- Moderator
- #61
Uh no? That is a non sequitur.
Yes, you're upset now. Someone comes along with basic facts about human embryology and developmental biology, and you summarily dismiss it because it doesn't jive with your pro-choice ideologies.
Alfonzon Rachel on abortion
- Thread starter Freewill
- Start date
Uh no? That is a non sequitur.
Yes, you're upset now. Someone comes along with basic facts about human embryology and developmental biology, and you summarily dismiss it because it doesn't jive with your pro-choice ideologies.
koshergrl
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2011
- 81,136
- 14,068
- 2,190
Not to you, because you have the functional brain power of a 4 year old.
Read again. Slowly. The Grand Jury maintained that Gosnell was material to the abortion debate in the sense that professionals over 40 years were perfectly aware of the state of things and failed to report him, and continued to refer women to him. Which is material to the abortion debate because it shows that the health profession and the abortion industry do NOT provide any oversight over abortion clinics or look out for the well being of women.
Even obama doesn't believe that.
koshergrl
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2011
- 81,136
- 14,068
- 2,190
Last edited:
- Moderator
- #67
The term "liberal mind" is an oxymoron. If you catch my drift.
Seawytch
Information isnt Advocacy
When did science prove "personhood"? You can't answer, because they haven't.
My analogy was not a non sequitur it was in direct response to your drivel about someone else killing an unborn child. If I have an abortion, it is not murder under the law. If you kill my unborn child, it is simply not the same under the law.
Science is what will stop unwanted pregnancies which is what abortion is the result of. We don't have an abortion problem, we have an unwanted pregnancy problem with abortion as a symptom.
Seawytch
Information isnt Advocacy
Please provide the exact text that claims that Gosnell is material to the overall abortion debate.
koshergrl
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2011
- 81,136
- 14,068
- 2,190
Because to science, personhood is a ridiculous, non-scientific mouthing by liberal nutbags seeking to divert attention away from the fact that science recognizes the unborn as HUMAN.
When you realized you couldn't get away from that, you decided that people needed to not only to be human to live...but also to have this new thing called "personhood".
Scientists aren't interested in abortion, you freak. The only people who see abortion as a scientific and positive endeavor are the monsters of this world. Sometimes they dress it as *science*...and when they do, they typically get the death penalty.
When you realized you couldn't get away from that, you decided that people needed to not only to be human to live...but also to have this new thing called "personhood".
Scientists aren't interested in abortion, you freak. The only people who see abortion as a scientific and positive endeavor are the monsters of this world. Sometimes they dress it as *science*...and when they do, they typically get the death penalty.
koshergrl
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2011
- 81,136
- 14,068
- 2,190
You haven't even read the grand jury's report.
You're dismissed. You don't even have the most basic grasp of the facts of the case. Moron.
koshergrl
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2011
- 81,136
- 14,068
- 2,190
From their report:
"That is why thecomplete regulatory collapse that occurred here is so inexcusable. It should have takenonly one look. The first line of defense was the Pennsylvania Department of Health. The department’s job is to audit hospitals and outpatient medical facilities, like Gosnell’s, tomake sure that they follow the rules and provide safe care. The department had contactwith the Women’s Medical Society dating back to 1979, when it first issued approval toopen an abortion clinic. It did not conduct another site review until 1989, ten years later.Numerous violations were already apparent, but Gosnell got a pass when he promised tofix them. Site reviews in 1992 and 1993 also noted various violations, but again failed toensure they were corrected.But at least the department had been doing something up to that point, howeverineffectual.
After 1993, even that pro forma effort came to an end. Not because of administrative ennui, although there had been plenty. Instead, the PennsylvaniaDepartment of Health abruptly decided, for political reasons, to stop inspecting abortion clinics at all. The politics in question were not anti-abortion, but pro. With the change of administration from Governor Casey to Governor Ridge, officials concluded that inspections would be “putting a barrier up to women” seeking abortions. Better to leave clinics to do as they pleased, even though, as Gosnell proved, that meant both women and babies would pay. The only exception to this live-and-let-die policy was supposed to be forcomplaints dumped directly on the department’s doorstep. Those, at least, would beinvestigated. Except that there were complaints about Gosnell, repeatedly. Severaldifferent attorneys, representing women injured by Gosnell, contacted the department. Adoctor from Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia hand-delivered a complaint, advising thedepartment that numerous patients he had referred for abortions came back from Gosnellwith the same venereal disease. The medical examiner of Delaware County informed the department that Gosnell had performed an illegal abortion on a 14-year-old girl carryinga 30-week-old baby. And the department received official notice that a woman namedKarnamaya Mongar had died at Gosnell’s hands. Yet not one of these alarm bells – not even Mrs. Mongar’s death – prompted thedepartment to look at Gosnell or the Women’s Medical Society. Only after the raidoccurred, and the story hit the press, did the department choose to act. Suddenly therewere no administrative, legal, or policy barriers; within weeks an order was issued toclose the clinic. And as this grand jury investigation widened, department officials“lawyered up,” hiring a high-priced law firm to represent them at taxpayer expense. Hadthey spent as much effort on inspection as they did on attorneys, none of this would havehappened to begin with.But even this total abdication by the Department of Health might not have beenfatal. Another agency with authority in the health field, the Pennsylvania Department of State, could have stopped Gosnell single-handedly. While the Department of Healthregulates facilities, the Department of State, through its Board of Medicine, licenses andoversees individual physicians. Like their colleagues at Health, however, Department of State officials were repeatedly confronted with evidence about Gosnell, and repeatedlychose to do nothing.Indeed, in many ways State had more damning information than anyone else.Almost a decade ago, a former employee of Gosnell presented the Board of Medicinewith a complaint that laid out the whole scope of his operation: the unclean, unsterileconditions; the unlicensed workers; the unsupervised sedation; the underage abortionpatients; even the over-prescribing of pain pills with high resale value on the street.
The department assigned an investigator, whose investigation consisted primarily of an offsiteinterview with Gosnell. The investigator never inspected the facility, questioned otheremployees, or reviewed any records. Department attorneys chose to accept thisincomplete investigation, and dismissed the complaint as unconfirmed.Shortly thereafter the department received an even more disturbing report – abouta woman, years before Karnamaya Mongar, who died of sepsis after Gosnell perforatedher uterus. The woman was 22 years old. A civil suit against Gosnell was settled foralmost a million dollars, and the insurance company forwarded the information to thedepartment. That report should have been all the confirmation needed for the complaintfrom the former employee that was already in the department’s possession. Instead, thedepartment attorneys dismissed this complaint too. They concluded that death was justan “inherent” risk, not something that should jeopardize a doctor’s medical license. The same thing happened at least twice more: the department received complaintsabout lawsuits against Gosnell, but dismissed them as meaningless. A departmentattorney said there was no “pattern of conduct.” He never bothered to check a nationallitigation database, which would have shown that Gosnell had paid out damages to atleast five different women whose internal organs he had punctured during abortions.Apparently, the missing piece in the “pattern” was press coverage. Once that began, afterthe raid, the department attorney quickly managed to secure a license suspension againstGosnell.Similar inaction occurred at the municipal level.
The Philadelphia Department of Public Health does not regulate doctors or medical facilities; but it is supposed to protectthe public’s health. Women’s Medical Society to retrieve blood samples for testing purposes, but nevernoticed, or more likely never bothered to report, that anything was amiss. Anotheremployee inspected the clinic in response to a complaint that dead fetuses were beingstored in paper bags in the employees’ lunch refrigerator. The inspection confirmednumerous violations of protocols for storage and disposal of infectious waste. But nofollow-up was ever done, and the violations continued to the end.A health department representative also came to the clinic as part of a citywidevaccination program. She promptly discovered that Gosnell was scamming the program;more importantly, she was the only employee, city or state, who actually tried to dosomething about the appalling things she saw there. By asking questions and pokingaround, she was able to file detailed reports identifying many of the most egregiouselements of Gosnell’s practice. It should have been enough to stop him. But instead herreports went into a black hole, weeks before Karnamaya Mongar walked into theWoman’s Medical Society.Ironically, the doctor at CHOP who personally complained to the PennsylvaniaDepartment of Health about the spread of venereal disease from Gosnell’s clinic, thedoctor who used to refer teenage girls to Gosnell for abortions, became the head of thecity’s health department two years ago. But nothing changed in the time leading up toMrs. Mongar’s death. And it wasn’t just government agencies that did nothing.
Grand Jury Report Kermit Gosnell Womens Medical
"That is why thecomplete regulatory collapse that occurred here is so inexcusable. It should have takenonly one look. The first line of defense was the Pennsylvania Department of Health. The department’s job is to audit hospitals and outpatient medical facilities, like Gosnell’s, tomake sure that they follow the rules and provide safe care. The department had contactwith the Women’s Medical Society dating back to 1979, when it first issued approval toopen an abortion clinic. It did not conduct another site review until 1989, ten years later.Numerous violations were already apparent, but Gosnell got a pass when he promised tofix them. Site reviews in 1992 and 1993 also noted various violations, but again failed toensure they were corrected.But at least the department had been doing something up to that point, howeverineffectual.
After 1993, even that pro forma effort came to an end. Not because of administrative ennui, although there had been plenty. Instead, the PennsylvaniaDepartment of Health abruptly decided, for political reasons, to stop inspecting abortion clinics at all. The politics in question were not anti-abortion, but pro. With the change of administration from Governor Casey to Governor Ridge, officials concluded that inspections would be “putting a barrier up to women” seeking abortions. Better to leave clinics to do as they pleased, even though, as Gosnell proved, that meant both women and babies would pay. The only exception to this live-and-let-die policy was supposed to be forcomplaints dumped directly on the department’s doorstep. Those, at least, would beinvestigated. Except that there were complaints about Gosnell, repeatedly. Severaldifferent attorneys, representing women injured by Gosnell, contacted the department. Adoctor from Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia hand-delivered a complaint, advising thedepartment that numerous patients he had referred for abortions came back from Gosnellwith the same venereal disease. The medical examiner of Delaware County informed the department that Gosnell had performed an illegal abortion on a 14-year-old girl carryinga 30-week-old baby. And the department received official notice that a woman namedKarnamaya Mongar had died at Gosnell’s hands. Yet not one of these alarm bells – not even Mrs. Mongar’s death – prompted thedepartment to look at Gosnell or the Women’s Medical Society. Only after the raidoccurred, and the story hit the press, did the department choose to act. Suddenly therewere no administrative, legal, or policy barriers; within weeks an order was issued toclose the clinic. And as this grand jury investigation widened, department officials“lawyered up,” hiring a high-priced law firm to represent them at taxpayer expense. Hadthey spent as much effort on inspection as they did on attorneys, none of this would havehappened to begin with.But even this total abdication by the Department of Health might not have beenfatal. Another agency with authority in the health field, the Pennsylvania Department of State, could have stopped Gosnell single-handedly. While the Department of Healthregulates facilities, the Department of State, through its Board of Medicine, licenses andoversees individual physicians. Like their colleagues at Health, however, Department of State officials were repeatedly confronted with evidence about Gosnell, and repeatedlychose to do nothing.Indeed, in many ways State had more damning information than anyone else.Almost a decade ago, a former employee of Gosnell presented the Board of Medicinewith a complaint that laid out the whole scope of his operation: the unclean, unsterileconditions; the unlicensed workers; the unsupervised sedation; the underage abortionpatients; even the over-prescribing of pain pills with high resale value on the street.
The department assigned an investigator, whose investigation consisted primarily of an offsiteinterview with Gosnell. The investigator never inspected the facility, questioned otheremployees, or reviewed any records. Department attorneys chose to accept thisincomplete investigation, and dismissed the complaint as unconfirmed.Shortly thereafter the department received an even more disturbing report – abouta woman, years before Karnamaya Mongar, who died of sepsis after Gosnell perforatedher uterus. The woman was 22 years old. A civil suit against Gosnell was settled foralmost a million dollars, and the insurance company forwarded the information to thedepartment. That report should have been all the confirmation needed for the complaintfrom the former employee that was already in the department’s possession. Instead, thedepartment attorneys dismissed this complaint too. They concluded that death was justan “inherent” risk, not something that should jeopardize a doctor’s medical license. The same thing happened at least twice more: the department received complaintsabout lawsuits against Gosnell, but dismissed them as meaningless. A departmentattorney said there was no “pattern of conduct.” He never bothered to check a nationallitigation database, which would have shown that Gosnell had paid out damages to atleast five different women whose internal organs he had punctured during abortions.Apparently, the missing piece in the “pattern” was press coverage. Once that began, afterthe raid, the department attorney quickly managed to secure a license suspension againstGosnell.Similar inaction occurred at the municipal level.
The Philadelphia Department of Public Health does not regulate doctors or medical facilities; but it is supposed to protectthe public’s health. Women’s Medical Society to retrieve blood samples for testing purposes, but nevernoticed, or more likely never bothered to report, that anything was amiss. Anotheremployee inspected the clinic in response to a complaint that dead fetuses were beingstored in paper bags in the employees’ lunch refrigerator. The inspection confirmednumerous violations of protocols for storage and disposal of infectious waste. But nofollow-up was ever done, and the violations continued to the end.A health department representative also came to the clinic as part of a citywidevaccination program. She promptly discovered that Gosnell was scamming the program;more importantly, she was the only employee, city or state, who actually tried to dosomething about the appalling things she saw there. By asking questions and pokingaround, she was able to file detailed reports identifying many of the most egregiouselements of Gosnell’s practice. It should have been enough to stop him. But instead herreports went into a black hole, weeks before Karnamaya Mongar walked into theWoman’s Medical Society.Ironically, the doctor at CHOP who personally complained to the PennsylvaniaDepartment of Health about the spread of venereal disease from Gosnell’s clinic, thedoctor who used to refer teenage girls to Gosnell for abortions, became the head of thecity’s health department two years ago. But nothing changed in the time leading up toMrs. Mongar’s death. And it wasn’t just government agencies that did nothing.
Grand Jury Report Kermit Gosnell Womens Medical
Last edited:
- Moderator
- #74
Read up. Stop swallowing those talking points.
Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo's Conception
American Bioethics Advisory Commission
Using your logic, born children have the “capacity to mature and reproduce.” but they haven’t reached that stage of development yet. Does that make a 10-year-old less human?
"Human embryos, whether they are formed by fertilization (natural or in vitro) or by successful somatic-cell nuclear transfer (SCNT — i.e., cloning), do have the internal resources and active disposition to develop themselves to the mature stage of a human organism, requiring only a suitable environment and nutrition. In fact, scientists distinguish embryos from other cells or clusters of cells precisely by their self-directed, integral functioning — their organismal behavior. Thus, human embryos are what the embryology textbooks say they are, namely, human organisms — living individuals of the human species — at the earliest developmental stage."
-Dr. Robert George, M.D. in Embryo by Robert P. George and Christopher Tollefsen
Both you and Noomi contend that a human fetus is not a person. Guess again, says Walter B. Hoye II:
"[T]he slaves were considered property, not people, and were treated as such. The killing of a slave was almost never regarded as murder, and the rape of slave women was treated as a form of trespassing […]
From 1815 to 1830, the American Colonization Society: ‘Free black in our country are … a contagion.’
In 1857 the U.S. Supreme Court decided: ‘A negro of the African race was regarded … as an article of property … a subordinate and inferior class of being.’
In 1858, the Virginia Supreme Court decision declared: ‘In the eyes of the law … the slave is not a person.’
In 1867, Buckner Payne, Publisher: ‘The Negro is not a human being.’
In 1900, Professor Charles Carroll: ‘The negro is … one of the lower animals.’
In 1903 Dr. William English: ‘The negro race is … a heritage of organic and psychic debris.’
In 1909, Dr. E. T. Brady: ‘They [Negroes] are parasites.’ "
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/persons-not-property-an-african-american-pastor-tackles-abortion
Using the contention that a fetus is "a clump of cells" by all definitions of that phrase, so are we, full grown adult human beings.
Essentially, it is all basic science, backed up in medical textbooks that include Moore and Persaud’s The Developing Human, Larsen’s Human Embryology, Carlson’s Human Embryology & Developmental Biology, and O’Rahilly and Mueller’s Human Embryology & Teratology.
Do you realize now how flawed your premise is? If you continue ignoring these facts, you are no more than a zealot, and not even close to informed on the subject.
Last edited:
koshergrl
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2011
- 81,136
- 14,068
- 2,190
"We believe, however, thatanyone responsible for permitting Gosnell to operate as he did should face strongdisciplinary action up to and including termination. This includes not only the peoplewho failed to do the inspecting, the prosecuting, and the protecting, but also
those at thetop
who obviously tolerated, or even encouraged, the inaction. The Department of State literally licensed Gosnell’s criminally dangerousbehavior. DOH gave its stamp of approval to his facility. These agencies do not deservethe public’s trust. "
http://www.scribd.com/doc/135646678/Grand-Jury-Report-Kermit-Gosnell-Womens-Medical
those at thetop
who obviously tolerated, or even encouraged, the inaction. The Department of State literally licensed Gosnell’s criminally dangerousbehavior. DOH gave its stamp of approval to his facility. These agencies do not deservethe public’s trust. "
http://www.scribd.com/doc/135646678/Grand-Jury-Report-Kermit-Gosnell-Womens-Medical
Lovebears65
Gold Member
So the kidnapper who kidnapped those 3 girls are going to be tried for murder because he forced a miscarriage but that same woman can go out and murder her baby and not get in trouble. That is how ass back wards things are . Both should be considered MURDER ..
Seawytch
Information isnt Advocacy
It's not a referendum on abortion but a lack of oversight. Here's the inconvenient truth.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/162374/americans-abortion-views-steady-amid-gosnell-trial.aspx
Cecilie1200
Diamond Member
No, but you can't claim the baby on your taxes until it's born...because until then, it's not a person.
So now we're letting the IRS decide science? I guess we can just fire all those medical researchers and biologists and whatever, then, and replace them with IRS auditors.
Cecilie1200
Diamond Member
So...you're only a person if you pay taxes?
No, but you can't claim the baby on your taxes until it's born...because until then, it's not a person.
So once again the liberal left rejects science making the IRS, of all groups, the decider of who is or is not a person.
How about this for a thought, until born the unborn child is not considered being an expense that is why they are not a tax deduction before birth.
And, of course, you CAN claim the pre-natal care on your taxes as a medical expense.
Similar threads
- Locked
New Topics
-
Cops swarm on Jeffrey Epstein’s Zorro ranch to search for bodies of two girls- Started by DonGlock26
- Replies: 2
-
Green Germany: Volkswagen Loses Half Their Profit, to Cut 50,000 Jobs Over Next Four Years
- Started by DonGlock26
- Replies: 5
-
-
Say now what happened to the$200 per barrel oil thread ??- Started by WEATHER53
- Replies: 19
-
