Missouri finds no wrongdoing in its Planned Parenthood investigation

OldWiseGuy said:

In today's mass market many products are "free", for a 'small shipping and handling fee' that actually contains a huge profit for the giverawayer.

In the case of baby body parts the 'handling' part of the fee is based on the supply, the demand, and the difficulty of obtaining the part. In other words the 'shipping and handling' fee is market driven, thus making it a 'sale'.

Click to expand...

You don't ship much stuff, do you?

variant said:

Yes I have seen the videos and how they were edited to make innocent statements into guilt

Click to expand...

"In 1993, a law pertaining to federally funded NIH research was enacted that allows donation of fetal tissue from induced abortions if certain criteria are met. These include that the woman donating is not aware of the recipients of the tissue, and that the abortion timing, procedures or method itself would not be altered for the sole purpose of obtaining the tissue."
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/07/unspinning-the-planned-parenthood-video/

I have said from the start that I didn't think they were profiting from tissue or organs, even though in one of the later videos they do say that they can't at this time because of the 'climate' of the culture around this issue. Which made it clear that they would not object to doing it if they could, but they aren't. Therefore, they are not breaking any laws in this area.
Neither is StemExpress and others like them. It is perfectly legal for them to sell the tissue/organs that they receive from abortion clinics for thousands of dollars because they are not the ones performing the abortions.

However, in the later video they discuss with StemExpress how they have to change the abortion procedures in order to harvest undamaged organs and it appears that in some locations that they may have done just that.
This is what I have always thought should be investigated.

Hank77 said:

"
However, in the later video they discuss with StemExpress how they have to change the abortion procedures in order to harvest undamaged organs and it appears that in some locations that they may have done just that.
This is what I have always thought should be investigated.

Click to expand...

I agree with this assessment, however, it's harder to get people riled up over what amounts to an inappropriate modification of a procedure.

Hank77 said:

However, in the later video they discuss with StemExpress how they have to change the abortion procedures in order to harvest undamaged organs and it appears that in some locations that they may have done just that.
This is what I have always thought should be investigated.

Click to expand...

Altering it so as to preserve tissue isn't really much of an issue at all.

Preserving tissue would automatically constitute altering the procedure. So splitting hairs much?

Sorry to be blunt about this, but what's so bad about changing abortion procedures to better harvest organs?

You still end up with an aborted fetus, just one that is more usefull.

Nithavela said:

Sorry to be blunt about this, but what's so bad about changing abortion procedures to better harvest organs?

You still end up with an aborted fetus, just one that is more usefull.

Click to expand...

Yes I'd like to hear the compelling state interest in upholding the sanctity of strict abortion procedures, so that more tissue is destroyed in the process and therefore can not be used in research....

variant said:

Preserving tissue would automatically constitute altering the procedure. So splitting hairs much?

Click to expand...

No preserving tissue is NOT altering the abortion procedure.

There are different ways of performing an abortion, the way that is used in the first trimester damages the organs, they are left in pieces. The other way is performed like a partial birth abortion is done, the fetus is removed in one piece, feet first (so as not to have a live birth). This way none of the organs are damaged.
That is altering the normal procedure in order to harvest whole organs.
They talk about it in one of the last two videos that were released.

Hank77 said:

No preserving tissue is NOT altering the abortion procedure.

There are different ways of performing an abortion, the way that is used in the first trimester damages the organs, they are left in pieces. The other way is performed like a partial birth abortion is done, the fetus is removed in one piece, feet first (so as not to have a live birth). This way none of the organs are damaged.
That is altering the normal procedure in order to harvest whole organs.
They talk about it in one of the last two videos that were released.

Click to expand...

They were talking about simply not crushing the organs.

And what's so bad about not slicing and dicing a fetus?

OldWiseGuy said:

In today's mass market many products are "free", for a 'small shipping and handling fee' that actually contains a huge profit for the giverawayer.

In the case of baby body parts the 'handling' part of the fee is based on the supply, the demand, and the difficulty of obtaining the part. In other words the 'shipping and handling' fee is market driven, thus making it a 'sale'.

Click to expand...

What an interesting hypothesis. You think this is what PP is doing? Well, okay, let's investigate and see what that's about. I wonder, has anyone else done that? Have there been threads about other people already having done that and determining that that's not what's going on?

The Cadet said:

What an interesting hypothesis. You think this is what PP is doing? Well, okay, let's investigate and see what that's about. I wonder, has anyone else done that? Have there been threads about other people already having done that and determining that that's not what's going on?

Click to expand...

I think there's an ongoing investigation about this in Washington.

OldWiseGuy said:

I think there's an ongoing investigation about this in Washington.

Click to expand...

Have you read the title of the thread you're currently posting in?

The Cadet said:

Have you read the title of the thread you're currently posting in?

Click to expand...

I think the conversation has gone beyond Missouri.

iluvatar5150 said:

You don't ship much stuff, do you?

Click to expand...

Shipping fees are the biggest scam in modern commerce.

OldWiseGuy said:

I think the conversation has gone beyond Missouri.

Click to expand...

Of course it has. The point is that in the ongoing investigations, we've actually had 6, all of which have come back with a clean bill of health for Planned Parenthood. What you think is happening is not happening.

The Cadet said:

Of course it has. The point is that in the ongoing investigations, we've actually had 6, all of which have come back with a clean bill of health for Planned Parenthood. What you think is happening is not happening.

Click to expand...

What I think is happening is there is a financial consideration in the harvesting of these parts. I'm not judging the morality of any of it.

OldWiseGuy said:

Shipping fees are the biggest scam in modern commerce.

Click to expand...

Really, you think it should be free to ship or something?

OldWiseGuy said:

Shipping fees are the biggest scam in modern commerce.

Click to expand...

Shipping fees as levied by whom? Retailers or UPS/Fed Ex/et al?

iluvatar5150 said:

Shipping fees as levied by whom? Retailers or UPS/Fed Ex/et al?

Click to expand...

Et al. This piece of leather (arrow rest material) cost $2.99, shipping was $6.95, sent in a box larger than a Kleenex box. It could have been mailed first class in an envelope for 43 cents plus a minimum handling fee. I order many small items that are similarly packaged.

.