Planned Parenthood Strikes Back - Sues Libelous Video Makers

[PapaZoom]

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/5014/1936/7155/PPFA_Audited_FS_FY2014.PDF

Looking at the audited financial statements of the organization would be a good start. As a practical matter, all costs figures are estimates and how you allocate costs to particular activities is complicated. How much of the costs associated with secretaries, answering services, telecommunication equipment and service, professional employees, benefits, utilities, etc. should be allocated to any particular task or revenue item is complicated. I know about these issues, but I generally just refer such questions to one of the Certified Public Auditors I know. Frankly, I'm not sufficiently skilled in Generally Accepted Accounting Practices to give a definitive answer.

I would venture to guess that a good accountant could take the same figures to show both a loss and a gain depending on how you used the actual figures.

 

[PapaZoom]

Question: does this indictment of CMP have anything whatsoever to do with family law?

That I don't know.

 

[KCfromNC]

Back in August. So, you know, before the investigation even began.

Stop confusing this thread with facts.

 

[KCfromNC]

First I don't think CMP are liars.

That isn't a question for what you "think". It is a simple fact that they used fake names when meeting with PP, so at the very least they lied in some ways. There are lots of other less cut and dried lies that they're also accused of. The question for some is whether that lying was for a greater good. And for others if their particular types of lying will end them up in prison and/or paying civil penalties.

 

[KCfromNC]

I would venture to guess that a good accountant could take the same figures to show both a loss and a gain depending on how you used the actual figures.

If guessing were what my arguments were reduced to, I'd reconsider that my opinion was correct.

 

[AirPo]

Stop confusing this thread with facts.

Maybe we need a sub forum that's a no fact zone.

 

[Belk]

Maybe we need a sub forum that's a no fact zone.

We do, it's called politics.

 

[Mayzoo]

That isn't a question for what you "think". It is a simple fact that they used fake names when meeting with PP, so at the very least they lied in some ways. There are lots of other less cut and dried lies that they're also accued of. The question for some is whether that lying was for a greater good. And for others if their particular types of lying will end them up in prison and/or paying civil penalties.

It is evident CMP both lied and broke the law. How some have convinced themselves otherwise is foriegn logic to me. So far as I know, none of the below facts are being disputed by anyone. Some are trying to justify the illegal actions, but no one is disputing the actions were illegal and/or lies.

1. They lied to obtain illegal state IDs for fraudulent purposes. (lie and illegal)
2. They used those IDs to present themselves as someone they were not. (lie and illegal)
3. They stated they wish to acquire something they had no intentions of acquiring. (lie)
4. They illegally recorded a conversation without the consent of the other party (http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/california-recording-law.) (illegal)

This tally is regardless of if the videos were deceptive or not. Three lies, and three illegal activities willfully partaken in.

 

[PapaZoom]

For my 2 bits, I think that a "woman's real health needs" are best determined by the individual woman and her healthcare providers.



This statement may be true, but it is certainly irrelevant.


I think you overestimate the impact of the indictment. First of all, your assertion that Planned Parenthood is "selling baby parts" is, in context, patently false. The "transaction" complained of in the video was for fetal tissue and tissue from adult humans, no legal "babies" involved. To be honest with you, I think the idea that human dignity depends on gestational age may, in the future, be viewed as irrational and vile as the idea that human dignity depended on the color of one's skin or even the color of the skin of one's great, great grand parents. Second, the felony count is for filing false documents (or tampering with a governmental document I have conflicted reports) which has little to do with biological material at all, and likely evidence of biological materials would be inadmissible on this count.

On the purchase of human tissue misdemeanor charge, eh maybe. Somehow I don't think this case has the same star power of say California v. O.J. Simpson. But more to the point, I'm not sure there are many people who approved of Planned Parenthood prior to this controversy who are likely to change their opinion, or for that matter many people who disapproved of Planned Parenthood who would change their opinion. Even still, it seems possible to fully and successfully prosecute this count using only the adult tissue. In fact, were I prosecutor I might adopt that strategy and file a motion to exclude all references to fetal or other non-adult tissue as being substantially more prejudicial than probative.

Abortion is a health care need? Who knew?

 

[Archivist]

Abortion is a health care need? Who knew?

If a woman's life or health is at risk because of her pregnancy, abortion is most certainly a health care need.

 

[JohnLocke]

Abortion is a health care need? Who knew?

In an ectopic pregnancy to a medical certainty neither the pregnant person nor the baby (in your view) will survive. Is your position so strident that you are willing to sacrifice both on the altar of absolutism?

Explain to me how it is moral to kill those two people (in your view) and I would seriously consider changing my position. Unfortunately, this is all rather off topic which I believe was the criminal charges facing the group that presented false government documents and attempted to purchase human organs.

 

[PapaZoom]

In an ectopic pregnancy to a medical certainty neither the pregnant person nor the baby (in your view) will survive. Is your position so strident that you are willing to sacrifice both on the altar of absolutism?

Explain to me how it is moral to kill those two people (in your view) and I would seriously consider changing my position. Unfortunately, this is all rather off topic which I believe was the criminal charges facing the group that presented false government documents and attempted to purchase human organs.

That is a medical emergency. Most abortions are for convenience reasons.

 

[KCfromNC]

It is evident CMP both lied and broke the law. How some have convinced themselves otherwise is foriegn logic to me. So far as I know, none of the below facts are being disputed by anyone. Some are trying to justify the illegal actions, but no one is disputing the actions were illegal and/or lies.

1. They lied to obtain illegal state IDs for fraudulent purposes. (lie and illegal)
2. They used those IDs to present themselves as someone they were not. (lie and illegal)
3. They stated they wish to acquire something they had no intentions of acquiring. (lie)
4. They illegally recorded a conversation without the consent of the other party (http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/california-recording-law.) (illegal)

This tally is regardless of if the videos were deceptive or not. Three lies, and three illegal activities willfully partaken in.

You're not going to be very popular in this thread if you keep posting the actual facts of this case. It is supposed to be filled with true believers reassuring each other that their heroes could no wrong.

 

[Mayzoo]

You're not going to be very popular in this thread if you keep posting the actual facts of this case. It is supposed to be filled with true believers reassuring each other that their heroes could no wrong.

I know it seems bizarre in today's times, but I am a fan of doing the right thing (biblically and legally), and when you choose to do the wrong thing, admit it and face up to the consequences (personal responsibility). Justifying illegal activities and/or sin, of others or oneself, is a very bad habit for anyone to get into, especially Christians.

 

[Archivist]

That is a medical emergency. Most abortions are for convenience reasons.

But that is not what you said earlier. You said "Abortion is a health care need? Who knew?" Well sometimes it is.

 

[PapaZoom]

If a woman's life or health is at risk because of her pregnancy, abortion is most certainly a health care need.

And we all know that nearly all abortion are NOT about the life of the woman. We can test your bias easily: All mother's life at risk pregnancies ok for abortion. All other pregnancies, against the law. That would virtually eliminate all abortions.

 

[PapaZoom]

But that is not what you said earlier. You said "Abortion is a health care need? Who knew?" Well sometimes it is.

Abortion is NOT a health care need. Wise up.

 

[Archivist]

And we all know that nearly all abortion are NOT about the life of the woman. We can test your bias easily: All mother's life at risk pregnancies ok for abortion. All other pregnancies, against the law. That would virtually eliminate all abortions.

Now you are saying "nearly all abortions." So you admit that some abortions are medically necessary. But that isn't what you said earlier.

I guess you can't bring yourself to admit when you are wrong.

 

[Archivist]

Abortion is NOT a health care need. Wise up.

In some cases it is. You even admitted "nearly all."

 

[PapaZoom]

Now you are saying "nearly all abortions." So you admit that some abortions are medically necessary. But that isn't what you said earlier.

I guess you can't bring yourself to admit when you are wrong.

Had to leave room for ectopic pregnancies or any other abnormal pregnancy that threatens the actual life of the mother. It's always been the pro life position that in the rare case where the life of the mother is in serious jeopardy, ending the pregnancy may be the only alternative. That's ALWAYS been the consistent position of pro life. So I'm not wrong, you are.