Planned Parenthood Exposed - New Undercover Video

[Anguille]

Anguille was telling me that she felt abortions should be no ones business but the mother and the doctor at any time. I asked if that meant that a person who was 8 1/2 months pregnant should be allowed to get an abortion a 8 1/2 months pregnant because of a truly silly reason, like wanting to go on vacation. Anguille's response was that it wasn't her business or mine to decide that. I disagree.

Now if I quoted you like that you'd call me a liar and rep me. You presented the hypothetical situation of yourself wanting to abort at 8.5 months and did I think that was okay. I said it was none of my business what you did.

 

[Anguille]

I agree with you whole-heartedly on that. This is where I think you may have missed out by not being part of the earlier discussion.

Anguille was telling me that she felt abortions should be no ones business but the mother and the doctor at any time. I asked if that meant that a person who was 8 1/2 months pregnant should be allowed to get an abortion a 8 1/2 months pregnant because of a truly silly reason, like wanting to go on vacation. Anguille's response was that it wasn't her business or mine to decide that. I disagree.

I do not think that there is a "problem" with women seeking abortions when their babies are viable for "frivolous" reasons. I just think that such a thing should not be allowed. I was trying, again in that earlier conversation, to see if Anguille had a point in which she would say, "No, an abortion should not be performed for that reason." But Anguille seems ardently devoted to giving the woman the right to make that decision for any reason, at any time in the pregnancy...which is of course, her opinion, and her right.

Hope that clears things up - but to restate...no, I do not think that the vast, vast majority of late-term abortions are done for anything but the most serious health reasons.

Anguille Wrote:

I'll take that at its face, and truly hope that you mean that you hope I don't have any complications with my pregnancy...rather than some smarmy comment. Because, again..here is where simply asking me for clarification would have come in handy...if we were willing to specify "health" reasons not to include those vague areas that are concerning...I think that health reasons like the one you "hoped never happened to me" are perfectly valid reasons for a woman to seek a late term abortion.

The smarmyiness is all in your suspicious little mind.
You want to try to make me into someone who judges others and thinks I have the right to decide when it's okay or not okay for another woman to have an abortion. Get a grip. You can't make me be you. When an abortion is or is not acceptable is something I can only decide for myself.

I can't make out what you are saying about health reasons but you clearly state in one of your first posts that health reasons are not an acceptable reason in your eyes for any woman to have a late term abortion. The only reasons according to your post, that you find acceptable are to save the woman's life. If you are changing your mind about that, fine. It's not clear however.

 

[eots]

No it isn't. Mental illness must be diagnosed.

But then what if a woman does kill herself because a doctor said, " tough shit" and refused to treat her. How many women, young girl especially, do commit suicide when they can no longer handle a pregnancy? Throwing yourself down a well was how they did it in the 19th century if the herbs failed to work.

and in your mind what does this diagnosis require other than a statement on how ? you are feeling..and talk about red herrings like if abortion was outlawed there would be any significant rise in suicide rates ..ludicrous

 

[Anguille]

At 9 months she will have to deliever regardless if it's born alive or dead. Why not let it live?

Perhaps she would like to be able to have children in the future who actually have brains instead of only a brain stem and who might live for more than a few hours or days.

 

[eots]

Perhaps she would like to be able to have children in the future who actually have brains instead of only a brain stem and who might live for more than a few hours or days.

more red herrings...

 

[Anguille]

Why do we have laws? Why do we follow rules? Why do we all seem to understand a basic code of right and wrong - we don't steal things when no one is looking, we don't break the laws (at least not the big ones ) just because we can...

In my opinion, its because we understand that for our society to work and function...we all have to live together, play together, work together, and protect ourselves and others.

We all have decisions "made for us" everyday. I am completely capable of driving 15 miles over the speed limit or more safetly...yet someone has decided to set a limit for me. (Yes, I am aware that it is a strange way to approach this issue...but I get to my point, in a second, I promise)

With the abortion issue...I feel that limits have to be set at some point because, at some point, you are not just discussing one person's life...you are discussing two lives. At that point - we as a society can, in my opinion, cling to the selfish answer of - I can do whatever I want to my body and until that kid is out and learning his multiplication tables he is part of my body! (yes, that was sarcasm) OR we can as a society say, "You have complete and total control over your body...up until the point where we aren't talking about just your body anymore."

You have the right to you, to your person....in my opinion...you do not have the right to kill another person for your convenience...and at 8 1/2 months...a baby is certainly another person.

Are there exceptions? Absolutely...and the law must be flexible for those serious exceptions. But - I think that women do a disservice to themselves - to our wisdom, our intelligence, our ability to be responsible for our own lives - when we say that we have the right to kill another human because we have the right to do whatever we want with out bodies whenever we want to.

P.S. I'm not going to respond to the whole "heartless because I want women to give up on future babies" comment because I answered that idea in an earlier post you might have missed...where I stated that that sort of scenario would certainly be one of those that falls under legitimate "health" concerns...my problem with the "health designation" are the grey areas where women can choose to abort rather than deliver viable babies for reasons that would not cost them life, limb, future children, etc.

Now you are changing your tune about the health thing. I think you are thinking of your own best interest.

Fetuses are not persons, they are not citizens. Women are persons and they are citizens. You can lecture about law all you want but under the law they are not persons.

 

[Anguille]

and in your mind what does this diagnosis require other than a statement on how ? you are feeling..and talk about red herrings like if abortion was outlawed there would be any significant rise in suicide rates ..ludicrous

Maybe it's not pills you take, maybe its meth.

 

[Anguille]

more red herrings...

yeah, meth and maybe crack too.

 

[Silence]

Makedde Wrote:

An abortion at this stage would likewise be highly invasive, require drugs and stitching, etc.

The hypothetical baby Anguille and I were talking about is one in the very late stages of development...8 1/2 months to be exact. Babies are delivered with no health complications far earlier than this. To allow a woman to choose an abortion instead of a c-section at this stage - when the baby could survive outside of its mother's body is, in my opinion, wrong.

In order to remove a baby as large as it would be at 8 1/2 months would require serious, invasive surgery...so a C-Section would not be significantly more severe.

Why would it be assault on the mother to force her to deliver a viable baby instead of killing it...but not murder for the baby who could survive outside the womb?

realistically speaking how often does that happen though Gem? How many women carry a baby for eight plus months and then suddenly decide they've changed their mind and no longer want the baby? most late term abortions are performed due to the baby having a fatal malformation and at that point in the pregnancy I believe 99% of women would choose to die themselves rather than abort their baby.

My personal opinion is I'm pro-choice during tghe first trimester. Up to 12 weeks abortions should be available without restriction. After 12 weeks there should be a medical need, either the baby has a serious medical condition which would seriously infringe on this child's quality of life or if the mother's life and health is in peril.

I don't believe in abortion during the third trimester except in the event that the child has no chance of survival if carried to term.

Now, as to the parental consent issue, I asked my daughter her opinion and she really surprised and impressed me with her response. She said that if she felt she was responsible enough to have sex at her age then she should be responsible enough to tell me if she got pregnant but that ultimately the decision should be hers' to make whether to terminate or not. . she said if I was against abortion she should be able to obtain one anyway because it's her body.

She also said the only way she'd want to get a job and rent an apt is as an experiment and under the guidance of an adult because she said kids would go butt wild if given that much freedom

The nurse in question should've been fired or at least disiplined in some way because even though the girl turned out to be fake the situation in question does occur and it's very troubling that she would choose to hide the fact that this young girl had clearly been either raped or at least taken advantage of by a much older man. It's also troubling that she would encourage this girl to break the law.

 

[Ravi]

California abortion law:



Abortion After the First Trimester - Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California

How is SUICIDAL TENDENCIES a reason for an abortion? That alone lets them do abortions up until the babies first breath. ONLY physical life of the mother. Mental... Put her in the hospital... The baby deserves life.

Put her in the hospital and force her to give birth. Yep, this is how I see the real agenda of the religious right.

btw, if the mother's suicidal tendencies are real she's pretty much going to self abort, don't you think? Two lives down the toilet instead of one. How Christian.

 

[Silence]

Put her in the hospital and force her to give birth. Yep, this is how I see the real agenda of the religious right.

btw, if the mother's suicidal tendencies are real she's pretty much going to self abort, don't you think? Two lives down the toilet instead of one. How Christian.

I guess I just don't get how giving birth will make one MORE suicidal but aborting wouldn't?!

If you're that far along in your pregnancy you still have to "give birth" to the baby or fetus or whatever you choose to call it. They don't magically disolve and go away. The cervix must be dialated and the child delivered or a C-section performed to remove the body.

If the child is viable and is not presenting serious/fatal medical conditions of it's own then every step should be taken to save the child AND the mother whenever possible.

 

[random3434]

I guess I just don't get how giving birth will make one MORE suicidal but aborting wouldn't?!

If you're that far along in your pregnancy you still have to "give birth" to the baby or fetus or whatever you choose to call it. They don't magically disolve and go away. The cervix must be dialated and the child delivered or a C-section performed to remove the body.

If the child is viable and is not presenting serious/fatal medical conditions of it's own then every step should be taken to save the child AND the mother whenever possible.

Why wouldn't the woman who didn't want the baby, but if "taken out of her" would still have a chance of life, give it up for adoption, instead of having it killed?

There are thousands of families out there who would adopt those babies.....

 

[Ravi]

Please. Women don't suddenly decide at the last minute to abort unless there is something seriously wrong with the baby...like it doesn't have a head or something. And doctors aren't a bunch of murderers looking for their next victim to kill. What is wrong with you people that you can even insinuate that women and/or doctors are out there willfully slaughtering full term babies?

IF that is the case then bring charges against them. But quit pretending it is a common occurrence. It is insulting to both women and doctors.

 

[Silence]

Please. Women don't suddenly decide at the last minute to abort unless there is something seriously wrong with the baby...like it doesn't have a head or something. And doctors aren't a bunch of murderers looking for their next victim to kill. What is wrong with you people that you can even insinuate that women and/or doctors are out there willfully slaughtering full term babies?

IF that is the case then bring charges against them. But quit pretending it is a common occurrence. It is insulting to both women and doctors.

funny ravi, I said almost the same exact thing a few posts up

realistically speaking how often does that happen though Gem? How many women carry a baby for eight plus months and then suddenly decide they've changed their mind and no longer want the baby? most late term abortions are performed due to the baby having a fatal malformation and at that point in the pregnancy I believe 99% of women would choose to die themselves rather than abort their baby.

I 100% agree with you that there are people who are acting as if women and doctors are so callous and vicious as to randomly decide to abort for no other reason than "she changed her mind" It's total BULLSHIT!

At 8 1/2 months most women have decorated the nursery, had their baby shower, have certainly been showing, family and friends know they are pregnant, etc. Do you think they would just say to all those people "**** this, I've changed my mind I don't want this baby afterall".....hell no!

Women who are forced, through circumstance, to undergo late term abortions do so, I'm sure, only after all other medical assistance has failed them and their child and no alternative exists.

 

[Ravi]

funny ravi, I said almost the same exact thing a few posts up



I 100% agree with you that there are people who are acting as if women and doctors are so callous and vicious as to randomly decide to abort for no other reason than "she changed her mind" It's total BULLSHIT!

At 8 1/2 months most women have decorated the nursery, had their baby shower, have certainly been showing, family and friends know they are pregnant, etc. Do you think they would just say to all those people "**** this, I've changed my mind I don't want this baby afterall".....hell no!

Women who are forced, through circumstance, to undergo late term abortions do so, I'm sure, only after all other medical assistance has failed them and their child and no alternative exists.

I confess, I haven't read all the posts. And I agree with what you've said here. It really bothers me that people, especially other women, actually try to make the case that women in general are a bunch of evil creatures.

 

[random3434]

funny ravi, I said almost the same exact thing a few posts up



I 100% agree with you that there are people who are acting as if women and doctors are so callous and vicious as to randomly decide to abort for no other reason than "she changed her mind" It's total BULLSHIT!

At 8 1/2 months most women have decorated the nursery, had their baby shower, have certainly been showing, family and friends know they are pregnant, etc. Do you think they would just say to all those people "**** this, I've changed my mind I don't want this baby afterall".....hell no!

Women who are forced, through circumstance, to undergo late term abortions do so, I'm sure, only after all other medical assistance has failed them and their child and no alternative exists.

I would hope that's the only reason. I don't know, a human life is a precious thing, I know a girl who had an abortion at 6 months, she had to go to Kentucky to get it done. She didn't do it to save her life, she did it because she didn't want to be pregnant anymore......................

 

[Agnapostate]

Well, I'd say that I've given up any possibility of being responded to.

Her beliefs are not contradictory because she maintains a consistent stance against the tyrannical application of hierarchical tyranny. In the former case, the state takes on a more benevolent stance, and excessively hierarchical parental authority is the tyranny being resisted. In the latter case, the excessively widespread state authority is the tyranny being resisted. But she maintains a consistent opposition to hierarchical authority and tyranny.

There are certain sociobiological realities underlying forms of sexual contact in all societies of course, and essentially every culture has some standard of sexual morality. Indeed, even chimpanzees appear to have some sexual standard or etiquette. But to a very great extent, the "intimate content" bit is a social construct imposed by Christianity and Islam. There are numerous ethnological studies of smaller cultures, now dominated by the two largest religions in the world, in which such a stringent standard and view of sexual contact as "intimate" did not exist. If I recall correctly, the Cherokee mated freely, for instance. Margaret Mead observed that the early Samoans placed few sexual taboos on young adolescents, and that sexual contact was largely viewed as casual, and was both common and healthy among many. She did go a bit overboard in attempting to apply her observations to sexual standards of Western society, though.

Now, I have not directly expressed an opinion on this issue yet. I shall do so now.

I shall first say, that although the representative of Planned Parenthood displayed a willingness to violate the law, it is my belief that she is in accordance with a higher ethical standard in being willing to provide aid to a young woman who happened to be under the age of majority. The labels of "girl" and "child" are incorrect, as pregnant females are clearly reproductive, and are thus young women.

Of course, there is a wider issue than biological maturity, that being the mental maturity of minors, which is often described as being separate from mere biological maturity and severely lacking and not equivalent to that of a legal adult. My contention is that, contrary to popular belief, the commonly accepted claim that adolescents are incapable of exercising rational judgment abilities is not an indisputably correct one. Supporters of this position frequently cite studies conducted with the use of magnetic resonance imaging or functional magnetic resonance imaging that illustrate that the teenage brain is “underdeveloped,” and that adolescents are thus often incapable of making rational or well informed decisions about significant issues. Yet, as Dr. Robert Epstein, former editor of Psychology Today, notes in an article published in Scientific American Mind, thought there is some semblance of a correlation between adolescence and brain development illustrated in these scans, there is no evidence of causation by a natural stage of adolescence. His chief counter-argument references the fact that adolescents have been severely infantilized in modern society, in contrast to the important adult role they played in past times, and it may be this factor that has led to the lack of brain development so commonly assumed to be a natural byproduct of adolescence. As such, it would not be intellectually honest to declare the infallibility of these scans just yet.

There are several studies that have been conducted on the basis of measuring the actual competency of adolescents to make informed decisions, as opposed to highly speculative guesswork based on snapshots of the brain.

An important one is that of Lois A. Weithorn and Susan B. Campbell, which tested four groups of people, aged 9, 14, 18, and 21. The study, entitled The Competency of Children and Adolescents to Make Informed Treatment Decisions, came to the conclusion that 14 year olds were capable of making medical decisions with a level of competence equivalent to that of legal adults. As partially summarized by Weithorn and Campbell:

"In general, minors aged 14 were found to demonstrate a level of competency equivalent to that of adults, according to four standards of competency (evidence of choice, reasonable outcome, rational reasons, and understanding), and for four hypothetical dilemmas (diabetes, epilepsy, depression and enuresis.)…The findings of this research do not lend support to policies which deny adolescents the right of self-determination in treatment situations on the basis of a presumption of incapacity to provide informed consent. The ages of eighteen or twenty-one as the “cutoffs” below which individuals are presumed to be incompetent to make determinations about their own welfare do not reflect the psychological capacities of most adolescents."

The earlier study of researchers Grisso and Vierling, Minors’ Consent to Treatment: A Developmental Perspective, came to a similar conclusion, the authors stating that “existing evidence provides no legal assumption that minors aged 15 years and above cannot provide competent consent.”

Researchers Bruce Ambuel and Julian Rappaport discovered similar results in a study intended to specifically focus on this topic, entitled Developmental trends in adolescents' psychological and legal competence to consent to abortion. The study confirmed the fact that the rational judgment and decision making capacities of adolescents, (particularly those at or beyond mid-adolescence), were often on par with those of adults.

In a wide-ranging review of the developmental literature on adolescents’ abilities to make rational decisions about medical treatment, researchers Kuther and Posada confirmed that, “the literature in developmental psychology has shown that adolescents are able to make meaningful decisions and advocates for youth have argued that researchers must respect the autonomy rights of children and adolescents,” thus confirming the legitimacy and validity of the previous studies to a great degree.

I must also express my observation regarding the logical invalidity of their argument that parents should be notified of a minor’s abortion because they would be legally and financially liable for whatever negative outcomes might occur. This may indeed serve as a compelling argument if we accepted adolescents’ legal and financial dependence on their parents as a natural condition, but accepting that assertion without a challenge is moral and intellectual dishonesty at its highest point. The oft-repeated adage, “As long as you live under my roof, you follow my rules,” is perhaps the most obvious manifestation of this belief. Yet, through the combination of compulsory schooling and child labor laws, adolescents are forced into a state of financial dependence on their parents.

It is important to note that scarcely a century ago, adolescents were occupied with traditional forms of employment and adult responsibilities, while they are now consigned to schools for much of the day, courtesy of a state mandate. The previous arrangement, which likely provided more practical forms of education than sitting in a stuffy classroom for hour on end ever could, is a beneficial one, and could likely be safely and humanely readopted. The brutal conditions of child labor that initially necessitated laws to prevent it have largely disappeared in developed countries as a result of expansive labor reforms. Yet, their legacy is perpetuated as laws intended to keep 6 year olds out of sweatshops keep 16 year olds out of air conditioned offices.

The issue of forced financial dependence is altogether different from a case of natural dependence. An analogy to describe the former might be the case of a man who locks his son inside the house and then comes home to complain that he did not go outside all day. Obviously, this claim would rightly be considered absurd and ludicrous, and the same standard should be applied to the issue of minors’ financial dependence on their parents as long as it is a forced condition.

 

[Silence]

I would hope that's the only reason. I don't know, a human life is a precious thing, I know a girl who had an abortion at 6 months, she had to go to Kentucky to get it done. She didn't do it to save her life, she did it because she didn't want to be pregnant anymore......................

and that is disgusting and shouldn't be allowed IMO....

 

[Anguille]

It just amazes me how controlling some people try to be. And how judgmental they think they are entitled to be when clearly they've never even been in the situations of some people who who've had abortions.

Women should just be concerned with what is right or wrong for their own bodies and butt out of the lives of others. Trying to get laws passed to prevent another woman from doing what she believes is right just because it doesn't jive with what you yourself would do displays a willingness to abuse women.

 

[Anguille]

I would hope that's the only reason. I don't know, a human life is a precious thing, I know a girl who had an abortion at 6 months, she had to go to Kentucky to get it done. She didn't do it to save her life, she did it because she didn't want to be pregnant anymore......................

Ummm, isn't that why anyone who has an abortion has one? So as not to be pregnant anymore?

You don't state her reasons, perhaps she had become bankrupt and homeless, had developed diabetes, did not want to bring a child into the world only to have to put it up for adoption. She may not even have known she was pregnant till then. Some women continue to have periods all the way through pregnancy and never get morning sickness or other things that clue them in that they are pregnant till they start to show. Those are off the top of my head, reasons that, I ,personally would have an abortion. They are not reasons why I would expect anyone else to have an abortion and i'm sure there are reasons others chose abortion for which I would not.
My point is, is it's really no one's business why another woman has an abortion. This thread is just getting super catty, IMO.