Planned Parenthood and Ick - Selling Baby Parts


Recommended Posts

Abortion is one of the three Holy Sacraments of the secular political religion of leftism (the other two being dope and perversion). In a similar manner, Israel also had abandoned decent values and had degenerated to sacrificing their children on the alters of pagan gods. So by default, it also had forfeited its moral protection, was overrun by its enemies, its cities laid waste, its nation destroyed, and its people led into slavery.

Don't think for an instant that America can't be destroyed...

It has already has forfeited protection from its enemies.

It has already forfeited economic providence.

The very same inexorable degenerative process Israel experienced thousands of years ago is unfolding right in front of your eyes.

America is now fair game.

It's open season on America.

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Why can't its enemies be destroyed by their own nonsense?

Secularists call evil nonsense... and that is their blind spot.

Obama believes Iran is not an evil nation. Like you, he also believes evil is just nonsense and that he can control Iran.

Can you see that belief makes him a fool as well as a tool?

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Negotiations for fetal body parts...

Adam,

You beat me to it.

She wants a Lamborghini from selling baby parts. Even as a quip, that sounds like an executive I can easily imagine from Soylent Corporation in Soylent Green.

Major ick.

Michael

I have been on both sides of this issue of abortion.

My first year teaching, I was 20 and one of my students was a young Italian Catholic lady who gave her final speech by converting all the students and myself into a medical board that would decide on aborting a particular pregnancy.

She listed the reasons for consideration which were overwhelming.

She gave an excellent speech.

Every hand went up to agree to ending the pregnancy.

She then moved away from the podium for the last time and stopped and in a perfect Columbo move she said,

"You just killed ______________!"

I had kept that in my memory for years as I was pro-choice/individual woman's right to choose/it's my body, so keep your fucking hands off my vagina.

However, as technology advanced, it became clear to me at a visceral level, that I was wrong.

I changed my vote, and voted in my mind to not deprive the world of potentials.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why can't its enemies be destroyed by their own nonsense?

Secularists call evil nonsense... and that is their blind spot.

Obama believes Iran is not an evil nation. Like you, he also believes evil is just nonsense and that he can control Iran.

Can you see that belief makes him a fool as well as a tool?

Greg

Nonsense is an attribute of evil, not a synonym.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why can't its enemies be destroyed by their own nonsense?

Secularists call evil nonsense... and that is their blind spot.

Obama believes Iran is not an evil nation. Like you, he also believes evil is just nonsense and that he can control Iran.

Can you see that belief makes him a fool as well as a tool?

Greg

Nonsense is an attribute of evil, not a synonym.

--Brant

It both minimizes and trivializes evil.

I know you didn't mean to do it, Brant. But that's just one example of how the left skews the narrative by controlling word usage.

Banned words you will never hear a leftist use...

evil

illegal alien

Islamic terrorist

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I introduced "nonsense" into this discussion, not Obama. Now you want to do to "nonsense" what the liberals do with "evil"? Ban it?

Rand: The moral is the practical. This implies the immoral is the impractical. It's the same as evil and nonsense. The latter word is an attribute of the former, but is not the former per se.

The only reason I don't approach electricity with the same bravado you do with ideas is I don't want to get electrocuted or burn down my house.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Negotiations for fetal body parts...

Adam,

You beat me to it.

She wants a Lamborghini from selling baby parts. Even as a quip, that sounds like an executive I can easily imagine from Soylent Corporation in Soylent Green.

Major ick.

Michael

I have been on both sides of this issue of abortion.

My first year teaching, I was 20 and one of my students was a young Italian Catholic lady who gave her final speech by converting all the students and myself into a medical board that would decide on aborting a particular pregnancy.

She listed the reasons for consideration which were overwhelming.

She gave an excellent speech.

Every hand went up to agree to ending the pregnancy.

She then moved away from the podium for the last time and stopped and in a perfect Columbo move she said,

"You just killed ______________!"

I had kept that in my memory for years as I was pro-choice/individual woman's right to choose/it's my body, so keep your fucking hands off my vagina.

However, as technology advanced, it became clear to me at a visceral level, that I was wrong.

I changed my vote, and voted in my mind to not deprive the world of potentials.

A...

That's good drama, but it misses the point. You don't get a vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Negotiations for fetal body parts...

Adam,

You beat me to it.

She wants a Lamborghini from selling baby parts. Even as a quip, that sounds like an executive I can easily imagine from Soylent Corporation in Soylent Green.

Major ick.

Michael

I have been on both sides of this issue of abortion.

My first year teaching, I was 20 and one of my students was a young Italian Catholic lady who gave her final speech by converting all the students and myself into a medical board that would decide on aborting a particular pregnancy.

She listed the reasons for consideration which were overwhelming.

She gave an excellent speech.

Every hand went up to agree to ending the pregnancy.

She then moved away from the podium for the last time and stopped and in a perfect Columbo move she said,

"You just killed ______________!"

I had kept that in my memory for years as I was pro-choice/individual woman's right to choose/it's my body, so keep your fucking hands off my vagina.

However, as technology advanced, it became clear to me at a visceral level, that I was wrong.

I changed my vote, and voted in my mind to not deprive the world of potentials.

A...

That's good drama, but it misses the point. You don't get a vote.

Deanna:

Even with a contract signed by both parents?

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Negotiations for fetal body parts...

Adam,

You beat me to it.

She wants a Lamborghini from selling baby parts. Even as a quip, that sounds like an executive I can easily imagine from Soylent Corporation in Soylent Green.

Major ick.

Michael

I have been on both sides of this issue of abortion.

My first year teaching, I was 20 and one of my students was a young Italian Catholic lady who gave her final speech by converting all the students and myself into a medical board that would decide on aborting a particular pregnancy.

She listed the reasons for consideration which were overwhelming.

She gave an excellent speech.

Every hand went up to agree to ending the pregnancy.

She then moved away from the podium for the last time and stopped and in a perfect Columbo move she said,

"You just killed ______________!"

I had kept that in my memory for years as I was pro-choice/individual woman's right to choose/it's my body, so keep your fucking hands off my vagina.

However, as technology advanced, it became clear to me at a visceral level, that I was wrong.

I changed my vote, and voted in my mind to not deprive the world of potentials.

A...

That's good drama, but it misses the point. You don't get a vote.

Deanna:

Even with a contract signed by both parents?

A...

Were any of the students in that class one of the parents? Was the speech-giver one of the parents? Contracts are binding agreements between specified parties. If you aren't one of the parties or in some way justifiably involved in arbitrating a disagreement between those parties, then.... you don't get a vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's good drama, but it misses the point. You don't get a vote.

Deanna:

Even with a contract signed by both parents?

A...

Were any of the students in that class one of the parents? Was the speech-giver one of the parents? Contracts are binding agreements between specified parties. If you aren't one of the parties or in some way justifiably involved in arbitrating a disagreement between those parties, then.... you don't get a vote.

Ah, got it.

I was speaking about how her argument stayed in my mind throughout life.

However, you will grant that if I was one of the parents, I would have a "vote," correct?

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Her "vote" outweighs yours, all else considered, but it's not voting, really, but moral and practical suasions combined. Human rights are a human invention and the unborn baby is on the wrong side of that invention especially early in the pregnancy. The Mother has a "social existence," not her unborn child. That's Objectivism, anyway. I'm inclined to say that when the baby starts bouncing around in the womb, a social existence is starting to be built between the two. Or, maybe, if you can't do the time--pregnancy--don't do the crime--sex. Abortion strikes me too as a kind of self-mutilation, something I thought of for the first time writing this. You're pregnant? What's inside you is you. This is not the same as saying there outta be a law, which would be another, derivative matter.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Her "vote" outweighs yours, all else considered.

--Brant

So much for the equality between the sexes...

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I introduced "nonsense" into this discussion, not Obama. Now you want to do to "nonsense" what the liberals do with "evil"? Ban it?

That's nonsense, Brant. :wink:

I'm totally powerless to implement public policy... I only set my own policy. You're totally free to do whatever you want. To even imply I have that power just to couch others as victims is specious.

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I introduced "nonsense" into this discussion, not Obama. Now you want to do to "nonsense" what the liberals do with "evil"? Ban it?

That's nonsense, Brant. :wink:

I'm totally powerless to implement public policy... I only set my own policy. You're totally free to do whatever you want. To even imply I have that power just to couch others as victims is specious.

Greg

Ah, but not evil?

Not all nonsense is evil too.

I was referring to your nonsense--semantic nonsense--not mine. You're just telling me what I already know. Just because I say something is nonsense doesn't mean I'm covering up evil; that's nonsense.

Since it's semantical, there is no implication you have any "power" you claim I attribute to you.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then it's the same as your implication I had the power to ban evil by saying that something evil was nonsense. I don't. I didn't take it that way but could have. It's still all semantical, but, regardless, the same for both of us in this discussion.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Brant...

forehead-slap-smiley-emoticon.gif

What about "words have meaning?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then it's the same as your implication I had the power to ban evil by saying that something evil was nonsense.

I know, Brant. I said you didn't mean to do it. Just as I know I don't have that power, I also know you don't either.

My comments were about how the leftists control word usage, where speaking just one wrong word can end a career. Perpetually offended feminized leftist word nazis only wield that power because there are so few Americans in America.

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Brant...

forehead-slap-smiley-emoticon.gif

What about "words have meaning?"

Of course they do. Also meaning in how they are applied. I merely pointed out "nonsense" was an attribute of evil but not all nonsense is evil. This is nuance, something Greg has difficulty with, but it is also semantical until we start applying it to real life situations. Even "evil" has to be applied to be evil. That could be mere advocacy of evil.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Brant...

forehead-slap-smiley-emoticon.gif

What about "words have meaning?"

Of course they do. Also meaning in how they are applied. I merely pointed out "nonsense" was an attribute of evil but not all nonsense is evil. This is nuance, something Greg has difficulty with, but it is also semantical until we start applying it to real life situations. Even "evil" has to be applied to be evil. That could be mere advocacy of evil.

--Brant

Just checkin cause ya had me a tetch worried there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's good drama, but it misses the point. You don't get a vote.

Deanna:

Even with a contract signed by both parents?

A...

Were any of the students in that class one of the parents? Was the speech-giver one of the parents? Contracts are binding agreements between specified parties. If you aren't one of the parties or in some way justifiably involved in arbitrating a disagreement between those parties, then.... you don't get a vote.

Ah, got it.

I was speaking about how her argument stayed in my mind throughout life.

However, you will grant that if I was one of the parents, I would have a "vote," correct?

A...

Then I misunderstood you, or else you misspoke. I inferred your meaning to be that her argument didn't just stay in your mind, but that it changed your mind.

Regarding decisions about a specific pregnancy, you're right in that there is no equality of sexes. As long as the unborn is part of the mother's body, then the decisions are hers to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then I misunderstood you, or else you misspoke. I inferred your meaning to be that her argument didn't just stay in your mind, but that it changed your mind.

Regarding decisions about a specific pregnancy, you're right in that there is no equality of sexes. As long as the unborn is part of the mother's body, then the decisions are hers to make.

It was my true story, so it was on me to be clear. Her argument, which was valid in terms of her assumptions, did stay in my mind and eventually supported my modification of my position that the "right" to terminate a pregnancy should have limitations.

Additionally, the more that technology has accelerated, the more options have been created that could preserve that life in utero.

As to your second point Deanna, my argument has been made here before and it is a "what if" argument:

If the two parents, let's say they are Objectivists, and, being Objectivists, they want everything to be clear and in writing, so they draft up an ante-nuptual/relationship [aka pre-nup/relationship] and in the document, they agree that if there is a pregnancy, both parents have a right to any fetus in utero.

Additionally, they agree that only a Doctor could override the decision to go through with the pregnancy if the life of the mother was in danger.

Moreover, they both agree that any termination of the pregnancy shall have the unanimous consent of both parents unless a Doctor steps in under the prior clause.

In that specific situation, would your statement still be in effect for that couple?

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now