• 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 Knew of Gosnell's Abortion Horrors [W:24]

j-mac said:
I don't think that the PP guy said, but in the outline that nota gave, I think it's testimony of one of the women that complained, or something like that...In any case any one of those would have been a health hazard, and if they were conveyed to anyone at PP, then they had an obligation to report them.
Click to expand...

you are still mixing parts of this thread and are confused, the testimony had nothing to do with PP

but lets say it was, what "obligations" are you talking about?
they told the woman to file complaints, besides that what FACTUAL obligations are you referring too
 
AGENT J said:
are you claiming that PP factually new what nota said came out IN THE TRIAL??? (the trial that has nothing to do with PP)
because i see zero proof of that, do you have proof of that?

so yes the article title is 100% misleading and not true until anybody can prove otherwise :shrug:
PP had no obligation to report anything as of yet that, nobody even knows what PP factual new or any FACTS that were presented to them.

What dont you understand? seems you came in late and are confusing the two discussion going on
Click to expand...

eh, maybe...But I don't think I am...No, I don't have any "proof" what the complaints to PP were. Maybe you could outline what you would accept as proof, and I'll have a look. However, it is my understanding that the person at trial offering the synopsis of conditions at Gosnell's clinic was one of the women that complained to PP, I could be wrong....In either case would you agree that if these conditions were conveyed to PP then they had an obligation to report them?
 
AGENT J said:
you are still mixing parts of this thread and are confused, the testimony had nothing to do with PP

but lets say it was, what "obligations" are you talking about?
they told the woman to file complaints, besides that what FACTUAL obligations are you referring too
Click to expand...

I believe under the health code, that if another HC facility has knowledge of violations that threaten public health, or safety, then they have a legal obligation to report them.
 
j-mac said:
1.)eh, maybe...But I don't think I am..
2.).No, I don't have any "proof" what the complaints to PP were.
3.)Maybe you could outline what you would accept as proof, and I'll have a look.
4.)However, it is my understanding that the person at trial offering the synopsis of conditions at Gosnell's clinic was one of the women that complained to PP, I could be wrong....In either case would you agree that if these conditions were conveyed to PP then they had an obligation to report them?
Click to expand...

1.) you factually are, what nota posted was TRAIL info, not what PP FACTUALLY knew of
2.) ok then that is proof that the thread title, which is article title by rule, its not Nota's fault, is currently WRONG and misleading
3.) lol more than hearsay. Pictures, video, proof of medical misconduct (arm removed when a leg needed removed etc)
4..) no i dont not because its hearsay, unless they are bound by some procedure or codes that requires all VERBAL complaints to be reported whether they are true or not i see no reason they would be obligated to do anything more than they did. Tell the woman to official report it.

also, let be clear, even if i personally had they opinion they should have reported the hearsay complaints that doesn't do anything to my point that the fact that the thread title is currently wrong and misleading.

you do get that right?

also be very clear, if evidence comes out saying they did factually know, had some real evidence or they violated procedure/protocol for reporting it then they should be punished!

but what i wont do is just assume and make stuff up with no evidence.
 
j-mac said:
I believe under the health code, that if another HC facility has knowledge of violations that threaten public health, or safety, then they have a legal obligation to report them.
Click to expand...

you BELIEVE?

define knowledge?

hey, the shoes i have on right now are blue, do you have knowledge that my shoes are factually blue?

you show me FACTS, and im on board, currently there's no facts that support the article title.
 
j-mac said:
eh, maybe...But I don't think I am...No, I don't have any "proof" what the complaints to PP were. Maybe you could outline what you would accept as proof, and I'll have a look.
Click to expand...

I appreciate your distinguishing between fact and inference

However, it is my understanding that the person at trial offering the synopsis of conditions at Gosnell's clinic was one of the women that complained to PP, I could be wrong....In either case would you agree that if these conditions were conveyed to PP then they had an obligation to report them?
Click to expand...

I've seen no evidence that the women testifying are the women that the PP person referred to in his statement.
 
j-mac said:
I believe under the health code, that if another HC facility has knowledge of violations that threaten public health, or safety, then they have a legal obligation to report them.
Click to expand...

I've seen no evidence of any obligation like that
 
AGENT J said:
hey, the shoes i have on right now are blue, do you have knowledge that my shoes are factually blue?
Click to expand...


a rather dishonest analogy, being that they apparently had mul;tiple complaints. So it would be more like 12 different incidents of separate individuals telling us your shoes were blue
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
a rather dishonest analogy, being that they apparently had mul;tiple complaints. So it would be more like 12 different incidents of separate individuals telling us your shoes were blue
Click to expand...

it would?

so you know that there were 12 complaints and they were all the same?
and you also know that based on that alone that they were factually obligated to do more than they did, tell the woman to report and reported themselves.

Interesting, can you provide these fact please?

oh and lastly none of this change the fact that the thread title is still currently factually wrong and misleading.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
a rather dishonest analogy, being that they apparently had mul;tiple complaints. So it would be more like 12 different incidents of separate individuals telling us your shoes were blue
Click to expand...

So now you're claiming that the complaints PP received were identical or similar?

Tell us more!!
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
a rather dishonest analogy, being that they apparently had mul;tiple complaints. So it would be more like 12 different incidents of separate individuals telling us your shoes were blue
Click to expand...

You're pearl-casting. Abandon hope.
 
sangha said:
So now you're claiming that the complaints PP received were identical or similar?

Tell us more!!
Click to expand...

also what if they all were, at what point are they fact?

did all the complaints go to the same person at pp? were they all documented? etc etc etc

its a HUGE assumption not based on any facts but emotions and opinions.

mean while if any of this stuff turns out to be true i hope that woman is fired and punished by law, but im not going to call for that on speculation.
 
nota bene said:
You're pearl-casting. Abandon hope.
Click to expand...

I agree, trying to make a person believe an OPINION as fact with zero evidence is pretty hopeless.

Good job nota, a post that is truthful!
 
Planned Parenthood has admitted that it knew about conditions at Gosnell's "House of Horrors," but took no steps to report him to the authorities.

BREAKING: Obama backs out of Planned Parenthood gala Thursday: White House | LifeSiteNews.com

Planned Parenthood, left to itself, becomes another House of Horrors

LifeNews.com reports that Dayle Steinberg, the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Southeast Pennsylvania, (admitted) at a fundraiser that he knew about the problems in Gosnell’s Philadelphia charnel house. Rather than reporting this information to local or state authorities so that Gosnell’s clinic could be shut down, Planned Parenthood did nothing at all. Instead, it hoped that the women who suffered traumatizing abortions in filthy rooms would speak up. Or, as Steinberg said, “We would always encourage them to report it to the Department of Health.”

Kermit Gosnell?s Abortion House of Horrors: Planned Parenthood Knew! // Mr. Conservative


Planned Parenthood of Delaware CEO Ruth Lytle-Barnaby (denied) any claims of unsanitary practices and said the facility is dedicated to providing a safe environment for women. She would not confirm the circumstances under which Mitchell-Werbrich and Vasikonis left. And the television station reports two other nurses and one abortionist have also quit working at the facility.
 
ernst barkmann said:
Planned Parenthood has admitted that it knew about conditions at Gosnell's "House of Horrors," but took no steps to report him to the authorities.

BREAKING: Obama backs out of Planned Parenthood gala Thursday: White House | LifeSiteNews.com

Planned Parenthood, left to itself, becomes another House of Horrors

LifeNews.com reports that Dayle Steinberg, the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Southeast Pennsylvania, (admitted) at a fundraiser that he knew about the problems in Gosnell’s Philadelphia charnel house. Rather than reporting this information to local or state authorities so that Gosnell’s clinic could be shut down, Planned Parenthood did nothing at all. Instead, it hoped that the women who suffered traumatizing abortions in filthy rooms would speak up. Or, as Steinberg said, “We would always encourage them to report it to the Department of Health.”

Kermit Gosnell?s Abortion House of Horrors: Planned Parenthood Knew! // Mr. Conservative


Planned Parenthood of Delaware CEO Ruth Lytle-Barnaby (denied) any claims of unsanitary practices and said the facility is dedicated to providing a safe environment for women. She would not confirm the circumstances under which Mitchell-Werbrich and Vasikonis left. And the television station reports two other nurses and one abortionist have also quit working at the facility.
Click to expand...

More evidence that the only way the moral fascists who want to ban abortion can present themselves as morally superior is by being dishonest
 
ernst barkmann said:
1.)Planned Parenthood has admitted that it knew about conditions at Gosnell's "House of Horrors," but took no steps to report him to the authorities.

2.)BREAKING: Obama backs out of Planned Parenthood gala Thursday: White House | LifeSiteNews.com

3.)Planned Parenthood, left to itself, becomes another House of Horrors

LifeNews.com reports that Dayle Steinberg, the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Southeast Pennsylvania, (admitted) at a fundraiser that he knew about the problems in Gosnell’s Philadelphia charnel house. Rather than reporting this information to local or state authorities so that Gosnell’s clinic could be shut down, Planned Parenthood did nothing at all. Instead, it hoped that the women who suffered traumatizing abortions in filthy rooms would speak up. Or, as Steinberg said, “We would always encourage them to report it to the Department of Health.”

4.)Kermit Gosnell?s Abortion House of Horrors: Planned Parenthood Knew! // Mr. Conservative


5.)Planned Parenthood of Delaware CEO Ruth Lytle-Barnaby (denied) any claims of unsanitary practices and said the facility is dedicated to providing a safe environment for women. She would not confirm the circumstances under which Mitchell-Werbrich and Vasikonis left. And the television station reports two other nurses and one abortionist have also quit working at the facility.
Click to expand...

1.) still not factual

2.)the first link supports that they didnt factually know anythign other than there were complints :shrug:

3.) not sure what this has to do with the topic at all? this link seem to talk about a PP faclity itself that has failed inspection or is guilty of violating protocal. What am i missing?
if thats true i hope they do what ever is required in those cases, fire people, shut it down, criminal charges if applical etc

did i miss something on how this tie into the discussion?

4.) this link also shows that PP was only aware of complaints and told them to report them

what i dont like though is that PP MIGHT have referred them to the clinic knowing they need late term abortion that PP doesnt do. Are late term abortions in PA illegal, ill have to check and how late. If that is true again, i hope they take the steps to punish that.

anything else i missed?

the thread title is still not factually true by anything you provided unless i missed something youd like to point out.

5.) this seems to apply to link two, bullet 4.) again not sure what this has to do with the topic here?
 
Last edited:
sangha said:
I've seen no evidence of any obligation like that
Click to expand...

Under the PA code, minimum standards include:

(7) The facilities in which the services are rendered are safe, sanitary, and adequately equipped.

(8) There is an organized medical or professional staff responsible for maintaining accepted standards of medical, surgical, or health-related care and for requiring staff members to participate in recognized continuing education programs.

Pennsylvania Code
Click to expand...

Now, I will research weather or not other facilities have an obligation to report...Although I don't see why they wouldn't....
 
j-mac said:
Under the PA code, minimum standards include:



Now, I will research weather or not other facilities have an obligation to report...Although I don't see why they wouldn't....
Click to expand...

uhm, nobody here doubt that medical facilitys have a standard that must be kept for themselves???

the question is, does PP have an obligation to report something word of mouth?
we are asking about factual OBLIGATION

if they did then action should be taken against them :shrug:

and still, none of this makes the thread title true
 
AGENT J said:
1.) still not factual

2.)the first link supports that they didnt factually know anythign other than there were complints :shrug:

3.) not sure what this has to do with the topic at all? this link seem to talk about a PP faclity itself that has failed inspection or is guilty of violating protocal. What am i missing?
if thats true i hope they do what ever is required in those cases, fire people, shut it down, criminal charges if applical etc

did i miss something on how this tie into the discussion?

4.) this link also shows that PP was only aware of complaints and told them to report them

what i dont like though is that PP MIGHT have referred them to the clinic knowing they need late term abortion that PP doesnt do. Are late term abortions in PA illegal, ill have to check and how late. If that is true again, i hope they take the steps to punish that.

anything else i missed?

the thread title is still not factually true by anything you provided unless i missed something youd like to point out.

5.) this seem to apply to link too, bullet 4.) again not sure what this has to do with the topic here?
Click to expand...

i am sure you can tell these are all links and story lines from the internet, and not me.
 
ernst barkmann said:
i am sure you can tell these are all links and story lines from the internet, and not me.
Click to expand...

yes i can, all my questions still apply

you posted 3 links

2 support the current evidence that PP didn't factually know anything accept that some woman had complaints and that they told the woman they should report their complaints to the appropriate authorities.

1 link is a story about some random PP facility that seems to be in violation and it looks like action will be taken against that facility as it should if its true.

so again, what did i miss?
 
j-mac said:
Under the PA code, minimum standards include:



Now, I will research weather or not other facilities have an obligation to report...Although I don't see why they wouldn't....
Click to expand...

Let me know what you find, but I doubt there is such an obligation. I suspect it would raise issues relating to medical privacy
 
AGENT J said:
it would?
Click to expand...

Yes, in your analogy there is one sole statement of an eyewitness account. This ignores there were multiple eyewitness accounts.

and you also know that based on that alone that they were factually obligated to do more than they did
Click to expand...

I've been rather clear that I do think they have a professional and moral obligation to do so, yes.


Interesting, can you provide these fact please?
Click to expand...

I don't think you really understand how things like "fact", "logic" and 'debate" really work. If something can be "factually" established it wouldn't be "debatable". And many important things are "debatable". SO what we do in "debate" is present our arguments for why something is most likely correct, based on supporting fact and logic. Because we are unlikely to find 'factual" evidence one way or the other
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom