the officer in question, he was in the way.

Yeah, damn shame that officer was there doing his job and got in the way and was killed. :doh

And you have the nerve to denigrate women who have elective abortions to enable better lives for themselves and their families? But you just toss this officer aside as what, collateral damage?

Thanks for the post with such blatant hypocrisy. You need to look in the mirror to see an actual "enemy of peace."
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

The degree of violence doesn't matter when we are discussing what is and isn't violence. It also doesn't matter what violence is acceptable and what violence is unacceptable when we are speaking about what is and isn't violence.

I know. I got that, using the definition. If you re-read, I mentioned that your hyperbolic use of the word minimized and devalued it. lol
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

According to the investigation, the reviewers could not determine “the extent to which C.M.P.’s undisclosed edits and cuts distort the meaning of the encounters the videos purport to document.”
The analysis commissioned by Planned Parenthood covers the first four videos and transcripts from the Center for Medical Progress, which were recorded in California, Colorado and Texas.
there were over 10 videos as I recall and nobody ever argued that the videos weren't edited for time.
Some ran over an hour.
Content is what matters and the participants said what they said.
Did you watch the visdeos?

Not all in their entirety but saw quite a bit.

And thanks for admitting that they were indeed edited. They determined distortion...just not how much.

Changing the context of statements can change the entire meaning. Cleverly editing those statements to create a false picture is a cheap, desperate tactic and yet look how many Americans *still* choose to fall for such misinterpretation?
 
Last edited:
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

Yeah, damn shame that officer was there doing his job and got in the way and was killed. :doh

And you have the nerve to denigrate women who have elective abortions to enable better lives for themselves and their families? But you just toss this officer aside as what, collateral damage?

Thanks for the post with such blatant hypocrisy. You need to look in the mirror to see an actual "enemy of peace."

Like I said, he was in the way. If you're there to stop abortion providers then it is imperative you deal with anyone that tries to defend them.
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

Like I said, he was in the way. If you're there to stop abortion providers then it is imperative you deal with anyone that tries to defend them.

Yes, he answered the dispatcher, went to PP to do his job...and you justify his death.

Like I said, you have zero moral High Ground here. "He was in the way." Buh by. But God forbid a woman have an abortion so that she and her current famliy...kids? elderly parent? disabled brother?...dont have to move to a dangerous neighborhood or go on welfare.
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

Not all in their entirety but saw quite a bit.

And thanks for admitting that they were indeed edited. They determined distortion...just not how much.

The videos were edited for time.
That was never denied by anyone.
You say the words of the PP employees were distorted.
That was never proven by anyone.
 
Re: Planned Parenthood and the tweet that maybe shouldn't have been

The videos were edited for time.
That was never denied by anyone.
You say the words of the PP employees were distorted.
That was never proven by anyone.

It was quite clear that the editing was not just for time.
The transcript proved the words on the video were spliced to distort what was said in full.

From page 7 transcript


Buyer: When we were talking saying the $30-$100 price range is per specimen that were talking about, right?
PP: Per specimen. Yes.
Buyer: And what does per specimen mean for Planned Parenthood? Is that, you
guys consider that, a discrete sample.
PP: One case. One patient, and again, there’s different steps involved too right? There’s who’s going to consent the patient to donate. It it’s staff, then that’s staff time, that gets figured into it, as opposed to if there’s someone that’s there, then it’s just flagging the interested or “eligible” patient and somebody else does the work. It’s basically for individual patient. So, if you end up shipping four individual specimens, that’s still one patient.

Buyer: Yea, that’s what I was going to say. If we take kidney, liver, thymus and say bone marrow-
PP: Yea, to us it’s all just one.

Buyer: Because when we charge, that’s four different specimens to a researcher
but-

031204
PP: That’s basically the way that they do their work. The way they budget is by the amount of time they spend on one patient. That’s one bunch of tissue, they handle the tissue, they do what they do, you know, in that way, so. But yea, that’s the way- It depends, if you’re expecting somebody to process, and package, identify tissue for you, it’s going to be at the higher end of the range. In all cases, it’s really gonna be about staff time, because that’s the only cost to the affiliate. And then, if you want space. For example, it is, it’s Novogenix is at PPLA, they have a corner of the lab. And they set up, come in with their coolers and everything, and handle all the tissue, but they’re taking up space, so I’m sure the affiliate considers that when they come up with what’s reasonable. But I don’t think anybody’s gonna come up with a crazy number, because they’re all very sensitive to this too. And at the end of the day, they want to offer this service because patients ask about it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom