For Sale: Baby parts

[jellowrestling]

A useful idiot is really a lazy person who allows others to do their thinking for them. In my opinion. And please show me where I'm wrong, where I obfuscate, where I am not coherent, and where I ramble.

Our apparently Lenin loving friend (I had no idea that was a term from Lenin till you pointed it out, mayhem), Red Oak, called me a useful idiot after calling me an idiot. I'm not lazy nor do I allow others to think for me. So, I guess I'm not a useful idiot after all. Glad that's settled.

Otherwise I couldn't agree more with what you have said. This type of group want to inflame and incite more than they want to share/spread truth --- anyone remember Flip Benhem (sp?)???? Before swallowing their bait it is only responsible to be sure it's all true. Snopes is one of my favorite go to sites for fact checking. You are right on about that.

No sane person would support dismemberment and selling of human parts but what is the true story? That's what we should all be interested in knowing.

A: It wasn't mayhem who pointed out the Lenin attribution. That was me, Jellowrestling.
B: Snopes is basically honest, but they do tend to put a liberal spin on things. I experienced that first-hand in my correspondence with them about Willie Horton. Last time I checked, they had removed any mention of Willie Horton. But that's another whole discussion.
C: No sane person would support the dismemberment of the healthy babies of healthy women. But that happens more than a million times a year, and Planned Parenthood is right in the thick of it.

[jellowrestling]

Ann, waterhead trolls for sport.

Yeah, I'm coming around. Either all YL's have similar rambling patterns, or this is Waterhead.

[millergrovesue]

A: It wasn't mayhem who pointed out the Lenin attribution. That was me, Jellowrestling.
B: Snopes is basically honest, but they do tend to put a liberal spin on things. I experienced that first-hand in my correspondence with them about Willie Horton. Last time I checked, they had removed any mention of Willie Horton. But that's another whole discussion.
C: No sane person would support the dismemberment of the healthy babies of healthy women. But that happens more than a million times a year, and Planned Parenthood is right in the thick of it.

A. Okay, I stand corrected. So I guess Red Oak is calling you a liar and not mayhem.

B. No comment here.

C. The problem is that what PP does is legal. I hate it but, again, believe it is an issue of morality...........or lack thereof.

[Castle Doctrine]

A. Okay, I stand corrected. So I guess Red Oak is calling you a liar and not mayhem.

B. No comment here.

C. The problem is that what PP does is legal. I hate it but, again, believe it is an issue of morality...........or lack thereof.[/quote]

About C. I want you to understand this clearly. PPA does not SELL the fetal remains. The woman may elect to donate (and is probably solicited to) and the provider will facilitate that. It is long standing medical practice to compensate the facilitator for the cost of harvesting, storage, and transportation of the DONATED materials. Check with some other people with medical backgrounds. What I am telling you is true. They are not SELLING "baby parts".

When you say you hate it...do you mean you would hate it is true or are you generally expressing a distaste for abortion? As for abortion, yes, it is strictly a moral issue...a personal moral issue. From at least one perspective, I would think the donations are a better use for the tissue than as fuel for an incinerator. But, I know I am exceedingly cold on this issue. My emotions are entirely different. I am just careful to not let my heart override my intellect.

[crackertoes]

But, I know I am exceedingly cold on this issue. My emotions are entirely different. I am just careful to not let my heart override my intellect.

Cold is hardly the word I would use.

[Castle Doctrine]

But, I know I am exceedingly cold on this issue. My emotions are entirely different. I am just careful to not let my heart override my intellect.

Cold is hardly the word I would use.

Yeah, practical or realistic would probably have been a better word choice. You are very clearly letting your emotions over ride your intellect.

No, on second thought, cold is right...or perhaps callous, if you will. I have no emotional connection to this beyond clarifying the facts and rebutting a slanderous propaganda piece. Reports that cite facts and then misrepresent what they mean are a special issue with me. And there is no shortage of them...this one is just so bad! Anyone that believes this story is a lot closer to being a "useful idiot" than I have ever been, they are being manipulated by deceit and are willing accomplices to their deception. This is nothing but a con job...pure and simple.

[crackertoes]

But, I know I am exceedingly cold on this issue. My emotions are entirely different. I am just careful to not let my heart override my intellect.

Cold is hardly the word I would use.

Yeah, practical or realistic would probably have been a better word choice. You are very clearly letting your emotions over ride your intellect.

No, on second thought, cold is right...or perhaps callous, if you will. I have no emotional connection to this beyond clarifying the facts and rebutting a slanderous propaganda piece. Reports that cite facts and then misrepresent what they mean are a special issue with me. And there is no shortage of them...this one is just so bad! Anyone that believes this story is a lot closer to being a "useful idiot" than I have ever been, they are being manipulated by deceit and are willing accomplices to their deception. This is nothing but a con job...pure and simple.

The fact is that PPA is harvesting aborted organs. That's wholly undisputed. And just because it's legal doesn't mean it should be done. Restraint is the better part of valor and the hallmark of a civilized society.

[Castle Doctrine]

Cold is hardly the word I would use.[/quote]

Yeah, practical or realistic would probably have been a better word choice. You are very clearly letting your emotions over ride your intellect.

No, on second thought, cold is right...or perhaps callous, if you will. I have no emotional connection to this beyond clarifying the facts and rebutting a slanderous propaganda piece. Reports that cite facts and then misrepresent what they mean are a special issue with me. And there is no shortage of them...this one is just so bad! Anyone that believes this story is a lot closer to being a "useful idiot" than I have ever been, they are being manipulated by deceit and are willing accomplices to their deception. This is nothing but a con job...pure and simple.[/quote]

The fact is that PPA is harvesting aborted organs. That's wholly undisputed. And just because it's legal doesn't mean it should be done. Restraint is the better part of valor and the hallmark of a civilized society.[/quote]

You do understand that the WOMAN makes the decision to DONATE the tissue, right? PPA isn't "harvesting" anything, especially organs. Your "wholly undisputed" fact isn't a fact...it is just a lie you like. They are securing, storing and transporting the tissue to the end user who offsets the cost involved to PPA...in accordance with the wishes of the woman involved. I have two daughters. If either was contemplating an abortion I would encourage them to donate the tissue. It is only consistent...I'm a registered organ donor and have instructed my family to donate my remains to science.

DISCRETION is the better part of valor, crackertoes. And I have always heard that TOLERANCE was the defining characteristic of a civilized society. I suppose it depends on what you call civilized...or maybe society.

[crackertoes]

There are many components to valor, restraint being one of them, "castle doctrine." And indeed, a certain amount of tolerance exists in a civilized society (look up the definitions if they're not familiar). In your society, you would offer encouragement as pertains to human dismemberment to your daughters with regards to an abortion. In my society, I would encourage donating the entire baby, after birth, to someone fully capable of the emotion of love and the comforts of a home where being adopted is well-tolerated.

[Castle Doctrine]

There are many components to valor, restraint being one of them, "castle doctrine." And indeed, a certain amount of tolerance exists in a civilized society (look up the definitions if they're not familiar). In your society, you would offer encouragement as pertains to human dismemberment to your daughters with regards to an abortion. In my society, I would encourage donating the entire baby, after birth, to someone fully capable of the emotion of love and the comforts of a home where being adopted is well-tolerated.

I have a pretty comprehensive education and I am a compulsive reader. I am familiar with the concepts of restraint and tolerance. I wish the same could be said of the Right. Anyway, I have no need to review the definitions...but thank you for the kind suggestion. In my society, both the encouragement to donate fetal tissue and the encouragement to seek adoption would be available to the woman involved. She would be free to act as her conscience dictated. You would not be able to compel her to decide as YOUR conscience dictates.

With only your option, women who DO NOT have any desire to be pregnant or carry to term would not have that option. Try to think about this rationally. The woman has decided to terminate. Whatever you think about that clump of cells it is never going to be born. This child is not going to be born, but it can make a contribution to society if the mother donates the tissue. This is the only opportunity this child will ever be able to make but it could be a very important one...and you would prevent that because it offends your sensibilities. How would you characterize that position with regard to "cold".

I can see why you take such a dim view of tolerance...it isn't a trait the Right has much of or any use for. But, why on Earth would you think restraint was in any way related to valor?

[crackertoes]

"castle doctrine", you make many assumptions about people you do not know. Left, right, liberal, conservative, white, black, purple-people-eater or whatever... assuming comes down to that very basic, very childish mantra about the word assume as it pertains to people of which I'm sure you're well aware so we can move on from that point now.

You do not have to see anything any other way than your own which you've made quite obvious that you're not willing to, so there's really no point in discussing it, or attempting to discuss it, any further. So let's just agree that on this particular issue we disagree.

[Castle Doctrine]

"castle doctrine", you make many assumptions about people you do not know. Left, right, liberal, conservative, white, black, purple-people-eater or whatever... assuming comes down to that very basic, very childish mantra about the word assume as it pertains to people of which I'm sure you're well aware so we can move on from that point now.

You do not have to see anything any other way than your own which you've made quite obvious that you're not willing to, so there's really no point in discussing it, or attempting to discuss it, any further. So let's just agree that on this particular issue we disagree.

I'm not entirely sure why you felt compelled to lecture me on assumptions. I have trouble believing you're pro-choice but I could be wrong. You have been talking about the tissue donation and not the abortion. If so I apologize; but, would argue it is a simple enough mistake to make. Anyway, so I now understand you are simply opposed to the process of tissue donation. You feel it is something that should never be done? I can almost understand that position. But, I don't see where it compels you to accept a phony story like this as gospel. That is a thing I don't get about people, acceptance that will brook no challenge. I'm almost always a skeptic.

I find it curious that you say I am not willing to see any other way than my own. I mean, why single me out, virtually every voice here refuses to even acknowledge there is any other way to see things than their own. And, I condemn no one for disagreeing with me. A lot of people here equate disagreement with being EVIL. If I don't see things their way I am the ENEMY...or worse.

There is every reason to be discussing this. I can't see any other view than my own unless someone articulates a better one. I am particularly interested in the things people like you have to say. I see you as reasonable and intelligent, very civil and well-spoken. In reflection I was probably a bit harsh in my last post. I really do regret that now. I hope you will believe that and accept my apology. But, back to my point. You are exactly the sort of person I want to understand. Our views are so very different. I want to understand yours and see why we have such diverse views on these issues. I may never agree with you but if we understand our differences we can at least discuss them civilly. I hate the idea that I am viewed as evil or an enemy for sincerely disagreeing with someone. Understanding can defuse that effect.

If you don't want to discuss this topic further I won't bother you further. But, I will continue to engage in this conversation as I feel I have something to say...I just won't bother you. Fair enough? I really have no interest in getting sideways with you. I don't have any issues with you. You have never been rude to me. I just want to understand your position and how you reached it. I have plenty of folks here who don't approve of me. I really don't need another.

Have a good weekend.

[millergrovesue]

Because lecturing is what she seems to do these days. I remember when Crackertoes was a warm humorous sympathetic person. I considered her a friend. Don't know what has happened to change her attitude but I find it very sad.

[planosteve]

If anyone comes across a little finger, right hand that is for sale, let me know. I'm in the market.

[jellowrestling]

Because lecturing is what she seems to do these days. I remember when Crackertoes was a warm humorous sympathetic person. I considered her a friend. Don't know what has happened to change her attitude but I find it very sad.

Perhaps she's not the one who has changed?

[jellowrestling]

"castle doctrine", you make many assumptions about people you do not know. Left, right, liberal, conservative, white, black, purple-people-eater or whatever... assuming comes down to that very basic, very childish mantra about the word assume as it pertains to people of which I'm sure you're well aware so we can move on from that point now.

You do not have to see anything any other way than your own which you've made quite obvious that you're not willing to, so there's really no point in discussing it, or attempting to discuss it, any further. So let's just agree that on this particular issue we disagree.

I find it curious that you say I am not willing to see any other way than my own. I mean, why single me out, virtually every voice here refuses to even acknowledge there is any other way to see things than their own. And, I condemn no one for disagreeing with me. A lot of people here equate disagreement with being EVIL. If I don't see things their way I am the ENEMY...or worse.

Killing healthy babies and harvesting them for parts is evil. Not much to discuss from there. The rest is just details.

[ann jusko]

Crackertoes is one of the most intelligent, educated, accomplished people I know. How dare you Castle Docrine! Her education, life experiences, intuition, moral fiber, even- handedness and business sense are just a few of her qualities that " others" lack. She doesn't put up with nonsense or pompousness. And this is from someone who has known her for years (but not as long as Jello ). Sue, she is still that person, but not when insulted. I miss her being in Dallas. It's Ft. Worth's gain though.

[Castle Doctrine]

"castle doctrine", you make many assumptions about people you do not know. Left, right, liberal, conservative, white, black, purple-people-eater or whatever... assuming comes down to that very basic, very childish mantra about the word assume as it pertains to people of which I'm sure you're well aware so we can move on from that point now.

You do not have to see anything any other way than your own which you've made quite obvious that you're not willing to, so there's really no point in discussing it, or attempting to discuss it, any further. So let's just agree that on this particular issue we disagree.

I find it curious that you say I am not willing to see any other way than my own. I mean, why single me out, virtually every voice here refuses to even acknowledge there is any other way to see things than their own. And, I condemn no one for disagreeing with me. A lot of people here equate disagreement with being EVIL. If I don't see things their way I am the ENEMY...or worse.

Killing healthy babies and harvesting them for parts is evil. Not much to discuss from there. The rest is just details.

Yep, not much to discuss. Killing healthy babies and harvesting their organs WOULD be evil...if it were happening. Those details that constitute the rest of the story mostly consist of the FACT that it IS NOT happening.

Is there something about that you don't understand or is it just that you don't like the fact it isn't really happening.

[jellowrestling]

Castle Doctrine, I'll tell you what I don't like: big-mouth trolls.

This is a little community of friends who like discussing things. I can't speak for everybody, but I really don't care how smart or clever you think you are. Your telling us/me over and over again that your logic and POV are air-tight, solid and in a lockbox doesn't impress me (and from what I can tell, most of the people on the board). Demanding that others accept your premise and argument as a whole piece is incredibly arrogant.

As for the killing babies and harvesting parts: yes, abortion is the killing of babies. You can obfuscate and pretend you don't know what I'm talking about, but that's it in a nutshell. And the director of PP is talking about harvesting baby parts. Again, I am relatively certain that you are at least intelligent enough to understand GFB's point on that. In any case, you don't have to constantly be a jerk about it.

[Castle Doctrine]

Castle Doctrine, I'll tell you what I don't like: big-mouth trolls.

This is a little community of friends who like discussing things. I can't speak for everybody, but I really don't care how smart or clever you think you are. Your telling us/me over and over again that your logic and POV are air-tight, solid and in a lockbox doesn't impress me (and from what I can tell, most of the people on the board). Demanding that others accept your premise and argument as a whole piece is incredibly arrogant.

As for the killing babies and harvesting parts: yes, abortion is the killing of babies. You can obfuscate and pretend you don't know what I'm talking about, but that's it in a nutshell. And the director of PP is talking about harvesting baby parts. Again, I am relatively certain that you are at least intelligent enough to understand GFB's point on that. In any case, you don't have to constantly be a jerk about it.

Has long as you people keep insisting that POV is "air-tight, solid and in a lockbox" I am going to continue to dispute that as the urge moves me. And I am not talking about logic or point of view. I am talking about facts. And the fact is the whole story is lie stacked on falsehood stacked on lie...and it is demonstrable. And yes, demanding that others accept your premise and argument as a whole piece is incredibly arrogant...why is that the standard conduct here do you think? What everybody knows to be true usually isn't.

As far the thing about your opinion of what abortion is...well, fine, but you don't have to constantly be a jerk about it...I'm not.

Oh yeah, about the loudmouth troll thing...I don't like GfB either.