Hanging by a Limb

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Tue Jul 21, 2015 5:02 pm

So as I pointed out in another thread, it is amazing how depraved some on the left are. There are now 2 video tapes out showing the heads of Planned Parenthood (or should we call them Planned Organ Sellers):

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... ody-parts/

So as you can see, baby parts prices are being haggled over. Now some like slick will try to diminish what is being said but it is the selling of baby parts, plain and simple...which is illegal. Now I have to ask you, why should the US Govt continue to fund 150 million to this organization when they are making a profit off it? And are any of you disturbed at what amounts to govt. funded illegal activities?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Tue Jul 21, 2015 5:33 pm

woodchip wrote:So as I pointed out in another thread, it is amazing how depraved some on the left are. There are now 2 video tapes out showing the heads of Planned Parenthood (or should we call them Planned Organ Sellers):

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... ody-parts/

So as you can see, baby parts prices are being haggled over. Now some like slick will try to diminish what is being said but it is the selling of baby parts, plain and simple...which is illegal. Now I have to ask you, why should the US Govt continue to fund 150 million to this organization when they are making a profit off it? And are any of you disturbed at what amounts to govt. funded illegal activities?

THIS(the above) IS AN ABSOLUTE LIE!!! No one was selling or discussing body parts. Now, in the hope you are simply misinformed, and not purely mendacious, I'll spell it out. For 30 years, scientists have utilized discarded tissue from abortions in tissue culture. As time has progressed, along with scientific advances, much can be done, especially with nascent, organ-specific embryonic tissue types. Such types are heart, lung and other organ system PRECURSOR cells, not in any way functional organs. The benefit of culturing such tissue, which would otherwise simply be discarded, is IMMENSE. That is what was being discussed. I've seen both tapes, NO ONE is haggling over prices, either. They were discussing whether and how to make the women having the abortions aware of compensation from the research organizations, as such compensation was deemed appropriate by a judge two years back. NONE of the money EVER goes to Planned Parenthood,save compensation for processing for transport(tissue samples are fragile and must be handled and packaged, usually in liquid nitrogen), and, even the weasels(who likely violated the law in making and editing the tapes) who made the tapes couldn't make that claim, when pressed afterwards. So, no, I am not the least disturbed by Planned Parenthood, a great organization, to which I've donated for a decade and a half. No, I have no qualms about government support,as they provide abolutely vital services(was past abortion) in many poor communities, and for students at over 250 Universities. Do I have qualms that people, for sheer political brownie points, are willing to spread lies like you do above, Woody. Damn right I do.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Tue Jul 21, 2015 5:46 pm

from a few pages on the topic on Snopes:
"
The controversy prompted questions about the nature of the Center for Medical Progress, which describes itself as “a group of citizen journalists dedicated to monitoring and reporting on medical ethics and advances.” The organization’s Twitter and Facebook accounts are both just a few months old, and the only videos found on the group’s YouTube page are the two shown above, even though the organization has supposedly been engaged in a three-year long investigation. The group’s web site also initially presented nothing more than standard stem cell research-related articles from mid-2013 onwards, until it suddenly switched to its current “investigative” form.

An individual named David Daleiden has been widely credited as the “leader” of the Center for Medical Progress. While Daleiden’s online footprint is minimal, a 2009 Claremont University article (penned by fellow conservative activist Chuck Johnson) reported:

James O’Keefe is a friend of David Daleiden’s. O’Keefe and Hannah Giles have been going coast to coast documenting instances of ACORN employees willingly giving advice on how to avoid paying taxes and shielding a would be pimp (running for congress) and a prostitutent from the watchful eye of the law. They’ve brought their investigation to New York City, Washington D.C., and Baltimore.
.
O’Keefe came to prominence in 2009 after he produced “egregiously misleading” and “severely edited” videos targeting agencies such as ACORN:

Videotapes secretly recorded and severely edited by O’Keefe seemed to show ACORN employees encouraging a “pimp” (O’Keefe) and his “prostitute,” actually a Florida college student named Hannah Miles, in conversations involving prostitution by underage girls, human trafficking and cheating on taxes. Those videos created a media sensation.

Evidence obtained by [California Attorney General Edmund] Brown tells a somewhat different story, however, as reflected in three videotapes made at ACORN locations in California. One ACORN worker in San Diego called the cops. Another ACORN worker in San Bernardino caught on to the scheme and played along with it, claiming among other things that she had murdered her abusive husband. Her two former husbands are alive and well, the Attorney General’s report noted. At the beginning and end of the Internet videos, O’Keefe was dressed as a 1970s Superfly pimp, but in his actual taped sessions with ACORN workers, he was dressed in a shirt and tie, presented himself as a law student, and said he planned to use the prostitution proceeds to run for Congress. He never claimed he was a pimp.

“The evidence illustrates,” Brown said, “that things are not always as partisan zealots portray them through highly selective editing of reality. Sometimes a fuller truth is found on the cutting room floor.”
.
Read more at http://m.snopes.com/pp-baby-parts-sale/ ... 6QAYIwE.99

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Tue Jul 21, 2015 6:21 pm

Wow slick, you are really struggling with this. So far nothing to disprove the tapes linked.

Vander · Post by **Vander** » Tue Jul 21, 2015 6:30 pm

I have a question, if I go to my private doctor for an abortion, is that doctor forbidden from seeking market prices for the aborted fetus? Or is the price regulated for private business as well?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Tue Jul 21, 2015 8:49 pm

woodchip wrote:Wow slick, you are really struggling with this. So far nothing to disprove the tapes linked.

what do admittedly(by the makers)EDITED tapes prove?
The full, two-hour version(still edited) is available. Proves nothing about any of your claims. Nothing. Take words out of context, even out of time sequence, and you get whatever you wish to hear.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Tue Jul 21, 2015 8:51 pm

Vander wrote:I have a question, if I go to my private doctor for an abortion, is that doctor forbidden from seeking market prices for the aborted fetus? Or is the price regulated for private business as well?

by law, the provider cannot receive any money, except for prepping and shipping if he/she is asked to do so(generally is). The same court decision that decreed that the woman undergoing the procedure CAN be compensated also covered that, I believe.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Jul 22, 2015 6:07 pm

callmeslick wrote:
woodchip wrote:Wow slick, you are really struggling with this. So far nothing to disprove the tapes linked.
what do admittedly(by the makers)EDITED tapes prove?
The full, two-hour version(still edited) is available. Proves nothing about any of your claims. Nothing. Take words out of context, even out of time sequence, and you get whatever you wish to hear.

And you'll link some MSNBC edited vid as gospel. Oh and here is the full version of the second vid:

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Jul 22, 2015 6:16 pm

every expert I've heard has said EVERYTHING they've released is edited. Sorry, zero credibility.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Jul 22, 2015 7:10 pm

callmeslick wrote:every expert I've heard has said EVERYTHING they've released is edited. Sorry, zero credibility.

You'll forgive me but I think you haven't heard any experts.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Thu Jul 23, 2015 9:40 pm

heh. just when I thought this place couldn't get any crazier... it does.

I'm just going to go out on a limb here and say, that the next story we'll hear is planned parenthood is a front for cannibalism.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 6:06 am

I'm sure the videos will be edited soon to show people supposedly discussing the nutritional aspects and tenderness of fetal tissue.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 6:32 am

We are now seeing the classic denial of a sick organization. You can bet if this was a conservative group selling baby body parts, slick would be chortling how disgusting the conservatives are. Faced with it being liberals doing the selling, he can only make snide comments about editing and treat it like a joke. I truly feel sorry for your morality slick

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 6:40 am

woodchip wrote:We are now seeing the classic denial of a sick organization. You can bet if this was a conservative group selling baby body parts

no one is selling body parts though. Fetal tissue is NOT a body part. Early term fetuses, which are the only abortions PP does, do not have formed body parts.

What we're treating like a joke is your hysterical repetition of blatant lies, proven lies and refusal to do your own homework. And, yes, that's funny, because I prefer to view it through that lens rather than just see you as pathetic or sad.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 7:49 am

so, Woody, rather than treat is as a joke, let me TRY and explain again how this stuff works:

when someone donates a tissue sample from an aborted fetus, or from a deceased adult, there CAN be compensation for the donor or the donor's family, as stated by law. That was NOT what was being discussed. However, when one preserves and ships such tissue samples, there are expenses involved, for which the intermediary is compensated by the group receiving the donation. Happens ALL the time. I'll give you an example: When I was setting up the tissue culture facility for the State of Connecticut in the early 80s, I needed to obtain neuroblastoma cells. Those are tissue cells from a specific type of cancer, donated from a victim of such cancer. They are, essentially undeveloped neurons, which can be made, in culture, to develop into functional neurons in vitro. I contacted Columbia University's medical research staff, as I knew they had such cells in their laboratory. They DONATED the tissue samples to us, but I had to arrange for payment of transportation, which is expensive due to the matter of liquid nitrogen shipping and rules around living human tissue transport. No one SOLD me anything. I was not obtaining body parts(brains in this case). No one was harvesting organs for profit. It is all about maintaining cell lines, and tissue types for medical research. Without such research, progress cannot be made in the fields of physiology, cell biology, developmental biology, cancer research or a host of other specialities, all of which benefit mankind as a whole. This process, and their role as intermediary, is ALL that Planned Parenthood was doing, and ALL they EVER do. If you cannot grasp the difference between this process and 'selling body parts', that's on you and your ability to comprehend. That you keep misrepresenting it is why some us have simply stopped trying to explain and just laugh your whole stream of misinformation away. Hope this helps, Woody.....

Foil · Post by **Foil** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 9:44 am

callmeslick wrote:Fetal tissue is NOT a body part.

Again, this (the perspective that tries to make distinctions between a fetus and a human body) is one of the critical issues surrounding the abortion topic.

---------

For the sake of argument, let's say you're correct, that it's just "fetal tissue". At what point does it become a human body? (Please be very specific.)

vision · Post by **vision** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 11:52 am

Who the F U C K cares about dead body parts of people who don't have funerals? Outrage for the sake of outrage? Go take a walk in nature and relax.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 11:57 am

Foil wrote:
callmeslick wrote:Fetal tissue is NOT a body part.
Again, this (the perspective that tries to make distinctions between a fetus and a human body) is one of the critical issues surrounding the abortion topic.

---------

For the sake of argument, let's say you're correct, that it's just "fetal tissue". At what point does it become a human body? (Please be very specific.)

You can feel free to beat that topic to death again if you wish, but I was merely addressing what was a lie when first put forth, and continuation of that lie by Woody in TWO separate threads. The tissue in question consists of clumps of cells(maybe 100) stored on dry ice, to be cultured in petri dishes. They are NOT intact fuctional organs or parts. In other words, prenatal developmental heart tissue is never going to become a beating heart without the maternal body support, a flood of a series of hormones and growth factors and weeks of growth and development. So, thus, no one was 'selling parts' as has been suggested, unless you or others feel that you lose body parts daily as your dermal layer is lost to the outside environment, or when you blow your nose. If so, you do not use the term 'body parts' in a sense anyone in medicine or science would.

Foil · Post by **Foil** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 12:07 pm

callmeslick wrote:The tissue in question consists of clumps of cells(maybe 100) stored on dry ice, to be cultured in petri dishes.

...Where did you get that idea?

Most aborted fetuses are relatively far beyond that point. Heck, at the 100-cell mark (a few days after conception) most mothers don't even know they're pregnant yet.

[ Or are you suggesting that only the tiniest embryos are being sold, and the rest of the fetuses at later stages are not being sold? ]

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 12:18 pm

Foil wrote:
callmeslick wrote:The tissue in question consists of clumps of cells(maybe 100) stored on dry ice, to be cultured in petri dishes.
...Where did you get that idea?

from running a tissue culture lab.

Most aborted fetuses are relatively far beyond that point. Heck, at the 100-cell mark (a few days after conception) most mothers don't even know they're pregnant yet.

I'm not saying the fetus is that small, but the tissue samples being discussed in the PP tapes are. Generally, PP deals in early term abortions, and as you correctly noting, such fetuses tend to be around 1 inch in size, largely undifferentiated tissue with pockets of differentiated cells forming. It is the targeting of those specific pockets that is being discussed, those are the cells of value to research, and in the one tape, the discussion of 'we've gotten good at...." refers to isolation of those pockets without pulling out undifferentiated cells. You see, having the undifferentiated cells in the mix screws up the tissue culture prep process and makes subsequent research results questionable.

Or are you suggesting that only the tiniest embryos are being sold, and the rest of the fetuses at later stages are not being sold? ]

no, see above. They are dissecting, post abortion, the fetuses, before the cells in them die.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 12:22 pm

Foil wrote:For the sake of argument, let's say you're correct, that it's just "fetal tissue". At what point does it become a human body? (Please be very specific.)

That's the issue Foil. There really is no distinction between a just formed embryo and a full term fetus, other than time and growth. All the genetic information is present in an embryo to form a human being, but it takes time for that to fully occur. Most right to lifers believe that a human is formed once conception takes place, so any termination of an unborn fetus or embryo is murder in any strict definition of ending life. Most pro-choicers think that an embryo or early term fetus can't feel pain, so it assuages their guilt that they're essentially killing a baby and that early term abortions are then OK. I know liberals will take issue, but that's basically the way it is. Of course, once that fetus is dead, it IS just a lump of tissue and cells. It can't be put back together, so it might as well be used to save another life.

What really frosts me is religious controlling idiots like Rick Santorum, who thinks even contraception itself should be outlawed. That's taking away ALL control a woman has over her sex life and body. Well guys, it ain't going to happen. We've tasted sexual freedom and you can't take it away now. I can guarantee you going back to that era is going to increase the number of abortions as well, legal or not, because there will always be a number of unwanted pregnancies for some reason or another. People will always make impulsive mistakes when it comes to sex. Good luck controlling THAT! They want to, meaning the religious moralists, but it'll never happen. Preventing pregnancy, and making it easy and accessible in the first place is the best way to stop abortion, because if there is nothing conceived to terminate, the problem has solved itself.

As for abortion, I still firmly believe it's up to both parents, or the women if she's been left by the father, to have the choice to terminate a pregnancy, especially if she's been raped. She's the vessel, the carrier, and control over her body should only be hers and her partner's since he has half stake, unless she is mentally unfit to have a baby and care for it and there is no father around to have a say. You've argued with me before Foil, especially about terminating a fetus even due to rape, which I would do by the way with absolutely no compunction, but that's the way I would feel about being violated and having to be reminded of that violation for the rest my life as long as that child lived. Now personally, I wouldn't abort my fetus if it was just an unplanned "happening" of my own accord.

Then you have the issue of lifelong support, which usually ends up being the mother's responsibility if she's single. Few pro-lifers want to discuss what happens to that baby after the birth. It seems that once a baby is born, they rarely think about what happens to that baby in the hands of a mother that either doesn't want that child, or is incapable of taking care of that child or has a father who is absent or abusive. They are even more resistant to put out social funds to help that baby. This whole issue always gets lost in the scream fest of stopping those heinous abortions. If a newborn baby has to suffer because it was born to a poor or uncaring mother, it seems that everyone does a collective meh, not my problem anymore, she's the mother and needs to "take responsibility". Where's the outrage then, after an unwanted child has been abused or killed? I think that's a worse outcome than abortion.

Life is very cheap in this world because we humans like to kill each other for the most inane or simplistic of reasons. Abortion is not going to change the direction of humanity unless we consider all life as sacred and all murder and killing is outlawed, even war and the death penalty along with abortion. A baby's life should be no more important than the life of an adult. Life is life. It's precious to all who have it. We shouldn't be be deterministic Gods about who gets the right to decide who lives or dies. It's hypocrisy on the highest scale in my book because anytime someone kills for any reason, right or wrong, life becomes a cheap commodity to be snuffed out by those who wish to end it at their own whims or rules.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 12:29 pm

may I add, TC, that far too often, the folks who rail the loudest about abortion are the same folks who don't wish to see a robust Federal government that provides support(yes, freaking tax money type support) to single mothers, children in poverty, education, healthcare or the other stuff required to bring a child to adulthood optimally. So, while a clump of cells is sacrosanct, once the baby is born(that we've forced you to carry to term), all bets are off?

Foil · Post by **Foil** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 12:31 pm

callmeslick wrote:I'm not saying the fetus is that small, but the tissue samples being discussed in the PP tapes are.

...They are dissecting, post abortion, the fetuses, before the cells in them die.

So then, back to your claim that body parts are not being sold:

You're basing that on a distinction between "body parts" and "dissected parts of body parts"?

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 12:33 pm

callmeslick wrote:may I add, TC, that far too often, the folks who rail the loudest about abortion are the same folks who don't wish to see a robust Federal government that provides support(yes, freaking tax money type support) to single mothers, children in poverty, education, healthcare or the other stuff required to bring a child to adulthood optimally. So, while a clump of cells is sacrosanct, once the baby is born(that we've forced you to carry to term), all bets are off?

Personally, I think that's a bigger sin. Antiabortionists like to make sure ALL babies are born, but then turn their backs when support of those babies becomes an social issue.

Foil · Post by **Foil** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 12:47 pm

tunnelcat wrote:Antiabortionists like to make sure ALL babies are born, but then turn their backs when support of those babies becomes an social issue.

Ah, the deflective (and fairly inaccurate, particularly for me) stereotype.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 12:57 pm

Foil wrote:
callmeslick wrote:I'm not saying the fetus is that small, but the tissue samples being discussed in the PP tapes are.

...They are dissecting, post abortion, the fetuses, before the cells in them die.
So then, back to your claim that body parts are not being sold:

You're basing that on a distinction between "body parts" and "dissected parts of body parts"?

(facepalms), until growth, differentiation and sub-differentiation occur, no one can refer to them as parts. They are embryonic tissue blobs, nothing else. I tried to make that plain, that calling them 'parts' infers in reader's minds that they are fully formed arms, legs, organs. They are not. Period.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 12:58 pm

Foil wrote:
tunnelcat wrote:Antiabortionists like to make sure ALL babies are born, but then turn their backs when support of those babies becomes an social issue.
Ah, the deflective (and fairly inaccurate, particularly for me) stereotype.

I'll accept your word, but the generalization within the stereotype is largely accurate. Look around, take an honest appraisal of the loudest voices on the topic.

Foil · Post by **Foil** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 1:06 pm

callmeslick wrote:... such fetuses tend to be around 1 inch in size, largely undifferentiated tissue with pockets of differentiated cells forming...

...They are embryonic tissue blobs, nothing else.

Make up your mind. Which is it?

Are they fetuses of about 1 inch (that's ~8 weeks, where the embryo already has clearly differentiated arms, legs, etc.), or "tissue blobs"?

-----------

Note: I'm not talking about the the videos here. I'm trying to get at one of the crucial issues surrounding abortion, namely the incorrect idea that says aborted fetuses are "just tissue". (It's actually quite easy to find the statistics for abortion at various developmental stages, and most people are surprised at how much development has already happened for even the "average abortion".)

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 1:09 pm

at 8 weeks, you MAY think you see arms,etc, but those arms have no bone structure, no circulatory system, no muscle tissue,nothing except formative cells in a shape you WANT to recognize as 'human'. They are tissue blobs, in short. No dichotomy between my statements.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 1:40 pm

Too much of the counter argument is based in semantics and terminology, tissue and cells vs. organs and parts.

There may be some merit to the counter argument, but it’s hard to find in all of the clutter and noise.

Foil · Post by **Foil** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 1:53 pm

That's exactly my point - it's a continuous developmental progression.

Attempting to create distinctions ("that's not an arm, it's a blob... but this over here is an arm", "that's not a part, it's just tissue", etc.) that don't actually have any real demarcations is a huge part of the problem.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying "no abortions under any circumstances". What I'm saying is that the argument often revolves around these misleading semantics and false dichotomies, creating what I find most disturbing about this topic: The idea that what is being aborted "isn't human".

-----------

[Edit, to illustrate the point:]

Slick, you insist that the form of the appendage at 8 weeks should termed a "blob", and only later called an "arm", correct?

In that case, please let us know at what point (in weeks gestation) that demarcation occurs, and give some medical/scientific basis for the change of definition at that point.

Can you do that?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 2:41 pm

look, my entire thrust in this thread is that the BS about 'selling body parts' is just that: utter BS. If you all wish to revisit the arguments pro and con for abortion, fine, but NO ONE WAS SELLING or advocating selling body parts. Period. Call it 'semantics' if you will, you need a functioning body to have 'body parts' and no one can call a 9 week old fetus a functioning body.

for the record, and this is my last post in the thread unless someone wishes to address the whole claim around Planned Parenthood itself, my position is supportive of the choice of all women, no matter their relative wealth, to include abortion. It is a choice for rich women, no question, no qualifications. My support of that option being available is definitely influenced by the unwillingness of so many to support the very expensive process of raising a child, feeding a child and providing healthcare for a child. Were that process free for everyone, maybe I could understand the rather extreme morality that says, 'no abortions for anyone'. Until it is, I acknowledge that people can get pregnant through poor judgement, rape or incest and that no one should force them to carry through to the next 18 years of child rearing unless the people doing the forcing pay for the support needed.

Foil · Post by **Foil** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 4:07 pm

Okay, back to the original topic (the debate about whether body parts have been sold):

callmeslick wrote:...you need a functioning body to have 'body parts'...

Again, where do you get this? It's certainly not from any standard or medical definition of terminology.

Parts of a body (whether dissected or not, and whether fully functional or not) can certainly be called "body parts". I find it bizarre that you insist that people can't use the term in that sense.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 5:37 pm

Foil wrote:Okay, back to the original topic (the debate about whether body parts have been sold):

callmeslick wrote:...you need a functioning body to have 'body parts'...
Again, where do you get this? It's certainly not from any standard or medical definition of terminology.

yes, it is from common usage in a medical environment. Tissue samples are NOT body parts. EVER.

Parts of a body (whether dissected or not, and whether fully functional or not) can certainly be called "body parts". I find it bizarre that you insist that people can't use the term in that sense.

maybe it's the biologist in me, but I never considered, in all the transactions I participated in with cell culture samples, to be dealing with 'body parts'.
Can we just look at the facts and the law and acknowledge that no one has ever been shown to be 'selling' anything? And, for your further contemplation, do you realize how small a sample these transactions entail? Also, that these transactions entail resuspended cells in a growth medium, not wholesale 'parts' of any substantial nature? I guarantee that you likely couldn't even see anything with the naked eye if you spilled a vial of the suspension on a table top(unless you had a 150-300x magnifying lens in your pockets). Maybe it puzzles you, but as a professional who did tissue culture for a living, and worked in biochemistry, biology and medical sciences for 33 years, I can assure you that NONE of my peers would have the least issue with me disputing calling a tissue sample 'body parts'.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 5:39 pm

put another way, Foil: have you ever in your life heard a reference to trace materials left at a crime scene as 'body parts'? I haven't. Conversely, when a grisly murderer is caught with body parts buried, stashed in the freezer, etc, did that ever refer to say a 2 mg suspension of cells? Can't think of one example there, either, myself. That you find the two identical is every bit as bizarre seeming to me as you claim my distinction is to you.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 6:41 pm

from the Free Dictionary:

Noun 1. body part - any part of an organism such as an organ or extremity

doesn't seem to include multicellular tissue fragments, but who knows?

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 7:04 pm

Thanks…that puts the notion to rest that a fetus is just part of a woman’s body.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 7:49 pm

I'm confused as to why there was so much discussion of having to be careful not to crush things if they're not "body parts". If it has enough structure that you have to be careful not to smoosh it, "tissue sample" seems like an awfully antiseptic term to use to describe what it actually is.

I'm also confused as to how a trained biologist can continually refer to an 8-9 week fetus as though it doesn't have organs. Yes, it's only an inch long, and not every piece of it is fully formed -- but it has a regular heartbeat (implying a heart), eyes and partially-formed eyelids, and every major organ is partially formed and differentiated from the other major organs. We're not talking about an undifferentiated mass of cells (people like to misleadingly point to images resembling the right side of page 6 at http://time.com/3876085/drama-of-life-b ... des-later/ ) but rather something with both visually-distinct human-looking features (as on page 5 and the left side of page 6), and cells which have differentiated and partially formed every major key structure that's present in an adult body.

The "just a tissue sample" response comes across to me much like a "welfare leeches" comment -- insultingly dehumanizing. The rest of the "tissue donor" is now dead, and we're glossing over it like it's totally cool as long as the pieces of it being sold off are small and indistinct enough!

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 9:28 pm

Foil wrote:
tunnelcat wrote:Antiabortionists like to make sure ALL babies are born, but then turn their backs when support of those babies becomes an social issue.
Ah, the deflective (and fairly inaccurate, particularly for me) stereotype.

Not a deflection, but an extension of a age old problem. How to deal with the result of unplanned or spontaneous sex. On one hand, I see conservatives wanting to ban abortion. Then on the other hand, I see conservatives getting rid of entitlements for those poor, oversexed single mothers. Guess what, no one can regulate sex between adults or how partnerships form and most unplanned pregnancies happen to poor, single women, who are also more likely to get abortions. Getting them married off is the new conservative pipe dream solution to the entitlement problem. What are they going to do, mandate marriage for single mothers now? A little social engineering they think is the correct solution for poor, fatherless children, like Ted Cruz thinks? Think that will work out just peachy for the children born to those women? I've got news, no way in hell. Conservatives want a simple solution for a complicated problem and they want to do it on the cheap.

http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/01 ... ed/356964/

vision · Post by **vision** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 12:59 am

Lothar wrote:...something with both visually-distinct primate-looking features...

Fixed.