advertisement
Forums

 

AAPL stock: Click Here

You are currently viewing the 'Friendly' Political Ranting forum
Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: p8712
Date: July 02, 2012 04:15PM
Abortion is a tragedy, but if you can make money off it....

Maybe his defense will be he was so rich he didn't have time to notice he owned over two million shares of the company?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/02/2012 04:16PM by p8712.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: billb
Date: July 02, 2012 04:32PM
sounds hypocritical enough to be Pres mat'l
does he pass muster now ?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: $tevie
Date: July 02, 2012 04:39PM
Quote

He was probably focused more on the millions upon millions of dollars the investment would net him, and not how awkward it would make life for New Mitt. But Old Mitt had a way of being selfish like that.
jest smiley



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: hal
Date: July 02, 2012 04:59PM
this is pretty silly thing for liberals to be whining about especially considering the vast treasure trove or REAL issues where romney is weak
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: p8712
Date: July 02, 2012 05:02PM
Quote
hal
this is pretty silly thing for liberals to be whining about especially considering the vast treasure trove or REAL issues where romney is weak

Like reversing every major position hes held over the past decade or so?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Avenger
Date: July 02, 2012 05:47PM
Obama would personally sign stimulus money for this outfit. Don't cry for me.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: $tevie
Date: July 02, 2012 06:18PM
Quote
hal
this is pretty silly thing for liberals to be whining about especially considering the vast treasure trove or REAL issues where romney is weak

I wouldn't have said it was whining. I would have said it was mocking.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Black
Date: July 02, 2012 06:33PM
Quote
hal
this is pretty silly thing for liberals to be whining about especially considering the vast treasure trove or REAL issues where romney is weak

Unfortunately there is an election coming up, and the "real issues" don't seem to be all that interesting to the 'swing' voters being inundated with
utterly false but memorable BS about Obama.

At least this is based on truth...




New forum user map 8/2015: [www.zeemaps.com]
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Pam
Date: July 02, 2012 06:41PM
Quote
Avenger
Obama would personally sign stimulus money for this outfit. Don't cry for me.

So?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Black
Date: July 02, 2012 06:49PM
Quote
Pam
Quote
Avenger
Obama would personally sign stimulus money for this outfit. Don't cry for me.

So?

Can we please bring back that pic of a motorcycle in front of the cheap McMansion? It really served well as an instant visual warning not to bother trying to make sense out of the text.




New forum user map 8/2015: [www.zeemaps.com]
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Avenger
Date: July 02, 2012 08:18PM
So?

Honey, what is this in your stock portfolio? Fetus Disposal Company, of course. Why?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Ca Bob
Date: July 02, 2012 09:45PM
I agree that the article is nonsense, since there is a lot of medical waste, like kilotons of the stuff, and that, apparently, is what the company collected and disinfected. But the underlying satire is that this is exactly the level of truth and honesty that is characteristic of Fox News and the right wing radio jocks -- that is to say, little or none most of the time, just a lot of overinterpretation of miniscule things. I think the same criticism can be rendered regarding a lot of right wing internet typing -- the same dreary mockery that gets debunked and refuted on almost a weekly basis, but continues to be spewed. How many times did we see the ugly remark that Obama could only give a speech if he had a teleprompter? The result, hilarious in its effects, was that the Republican candidates in the primaries gave a lot of speeches that were off the cuff, and the results were most embarrassing for a lot of them. Rick Perry should find himself a teleprompter asap, but as we saw when the president agreed to meet with the House Republicans early in his presidency, Obama is not the guy who is lacking in the ability to think on one's feet.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: cbelt3
Date: July 02, 2012 10:28PM
But did they get harvested for Stem Cells? devil smiley
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: swampy
Date: July 03, 2012 10:58AM
I'd say Obama had a bigger hand in _creating_ any fetus that needed to be disposed of. There has neve been a doubt about his favorable stand on abortion and you can't deny that he has profited from it.



If you don't stand for something, you'll probably fall for anything.t
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: hal
Date: July 03, 2012 11:41AM
Quote
swampy
I'd say Obama had a bigger hand in _creating_ any fetus that needed to be disposed of. There has neve been a doubt about his favorable stand on abortion and you can't deny that he has profited from it.

Yes I can! I deny that.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Pam
Date: July 03, 2012 11:42AM
Quote
swampy
I'd say Obama had a bigger hand in _creating_ any fetus that needed to be disposed of. There has neve been a doubt about his favorable stand on abortion and you can't deny that he has profited from it.

A bigger hand? Than what? The two people who tangoed? You really do hate the guy to go that low. The Supreme Court long ago affirmed a woman's right to choose long ago. You may not believe in it, but that is a belief. Choices are personal and should stay that way. No government has any business in it. I personally won't vote for anyone who wants to take that choice away. I guess all of us pro choice people have had a hand in it. How absurd.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: $tevie
Date: July 03, 2012 11:57AM
If it is so profitable to be in favor of abortion, that must mean that it reflects a majority opinion, and if it is the majority opinion, that means that the people who want to tear down Roe v. Wade are not only disrespecting the Supreme Court but the majority of their fellow citizens as well.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: swampy
Date: July 03, 2012 01:15PM
The article was quick to condem Romney for owning stock in a medical waste disposal company that included services to dispose of fetal remains. Dirty job, somebody's got to do it. But I find it ironic that the author of this article only finds disposal of fetal matter objectionable because Romney was somehow involved. In all fairness, I'm just saying that Obama has spent a career making that fetal matter available for disposal by Romney's company or anyone other.



If you don't stand for something, you'll probably fall for anything.t



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/03/2012 01:16PM by swampy.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Lux Interior
Date: July 03, 2012 01:25PM
I thought democrats wanted to expand the welfare state and make people more dependent on government? If that's the case, then why would Obama be so pro-abortion?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Avenger
Date: July 03, 2012 01:56PM
Because he can always find plenty of people alive.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: hal
Date: July 03, 2012 02:47PM
Quote
swampy
The article was quick to condem Romney for owning stock in a medical waste disposal company that included services to dispose of fetal remains. Dirty job, somebody's got to do it. But I find it ironic that the author of this article only finds disposal of fetal matter objectionable because Romney was somehow involved.

I'm right with you up to this point - I think Bob said it very well above

Quote

In all fairness, I'm just saying that Obama has spent a career making that fetal matter available for disposal by Romney's company or anyone other.

But this is nonsense. Being pro choice doesn't mean that you support abortion for all people at all times. It's being of the opinion that the choice of abortion belongs to the woman. Again, most people I know these days are pro-choice and personally against abortion (as THEIR choice).
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Lux Interior
Date: July 03, 2012 03:50PM
Quote
hal
Being pro choice doesn't mean that you support abortion for all people at all times.


Mandatory abortions. It is part of the DNC platform.

Sorry, but that's a fact.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: swampy
Date: July 03, 2012 04:15PM
Quote
hal
]

But this is nonsense. Being pro choice doesn't mean that you support abortion for all people at all times. It's being of the opinion that the choice of abortion belongs to the woman. Again, most people I know these days are pro-choice and personally against abortion (as THEIR choice).

So what about the babies that survived late term abortion only to die later as a result of non care? Go look up Obama's track record on this when he was in the Illinois legislature. Or google "post birth abortion".

“…WHAT WE CALL ‘AFTER-BIRTH ABORTION’ (KILLING A NEWBORN) SHOULD BE PERMISSIBLE IN ALL THE CASES WHERE ABORTION IS, INCLUDING CASES WHERE THE NEWBORN IS NOT DISABLED”.

THEN THE TIE IN WITH THE QUEEN OF DEATH, KATHLEEN SEBELIUS:

“To bring up such children might be an unbearable burden on the family and on society as a whole, when the state economically provides for their care.”
——

So now we have the “ethical” argument for reducing Healthcare costs by killing BABIES WHO HAVE BEEN BORN!  How long do you think it will be before Seniors are considered as an Unbearable Burden.  How about the handicapped?  How about those with long-term illnesses like MS, ALS, Diabetes, and on and on.  If the decision is made by Progressives like Obama and the Queen of Death, there is no limit.




If you don't stand for something, you'll probably fall for anything.t
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: $tevie
Date: July 03, 2012 04:17PM
WTF? Now you are just babbling like an insane person.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: hal
Date: July 03, 2012 04:33PM
Damn swampy - I love a challenge, but there is NOTHING about Obama and 'post birth abortion' on google except rantings on extremely whacko right wing blogs...

But what I HAVE found is that the bulk of what you quoted originated in a paper published in the Journal of Medical Ethics by two philosophers...

This is the actual quote:

When circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible. … [W]e propose to call this practice ‘after-birth abortion’, rather than ‘infanticide,’ to emphasize that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus … rather than to that of a child. Therefore, we claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk.

Slate writes: Predictably, the article has sparked outrage. Last week, Reps. Joe Pitts, R-Penn., and Chris Smith, R-N.J., denounced it on the House floor. [www.slate.com]

but there is nothing to connect this nonsense to Obama (or to anyone in the USA for that matter) except the rantings of some seriously crazy people. Find me a and I'll read it, but I doubt that you can find anything about Obama accepting this philosophy.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: swampy
Date: July 03, 2012 07:28PM
While serving in the Illinois Senate....

He voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive. He supported allowing retired police officers to carry concealed weapons, but opposed allowing people to use banned handguns to defend against intruders in their homes. And the list of sensitive topics goes on.

[www.cbsnews.com]

Yeah, voting against allowing surviving babies to have medical care is seriously crazy. And I hope you don't try to refute CBSs reportage. There were many articles about this written by others during Obama's 2008 primary run, but they were conveniently overlooked by the mainstream media.



If you don't stand for something, you'll probably fall for anything.t
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Pam
Date: July 03, 2012 07:33PM
Quote
swampy
The article was quick to condem Romney for owning stock in a medical waste disposal company that included services to dispose of fetal remains. Dirty job, somebody's got to do it. But I find it ironic that the author of this article only finds disposal of fetal matter objectionable because Romney was somehow involved. In all fairness, I'm just saying that Obama has spent a career making that fetal matter available for disposal by Romney's company or anyone other.

You don't seem to get the hypocrisy, Romney is anti abortion yet makes money off of fetal disposal. That is what the article was pointing out. Money trumped personal belief. Not a great character for a presidential candidate.

Personally this is more noise I ignore. Odds are he had no idea. Mutual funds, retirements accounts, etc can make tracking individual investments tough. More so the more money you have.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: swampy
Date: July 03, 2012 07:53PM
Hal... You may also want to read the full transcript of an interview with a nurse who fought Obama on this issue..

(CNSNews.com) - In 1999, Jill Stanek, a labor and delivery nurse at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Ill., held a premature baby in her arms for forty-five minutes as the child struggled for life and then died.
 
The little boy, who had Down Syndrome, had survived an induced-labor abortion and was going to be left alone in a soiled utility room until he expired without any medical treatment or comforting. Stanek could not bear the thought of that, and the experience of holding the baby as he fought to breathe converted her into a pro-life activist.

Thanks to Stanek, the U.S. Congress enacted the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, which was signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2002.
 
In Illinois, however, a state version of the law was thwarted for three years, in part because of the resolute opposition of then-Illinois-state Sen. Barack Obama.

[cnsnews.com]

 
This month, Stanek received on of the first annual Life Prizes, awarded by the Gerard Health Foundation to Americans who have shown courage in defending the sanctity of human life.
 
In an interview with CNSNews.com Editor in Chief Terry Jeffrey, Stanek described her efforts to win legislation that would protect babies who survive abortions and Barack Obama’s efforts to stop that legislation
.



If you don't stand for something, you'll probably fall for anything.t
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: hal
Date: July 03, 2012 08:00PM


Sorry - not reading anything from a webpage that starts with that image above....

From the other article:

One vote that especially riled abortion opponents involved restrictions on a type of abortion where the fetus sometimes survives, occasionally for hours. The restrictions, which never became law, included requiring the presence of a second doctor to care for the fetus.


He voted against a dumb law - and so did everyone else I guess - it didn't pass. The discussion here is about an aborted fetus - a fetus - it isn't going to live long WITH medical help. Insisting that a second DR be standing by just in case of this rare event and try to keep a goldfish sized fetus alive is asinine. This is just another attempt to make the practice of a legal procedure impossibly bound by in red tape.

Quote
swampy
While serving in the Illinois Senate....

He voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive. He supported allowing retired police officers to carry concealed weapons, but opposed allowing people to use banned handguns to defend against intruders in their homes. And the list of sensitive topics goes on.

[www.cbsnews.com]

Yeah, voting against allowing surviving babies to have medical care is seriously crazy. And I hope you don't try to refute CBSs reportage. There were many articles about this written by others during Obama's 2008 primary run, but they were conveniently overlooked by the mainstream media.

edit: and I LOVE that masthead - the right news, right now (TM)


cute

edit 2: DAMN, these guys don't even try to be 'fair and balanced' they come right out and say it:

About Us

CNSNews.com was launched on June 16, 1998 as a news source for individuals, news organizations and broadcasters who put a higher premium on balance than spin and seek news that’s ignored or under-reported as a result of media bias by omission.

Study after study by the Media Research Center, the parent organization of CNSNews.com, clearly demonstrate a liberal bias in many news outlets – bias by commission and bias by omission – that results in a frequent double-standard in editorial decisions on what constitutes "news."

In response to these shortcomings, MRC Chairman L. Brent Bozell III founded CNSNews.com in an effort to provide an alternative news source that would cover stories that are subject to the bias of omission and report on other news subject to bias by commission.




Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/03/2012 08:10PM by hal.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: swampy
Date: July 03, 2012 08:02PM
Pam, if the sole purpose of the medical waste disposal company was to dispose of fetal matter then your argument makes sense. What doesn't make sense is to use that as an argument against Romney when Obama spent three years in the Illinois Senate actively opposing medical care for babies in critical condition having survived an abortion. it's called infanticide!



If you don't stand for something, you'll probably fall for anything.t
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: swampy
Date: July 03, 2012 08:11PM
Okay, Hal...just put the baby in a broom closet and let him die and keep telling yourself that Obama cares for everyone.



If you don't stand for something, you'll probably fall for anything.t
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Pam
Date: July 03, 2012 08:26PM
Quote
swampy
Pam, if the sole purpose of the medical waste disposal company was to dispose of fetal matter then your argument makes sense. What doesn't make sense is to use that as an argument against Romney when Obama spent three years in the Illinois Senate actively opposing medical care for babies in critical condition having survived an abortion. it's called infanticide!

Opposing REQUiRED medical care for abortion survivors. In other words the decision was the parents'. Not the government.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: RgrF
Date: July 03, 2012 08:53PM
Quote
billb
sounds hypocritical enough to be Pres mat'l
does he pass muster now ?

I was absent during the Romney tenure in Massachusetts, you were present. What's your opinion of him today?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Avenger
Date: July 03, 2012 08:58PM
MA never happened.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Manlove
Date: July 03, 2012 08:59PM
"He voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive. "

"Yeah, voting against allowing surviving babies to have medical care is seriously crazy.

These are not the same thing.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Black
Date: July 03, 2012 09:57PM
Quote
Manlove
"He voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive. "

"Yeah, voting against allowing surviving babies to have medical care is seriously crazy.

These are not the same thing.

They are the same thing here in the universe within this thread.
Can't you suspend reality for a little while?




New forum user map 8/2015: [www.zeemaps.com]
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Manlove
Date: July 03, 2012 11:11PM
Quote
Black
They are the same thing here in the universe within this thread.
Can't you suspend reality for a little while?

Ever since I came to this country Black.wink smiley
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Lux Interior
Date: July 04, 2012 01:10AM
Quote
swampy
Okay, Hal...just put the baby in a broom closet and let him die and keep telling yourself that Obama cares for everyone.


If you don't stand for something, you'll probably fall for anything.

You keep on keepin' on.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: swampy
Date: July 04, 2012 09:14AM
Pam, how do you get that it would be the parent's decision when state legislature declares if they will or they won't live?

A child is born, the cord is cut, and it is surviving and you are going to deny it care? Come on. Modern medicine can do wonders these days and you would deny medical care because it survives abortion? What next? Deny a baby care because it has spina bifita, downs syndrome, or a clef pallet?

Hal... I'm surprised that you wouldn't read the link to the Stanek interview transcript. She testified before congress, so perhaps you'd take the time to look it up, but no, you don't want to hear her story. I guess it is hard to accept that Obama favors killing babies, but in a nut shell, that's what it boils down to. This is not about abortion rights and women's choices. In this case the abortion has already been performed. This is about condeming a child to death simply because it _survived_ the abortion. Ooooops, the baby lived!

Then Obama brings in K Sebelius who would deny the baby care based on cost effectiveness. You call yourselves progressives so do you progress to euthanasia, eugenics, death panels? This is what conservatives envision when the President of the United States has gone on record (3 times) opposing post abortion care.



If you don't stand for something, you'll probably fall for anything.t



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/04/2012 09:24AM by swampy.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: decay
Date: July 04, 2012 11:44AM
Quote
Avenger
Obama would personally sign stimulus money for this outfit. Don't cry for me.

ergo, Obama = Romney.

Q.E.D.!



---
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Lux Interior
Date: July 04, 2012 12:49PM
Quote
swampy
Obama favors killing babies.


Only white ones, though.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Pam
Date: July 04, 2012 12:56PM
Quote
swampy
Pam, how do you get that it would be the parent's decision when state legislature declares if they will or they won't live?

A child is born, the cord is cut, and it is surviving and you are going to deny it care? Come on. Modern medicine can do wonders these days and you would deny medical care because it survives abortion? What next? Deny a baby care because it has spina bifita, downs syndrome, or a clef pallet?

Hal... I'm surprised that you wouldn't read the link to the Stanek interview transcript. She testified before congress, so perhaps you'd take the time to look it up, but no, you don't want to hear her story. I guess it is hard to accept that Obama favors killing babies, but in a nut shell, that's what it boils down to. This is not about abortion rights and women's choices. In this case the abortion has already been performed. This is about condeming a child to death simply because it _survived_ the abortion. Ooooops, the baby lived!

Then Obama brings in K Sebelius who would deny the baby care based on cost effectiveness. You call yourselves progressives so do you progress to euthanasia, eugenics, death panels? This is what conservatives envision when the President of the United States has gone on record (3 times) opposing post abortion care.

They weren't denying care swampy. You have it all wrong! They were preventing forced care! If an abortion was unsuccessful the parents could decide not to give what may or may not be lifesaving care or decide to give care. As far as Stanek goes she's a fervent anti abortionist who takes great latitude with facts so she can confuse people like you. You seriously need to stop listening to and reading political entertainers. They do not care about you or facts. Their motivation is money and the sense of power.

Euthanasia? Damn right I'm for it. We treat our animals better than people. It's long past time to rectify that.

Eugenics? Sorry. Republicans have that ball.

Death panels? Never existed. Never were part of the plan. You were suckered to get you to vote a certain way. Played like a fiddle.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: $tevie
Date: July 04, 2012 12:59PM
Now is time on Sprockets when we dance!

Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: swampy
Date: July 04, 2012 01:32PM
Quote
Pam

They weren't denying care swampy. You have it all wrong! They were preventing forced care! If an abortion was unsuccessful the parents could decide not to give what may or may not be lifesaving care or decide to give care. As far as Stanek goes she's a fervent anti abortionist who takes great latitude with facts so she can confuse people like you. You seriously need to stop listening to and reading political entertainers. They do not care about you or facts. Their motivation is money and the sense of power.

Euthanasia? Damn right I'm for it. We treat our animals better than people. It's long past time to rectify that.

Eugenics? Sorry. Republicans have that ball.

Death panels? Never existed. Never were part of the plan. You were suckered to get you to vote a certain way. Played like a fiddle.

Oh, sorry, I didn't know you knew Stanek or her motivations. I thought she said she was a delivery room nurse not an entertainer. I thought she also said that she favored choice until her experience. Forced care? Is it forced care to rock and hold a baby in your arms until it dies? The powers that be wouldn't even allow that and she hid from them so they wouldn't know. Geeez, Pam, don't try to tell me you are a compassionate liberal!

At least euthanasia, when done properly, provides for some comfort for the dying.

Eugenics? I think the progressives like Margaret Sanger were all over that back in the 1920s.



If you don't stand for something, you'll probably fall for anything.t
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Dennis S
Date: July 04, 2012 02:00PM
"A child is born, the cord is cut, and it is surviving and you are going to deny it care" - swampy

Sounds like the Republican Health Care Plan.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: $tevie
Date: July 04, 2012 02:07PM
The fact is, before medicine became so advanced AND the medical profession learned what a gold mine keeping doomed babies alive could be, doctors used to let babies with defects, or born far too soon, or whatever, die as a matter of course. It just wasn't discussed, sometimes even among the family. Life is tough and trying to raise a child whom nature would have rejected is even tougher. I would seriously need to know what chance any of these bemoaned "babies" would have had at a normal life.

Not to mention, I am weary of the occasional cruel and unusual event being used as some kind of example of how everyone in this country is behaving. It's like saying that because a couple of white guys were serial killers, then all white guys might become serial killers so we should pass a law against white guys.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Lux Interior
Date: July 04, 2012 02:08PM
Quote
swampy
I thought she said she was a delivery room nurse not an entertainer.


And Joe was a plumber.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/04/2012 02:08PM by Lux Interior.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: swampy
Date: July 04, 2012 07:06PM
, I am weary of the occasional cruel and unusual event being used as some kind of example of how everyone in this country is behaving....$tevie

If Obama had had his way this "occasional and cruel event" it would have become the norm in Illinois.



If you don't stand for something, you'll probably fall for anything.t
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: Pam
Date: July 04, 2012 08:18PM
Quote
swampy
Quote
Pam

They weren't denying care swampy. You have it all wrong! They were preventing forced care! If an abortion was unsuccessful the parents could decide not to give what may or may not be lifesaving care or decide to give care. As far as Stanek goes she's a fervent anti abortionist who takes great latitude with facts so she can confuse people like you. You seriously need to stop listening to and reading political entertainers. They do not care about you or facts. Their motivation is money and the sense of power.

Euthanasia? Damn right I'm for it. We treat our animals better than people. It's long past time to rectify that.

Eugenics? Sorry. Republicans have that ball.

Death panels? Never existed. Never were part of the plan. You were suckered to get you to vote a certain way. Played like a fiddle.

Oh, sorry, I didn't know you knew Stanek or her motivations. I thought she said she was a delivery room nurse not an entertainer. I thought she also said that she favored choice until her experience. Forced care? Is it forced care to rock and hold a baby in your arms until it dies? The powers that be wouldn't even allow that and she hid from them so they wouldn't know. Geeez, Pam, don't try to tell me you are a compassionate liberal!

At least euthanasia, when done properly, provides for some comfort for the dying.

Eugenics? I think the progressives like Margaret Sanger were all over that back in the 1920s.

It's not hard to glean her ilk. Just look at her website. I guess you overlooked that the case was investigated by the Illinois State Attorney General and found no evidence to back up her and another nurse's claims. Further, not giving treatment is legal, however if the hospital had done what Stanek said, it was already illegal. No law needed to be passed. All other employees reported absolutely no type of behavior ever occurred. Now what Stanek was like prior to her accusations, who knows. But she launched herself and is a political entertainer. Her "facts" bare that out.

Here are some facts from 4 years ago:
[www.politifact.com]

1920's huh. The Democrats were the conservative party back then. When the Democratic party shifted gears and started supporting more liberal ideals, the white (especially southern) voters moved to the Republican party. This is something I mentioned to you before. The parties have flip flopped through the years.

Specifically about eugenics, it was very popular in the early 1900's with support from some pretty prominent people [en.wikipedia.org]

Eugenics today s one of many issues of concern with the advent of genetically targeted medical treatment. However, no party or significant group is advocating eugenics for population manipulation. What on earth are you reading???



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/04/2012 08:19PM by Pam.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Mitt of 1999 Owned Stock In Fetus Disposal Company
Posted by: RgrF
Date: July 05, 2012 02:22AM
And just what's to prevent a crazy person with strange ideas from quoting from another strange person with even crazier ideas?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 68
Record Number of Users: 186 on February 20, 2020
Record Number of Guests: 5122 on October 03, 2020