Anti abortion video authors used stillborn (not aborted) baby in video

[Chingylol]

Hmmm...

"On Friday, the Center for Medical Progress (CMP), the antiabortion activist group that has been releasing undercover videos targeting Planned Parenthood, the practice of fetal tissue donation, and later-term abortion, has admitted that images shown its most recent video of a fetus of approximately 19 weeks gestational age was not taken at a Planned Parenthood affiliate clinic, as heavily implied in the video.

The Center for Medical Progress posted a new link on its video’s YouTube page late Thursday, adding that one of the images was actually a baby named Walter Fretz, born prematurely at 19 weeks.

In the video, Holly O’Donnell, a former employee of StemExpress, a middleman company that provides fetal tissue — among their forms of donated tissue — to biomedical researchers, discussed a fetus she sees and works with following an abortion done at almost 20 weeks of gestational age. O’Donnell describes seeing the fetus move in a voiceover that overlies video footage of a post-abortion fetus that seems to move. She then describes the process by which she was instructed to dissect the fetus to remove its heart for use in medical research.

O’Donnell was employed by StemExpress for just 34 days of work as a contract employee, working part-time over the period from December of 2012 to April of 2013. Upon leaving the company in April 2013, O’Donnell sent StemExpress a letter of resignation which detailed that her only reason for leaving was because she was not working as many hours as a procurement technician for the company as she had hoped and that she was sorry to have to leave the organization and the position."

https://www.yahoo.com/health/underco...289829487.html

[Orbitus]

Hmmm...



https://www.yahoo.com/health/underco...289829487.html

Not really surprising that she faked the entire thing. That is what they do to get the shock value out of it and then try to get something defunded that doesn't need to be. This is why we call these people gullible and low information voters.

[Hooked]

Hmmm...



https://www.yahoo.com/health/underco...289829487.html

History will remember these people as demons.

[Orbitus]

History will remember these people as demons.

Yeah, invoke religious nutbaggery, that will sway people to your side. And yes, the Center for Medical Progress are a bunch of demons for bottom-feeding on low information voters like you.

[Symphonic]

Hmmm...



https://www.yahoo.com/health/underco...289829487.html

It was obvious to anyone who watched the video that it was a completely different baby than the one that she talked about cutting up from its chin to get the brain out. First of all, she's telling a story, and she was not involved in the video at that point, so how would they have even gotten footage of that event? It's naive to think they could have. So of course it was a different baby, it was only there to show what a baby at that gestation looks like. It was not the actual baby that was sliced up.

[Lenonis]

What? A propaganda fueled hit piece isn't 100% truthful? Shocking.

I totally get why people are anti-abortion.

I don't get why the anti-abortion folks are so gullible when it comes to Planned Parenthood.

Judging from what I've seen there are no small number of people who honestly and truly believe that Planned Parenthood is a government funded for-profit business that makes millions forcing unwilling women into having abortions so they could sell baby parts on the black market for millions.

[Symphonic]

What? A propaganda fueled hit piece isn't 100% truthful? Shocking.

I think the mistake is that those watching, especially those looking to find flaws in everything being said in the videos, are grasping for anything they can. This is just the latest thing that they've decided makes the company making the videos seem less honest. Anyone who watches it can tell that they're talking about a 19 week old baby. They cut to a baby that is 19 weeks old, so you can get a reference for what a baby at that gestation looks like. Not because they are telling you that is the exact baby that the story is about.

[buck008]

What? A propaganda fueled hit piece isn't 100% truthful? Shocking.

I totally get why people are anti-abortion.

I don't get why the anti-abortion folks are so gullible when it comes to Planned Parenthood.

Judging from what I've seen there are no small number of people who honestly and truly believe that Planned Parenthood is a government funded for-profit business that makes millions forcing unwilling women into having abortions so they could sell baby parts on the black market for millions.

The sad thing is that even though 97% (literally) of what they do is not related to abortions and is related to things like cancer screenings and other legitimate health issues, one single abortion would be enough to invalidate the entire organization for these people.

[Jakalib]

Meanspirited things you should not do.

[Symphonic]

The sad thing is that even though 97% (literally) of what they do is not related to abortions and is related to things like cancer screenings and other legitimate health issues, one single abortion would be enough to invalidate the entire organization for these people.

eh, statistics suit those who make them. Here is a statistic from Democrats for Life:



Anyway, the silly thing about the "3% of our services are abortions" statistics equates 1 abortion to 1 pregnancy test, pap smear, or giving a condom away. Would you really call the service of one condom out the same as performing an abortion? It's silly.

[buck008]

eh, statistics suit those who make them. Here is a statistic from Democrats for Life:



Anyway, the silly thing about the "3% of our services are abortions" statistics equates 1 abortion to 1 pregnancy test, pap smear, or giving a condom away. Would you really call the service of one condom out the same as performing an abortion? It's silly.

You know they do more than those things, right? Planned Parenthood can and does employ actual doctors that do everything from a woman's yearly checkup to a variety of cancer screenings. They provide these services at a reduced rate to allow women who otherwise might not be able to afford these services to have access to them. That's what the 97% stat reflects. The overwhelming majority of the time, PP is not providing abortions.

Also, most women do not use PP for prenatal care. Most women can qualify for state healthcare when pregnant that allows them to see a OB/GYN or use the health department. That chart is flawed at its premise.

[Lenonis]

It's silly.

Kind of. Except it's just as silly as trying to paint PP as an abortion factory.

There are a myriad of health services and the abortion piece is a very very small amount of what they offer. In fact in some cases efforts to close PP have faltered because people have realized that it would leave many women, especially low income, with no reasonable means to get non-abortion related healthcare.

[Smauldy]

If you are anti abortion and pro life, it's time to open that wallet and do your part to support unwanted children with food, supplies and shelter. After all, being pro life means that you care about the children after they are born too, right? Right?

[Jakalib]

Hates african americans and single mothers being a drain on society....
hates abortions is pro death penalty.

[Symphonic]

If you are anti abortion and pro life, it's time to open that wallet and do your part to support unwanted children with food, supplies and shelter. After all, being pro life means that you care about the children after they are born too, right? Right?

whereas if you're pro-abortion and want to kill anyone who is a burden to society, you should be calling for the death of all prison inmates. After all, being pro-abortion means that you don't care about people that are a burden on society. Right?

Thanks for the laugh. My mom was adopted, 2 of my nephews were adopted out to another family (One was almost 3 and the other was almost 2). both my aunt and uncle were adopted. I absolutely know the benefits of adoption. Do you?

[Endus]

whereas if you're pro-abortion and want to kill anyone who is a burden to society, you should be calling for the death of all prison inmates. After all, being pro-abortion means that you don't care about people that are a burden on society. Right?

Nobody's pro-abortion. They're pro-choice. They want women to have the option of abortion; they aren't advocating that women should all have abortions. All you're doing here is attacking a ridiculous and defamatory straw man.

It has nothing to do with whether the potential child might have been a "burden on society". That's pure fantasy on your part.

[Symphonic]

Nobody's pro-abortion. They're pro-choice. They want women to have the option of abortion; they aren't advocating that women should all have abortions. All you're doing here is attacking a ridiculous and defamatory straw man.

Sorry, I get fed up with people who equate pro-life to pro-birthers who don't care about the mother and don't care about babies after they're born. I'll try to tone it down haha.

[Jakalib]

I could respect people who had a consistent position on the value of life
based on their spiritistic superstitions.

I can't respect people founding their opinion based
on tradition and stupid inconclusive arguments about legal personhood.

[Endus]

Sorry, I get fed up with people who equate pro-life to pro-birthers who don't care about the mother and don't care about babies after they're born. I'll try to tone it down haha.

Well, there's a fair point to make. There's a heavy correlation between people who are pro-life, and people who oppose welfare, maternity leave, and so forth. It's dishonest to say you care about human life when you oppose programs that are intended to support the poor and keep them out of hardship. Unless your purpose is to deliberately foster human suffering, you're being a hypocrite.

That's why, for so many, it becomes clear that their pro-life stance is less about having more healthy, happy babies, and more about denying women basic human rights.

And just to be clear; I'm aware there are some pro-lifers who actually follow through on their position's implications, and are totally on-board with strong support networks and the like. I'm talking about that significant overlap between pro-lifers and those who are against such support programs.


Edit: And just to be a bit more topic-focused, the stillborn image is pretty obviously dishonest. Not much different than that PETA ad with the bloody "shorn" lamb, when shearing sheep and lambs is in no way harmful to the animal and in fact generally beneficial.

[Deleted]

This whole argument is why identity politics is awful.

You can simultaneously be pro-choice AND disagree with some of the things that planned parenthood have been shown to be involved in. You can be pro-choice AND be abhorred by Kermit Gosnell.

Being in favour of policy X while ALSO being opposed to some actions of organisation Y which is also in favour of policy X is not contradictory at all.

Legal, accessible, safe abortion is the least-worst way to deal with unplanned and unwanted pregnancy, AND some of the shit that PP have been pulling is awful. This is my position, and it is not in any way contradictory.