• 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!

Baby Abortion Survivor Was "Swimming" In Toilet "Trying To Get Out"

The Prof said:
fyi, yesterday:



Florida Senate Unanimously OKS Anti-Infanticide Bill Planned Parenthood Opposed | LifeNews.com

presumably, florida democrats were disgusted by planned parenthood's alisa lapolt snow's testimony that babies born alive can simply be offed if mama so chooses

planned parenthood lets babies die:



planned parenthood receives a half billion dollars of taxpayer money per year

Planned Parenthood 487M in tax money, 329,000 abortions
Click to expand...

And here's some of the government's history in this case.

Government as Accomplice to Murder | National Review Online
 
Oceandan said:
He's a hero for the left. Why do you think there is no lamestream media coverage?
Click to expand...

This so-called 'clinic' is an abomination.

However continue to make abortion more and more difficult to get, or outlaw it....and this is all you will have. And it will multiply like maggots.


It will be back to the back alleys. Punishing women publicly for having abortions and making them harder to get only creates more risks.
 
Lursa said:
This so-called 'clinic' is an abomination.

However continue to make abortion more and more difficult to get, or outlaw it....and this is all you will have. And it will multiply like maggots.


It will be back to the back alleys. Punishing women publicly for having abortions and making them harder to get only creates more risks.
Click to expand...

Many cannot condemn this murderer without defending abortion.

Perhaps this mental connection is not without some reason.
 
Grant said:
Many cannot condemn this murderer without defending abortion.

Perhaps this mental connection is not without some reason.
Click to expand...

Let me be more clear...I do support a woman's right to abortion.
 
Lursa said:
Let me be more clear...I do support a woman's right to abortion.
Click to expand...

That's neither here nor there.

The topic surrounds a late term abortionist dumping babies in the toilet, as well as other atrocities, up to and including murder.

You, among many others, continue to associate these murders with legal abortions, therefore making it clear that abortion and murder is connected in your mind. Otherwise, why bring it up?
 
Grant said:
That's neither here nor there.

The topic surrounds a late term abortionist dumping babies in the toilet, as well as other atrocities, up to and including murder.

You, among many others, continue to associate these murders with legal abortions, therefore making it clear that abortion and murder is connected in your mind. Otherwise, why bring it up?
Click to expand...

I made the connection between quality of care (lack of it) & oversight and how we'd see more, not less, if access to the procedure was limited further.

It was a point I chose to make....it's not off-topic and I don't really care if you want to *tell* me how I think.
 
Grant said:
You did
say It seems to me that a pro life position should be taken very seriously. Moreso than any other position, that seems certain.


I think we're both aware of how labels are used to slot people into a certain type. Your use of the word "lifer", which is usually a term for those in prison, is new to me in this context. That's why I asked. Is it a new 'buzzword', just as buzzword once was?
Click to expand...

It's a traditional term. The proper terms are pro choice and pro life
 
Lursa said:
This so-called 'clinic' is an abomination.

However continue to make abortion more and more difficult to get, or outlaw it....and this is all you will have. And it will multiply like maggots.


It will be back to the back alleys. Punishing women publicly for having abortions and making them harder to get only creates more risks.
Click to expand...

actually one of the fueling factors to his ability to operate so long, according to the grand jury report, was an attitude and policy shift towards deregulation. In fact, they cite that abortion clinics operated with less oversight than other out patient facilities. It was something initiated under Ridge due to the perception that possible inspections worked as a deterrent from abortions
 
SheWolf said:
It's a traditional term. The proper terms are pro choice and pro life
Click to expand...

So, according to those who seek to control the language, the ending of a human life should not be mentioned. I understand.

“Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. ”
― George Orwell
 
Lursa said:
I made the connection between quality of care (lack of it) & oversight and how we'd see more, not less, if access to the procedure was limited further.

It was a point I chose to make....it's not off-topic and I don't really care if you want to *tell* me how I think.
Click to expand...

All many are asking is that current laws be followed and obeyed and that lawful investigations be carried out to ensure that's the case. It seems though that instead of encouraging the laws now in place and castigating those who don't follow the law, 'pro choice' people are seeking to change the debate to abortion itself. That is a separate issue and there is a forum on this site to argue the subject.
 
Grant said:
So,
according to those who seek to control the language, the ending of a human life should not be mentioned. I understand.

“Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. ”
― George Orwell
Click to expand...

It's not my rule. I didn't label either side.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
actually one of the fueling factors to his ability to operate so long, according to the grand jury report, was an attitude and policy shift towards deregulation. In fact, they cite that abortion clinics operated with less oversight than other out patient facilities. It was something initiated under Ridge due to the perception that possible inspections worked as a deterrent from abortions
Click to expand...

I didn't know that, thanks. However if there wasn't the need to try and hide abortion, to stigmatize women that got them, and if clinics didn't suffer (in some state) from performing them, then there wouldn't have been the need to try and relax inspections and regulations. That's not right and even if it was done with 'the best of intentions' women don't deserve crappy quality health care just because society doesnt 'approve.'

And I don't think it changes the probability that such facilities would become more common if abortion became more inaccessible.
 
Grant said:
All many are asking is that current laws be followed and obeyed and that lawful investigations be carried out to ensure that's the case. It seems though that instead of encouraging the laws now in place and castigating those who don't follow the law, 'pro choice' people are seeking to change the debate to abortion itself. That is a separate issue and there is a forum on this site to argue the subject.
Click to expand...


It was a point I chose to make," relevant to the topic.

I didn't see anyone objecting to investigation and due process of the charnel house.
 
Lursa said:
I didn't know that, thanks. However if there wasn't the need to try and hide abortion, to stigmatize women that got them, and if clinics didn't suffer (in some state) from performing them, then there wouldn't have been the need to try and relax inspections and regulations.
Click to expand...

you're kinda assuming that there was actually a need to relax the regulations in such a way
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
you're kinda assuming that there was actually a need to relax the regulations in such a way
Click to expand...

I didn't assume anything. I went by what was posted.
 
Lursa said:
However continue to make abortion more and more difficult to get, or outlaw it....and this is all you will have.
Click to expand...

Gosnell's clinic had ZERO regulation - ZERO inspections. Your logic is failing.
 
sangha said:
Untrue

There were plenty of regulations.
Click to expand...

No one from DOH was able to tell us who decided to exclude abortion clinics
from meaningful oversight that would protect patient safety, or why such a decision was
made. Nor did the jurors get a satisfactory answer as to why abortion clinics are under
DOH’s Division of Home Health (which oversees agencies that provide care in people’s
houses), rather than the more appropriate Division of Acute and Ambulatory Care. Or
why, on DOH’s website, even on the page that lists the types of facilities overseen by the
Division of Home Health, abortion clinics are not even mentioned.
Click to expand...

The abhorrent conditions and practices inside Gosnell’s clinic are directly
attributable to the Pennsylvania Health Department’s refusal to treat abortion clinics as
ambulatory surgical facilities.
But even if DOH’s position with respect to whether abortion clinics are ASFs
were reasonable – which it is not – that interpretation would not excuse the department’s
abdication of its duty to afford women who go to these clinics the same types of
safeguards that plastic surgery patients receive. This is because – whether a facility is
called an ambulatory surgical facility, a hospital, or a freestanding abortion clinic – the
legislature with the Abortion Control Act has charged DOH with the duty to write and
enforce regulations that protect the health and safety of women undergoing abortion
procedures
Click to expand...

The Grand Jury asked several DOH employees, attorneys as well as those charged
with overseeing abortion facilities, why the department does not treat abortion clinics as
ASFs when the language of the Health Care Facilities Acts is so clear. Their
unsatisfactory answers left us bewildered.
Click to expand...

The Department of Health’s decades-long neglect of its duty to ensure the health
and safety of women undergoing medical procedures in abortion clinics is in stark
contrast to its policies and practices with respect to procedures performed in other types
of health care facilities
Click to expand...

On November 24, 2009, Gosnell sent a fax to the department, followed by a letter
addressed to Staloski, notifying DOH that Karnamaya Mongar had died following an
abortion at his clinic. (Gosnell’s letter inaccurately stated that the second day of her
procedure was November 18.) Darlene Augustine, a registered nurse and health quality
administrator in the department’s Division of Home Health, received the fax.
Augustine, who supervises surveyors who respond to and investigate complaints
at health care facilities, testified that she immediately notified her boss, Cynthia Boyne.
(Boyne had become director of DOH’s Division of Home Health in 2007, when Staloski
was promoted to head the Bureau of Community Licensure and Certification.) Augustine
said that she told Boyne on November 25 that DOH should immediately go out to the
clinic and initiate an investigation. Augustine acknowledged that she generally had the
authority to send surveyors out to investigate – and she often did so within an hour of
receiving a notice of a serious event such as a death. She testified, however, that she felt
she needed Director Boyne’s approval because Gosnell’s notice involved an abortion
clinic.
Boyne did not give her approval. Instead, she went to the bureau director,
Staloski, to discuss the matter. Augustine explained that abortion clinics were treated
differently from other medical facilities because Staloski had for years overseen the
department’s handling of complaints and inspections – or lack of inspections – relating to
abortion clinics.
Click to expand...

yeah ...
 
Lursa said:
It was a point I chose to make," relevant to the topic.

I didn't see anyone objecting to investigation and due process of the charnel house.
Click to expand...

Have you complained at all about the lack of oversight on any later term abortion clinic? Why babies would have their feet cut off, for example, and placed in jars?

When 'pro choice' adherents won't face the fact that babies, and at least one mother, have been murdered, that venereal diseases have been spread thorough filthy conditions, that babies feet were being kept in jars as trophies, etc., but instead argue about 'pro choice' and fear that their right to abortion on demand be limited if regulations are followed, then something is amiss in their entire argument. It seems they have lost the ability to see clearly between right and wrong, moral and immoral, and blindly cling to their position, no matter what the possible consequences.

We see the consequences but they can' t seem to deal with them. But wouldn't it eventual come to this, once the value of human life is minimized?
 
phoenix makes five

wilmington, the bronx, dc, 3801 lancaster and...

The pro-life organization Live Action released its third secretly recorded video Thursday, revealing a counselor at a Phoenix, Ariz. late-term abortion clinic explaining that if a baby is born alive after a failed abortion, the clinic would not assist it, leaving it to die.

In the video, a Live Action undercover investigator, who is 23.5 weeks pregnant, presses a clinic worker identified as Linda at the Family Planning Associates Medical Group about whether doctors would assist the fetus if it is born alive.

“Sometimes they are [alive], yeah,” Linda says in the video. “But it doesn’t, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it will come out whole. ‘Cause they use suction, plus they use instruments so sometimes the fetuses don’t come out, you know, it’s not complete.”

“They will not resuscitate,” Linda responds when the investigator asks for assurance that she will not have to take the baby home.

Linda adds that the chance of the fetus being delivered with a heartbeat is “kind of slim.”

The undercover investigator also spoke with a doctor at the facility, Laura Mercer, who explains how the procedure works.

“We do the injection, which is a quick poke through your belly, um, and that stops the fetal heart, so that makes it so, if you were to deliver, there shouldn’t be movement. There shouldn’t be any of those things. … Yes. we induce a demise, an intrauterine demise … Um, death.”
Click to expand...

Abortion worker: 'They will not resuscitate' baby born alive [VIDEO] | The Daily Caller

live action's latest statement: "this video is just the latest evidence of a disturbing and horrifying trend occurring inside America’s abortion industry, the horrors of the gosnell trial are a widespread problem in this industry"

"dismembering and destroying innocent children, leaving born babies to die, injecting poison into the chest of a tiny child so that he slowly dies in his own mother’s womb — this is all standard operating procedure in the abortion industry”

are necks being snipped in a clinic near you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom