Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
User Journal

Journal smittyoneeach's Journal: "Mythology" 55

Journal by smittyoneeach
The Devil's mythology believed:
"Life starts *after* one's conceived"
By a mystic moment received
At some judge's behest.

It's true there is no "standing" room
When one's gestating in the womb
But is that space just so much tomb
Based on a legal test?

For those with the hardened hearts
Conception hunting season starts
Selling offspring for the parts
In our "enlightened" West?

God have mercy on these souls
Blighted by the murder's tolls
As on to Hell a holocaust rolls
While they make it a jest.

Let the conscience be the guide
Before man's essence goes inside
Adding to humanity's tide
The truth remains the best.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

"Mythology" More

"Mythology"

Comments Filter:
  • You just said

    Selling offspring for the parts

    Though you still have not answered who you think is buying the "parts". The video that you and so many other slashdot conservatives are hyperventilating over actually shows that they were only recovering the cost of shipping and handling for the tissue, so you cannot possibly argue that the people in it are actually making money. But who do you think the buyers actually are?

    • Mainly stem cell researchers so far- hoping to create cell lines from which they can clone organs for transplant.

      "actually shows that they were only recovering the cost of shipping and handling for the tissue"

      No. Because then when you're talking such small amounts, the cost of shipping and handling for the tissue is under $10. The amounts they were discussing were far in excess of that, and Stem Express's own advertising to recruit doctors indicated substantial payoffs for doctors who were double-

      • No. Because then when you're talking such small amounts, the cost of shipping and handling for the tissue is under $10

        That's not accurate. Yes, the amounts are small, but that doesn't make it easy or inexpensive to process, handle, and ship. We're not handling French Fries or Legos, here.

        For example, a group that is in the business of selling research animal parts charges $32.75 for a mouse kidney [jax.org], and that is a different handling method than you would need for human parts - and does not include the cost of shipping. If you are sending research tissue, it often needs to go priority overnight on dry ice.

        completely legal trafficking of human organs and body parts, up to and including brains harvested from premature infants born alive

        First of al

        • "in the business of selling research animal parts"

          And therefore, trying to make a profit. Shipping and handling charges are always about *increasing profit*.

          "the latter part of your statement is faith-based and not well supported by fact."

          Watch the unedited video- they *filmed it happening*. Extremely supported by fact that they have harvested brains from infants born alive.

          We think that "research" in "fetal tissue" is being used for implantation into patients who are told that it will be a cure for thing

          • "in the business of selling research animal parts"

            And therefore, trying to make a profit.

            Actually, Jackson Lab is non-profit.

            But regardless, there are very real costs associated with preparing and providing research tissue. Even if you do it with all volunteer work - and don't pay anyone any amount of money to do it - you still have substantial costs to ensure that you are providing the promised tissues:

            • Proper containers to maintain adequate temperature for shipping
            • Dry ice or ice bags (often the former) to preserve the tissue
            • Shipping costs
            • Costs of equipment and equipment sterilization (t

            • "Actually, Jackson Lab is non-profit. "

              So is Goodwill, supposedly, yet the CEO for just the Columbia Basin has a takehome in excess of a quarter million a year. Non-profit means very little when it comes to the individual greed of the people involved.

              "But regardless, there are very real costs associated with preparing and providing research tissue. Even if you do it with all volunteer work - and don't pay anyone any amount of money to do it - you still have substantial costs to ensure that you are providin

              • "But regardless, there are very real costs associated with preparing and providing research tissue. Even if you do it with all volunteer work - and don't pay anyone any amount of money to do it - you still have substantial costs to ensure that you are providing the promised tissues:"

                The real problem being providing the promised tissues in the first place, which everybody seems to be skipping over looking for profiteering.

                I can't force you to actually read what I write here.

                "Many questions exist on how the brain develops. You cannot take differentiated brain cells and make them go backwards to observe how they got to their final location and function Adult brain cells generally do not divide, at all. There are a few exceptions to this, but the majority simply stay put through the individual's life. You can't take physiologically normal adult brain cells and culture them for study, it simply doesn't work."

                And the reason for doing this research to begin with is exactly what?

                Have you ever heard of basic science? Some questions exist that are fundamental to our existence and some people would like to seek out answers to them.

                And so you think it's more ethical to cut open the screaming face of an infant that survived abortion to get it.

                You are putting words into my mouth.

                I will ask you another question at this point. Do you believe that there are abortions performed for no reason other than to provide tissue for research? The way you are phrasing your statements suggests you might believe that, but I want to see you make a cle

                • "Have you ever heard of basic science? Some questions exist that are fundamental to our existence and some people would like to seek out answers to them."

                  And usually, the answers are worse than useless, and create more problems than they solve.

                  "Do you believe that there are abortions performed for no reason other than to provide tissue for research?"

                  No. Even if a small minority were done merely to obtain tissue for research have the secondary purpose of providing extra money to the doctors who do them. Th

                  • The primary cause of abortion in the United States remains what it has always been- greed.

                    You actually think they're running fetus farms and paying the girls to get pregnant to harvest the parts? Eh, who knows what's going on in those trailer parks? If there's money in it, somebody is doing it, meth, body parts, it's a seller's market.

                    greed

                    It's in the genes, and apparently it's hard to resist, especially when it is the very essence of a natural, animalistic (spell checker says cannibalistic, it may be right

                    • If it was choice, then birth would remain a viable option, complete with support for the mother during early childhood. As I said before, greed- on the part of the father who wants to duck responsibility, leaving the mother with no choice. On the part of the doctor who claims to care about the mother then leaves her wounded and bleeding and his responsibility ends. On the part of her parents, who abandoned their grandchild. No, there's no actual CHOICE in abortion.

                    • Birth is a viable option. The population is still increasing. Only one particular demographic is decreasing in North America. I suppose two, if you count the pre-columbian population. Anyway, the back alley scene you are describing is what prohibition against the practice has brought. And without rights, if it wasn't rape, the father can walk, (like I say it works both ways) and our very prosperous society, despite its false claims of the opposite, can take care of the child, offer just as much protection a

                    • "Birth is a viable option. The population is still increasing."

                      Only because of immigration. The United States has been below demographic ZPG for 20 years now. Europe and Japan and China, even longer.

                      "Only one particular demographic is decreasing in North America. I suppose two, if you count the pre-columbian population. "

                      Only one, if you count them both as "native born".

                      "Anyway, the back alley scene you are describing is what prohibition against the practice has brought. "

                      It isn't just the back alley- the

                    • There is no choice, only force.

                      Yes, through meddling by religion through the state, in the ongoing subjugation of women.

                    • Wait. Are you going to go all anti-Islam on us?

                    • Whatever it is, I'm against it [youtube.com]...

                    • What if it involves societal decay, immorality, and debt?

                  • "Have you ever heard of basic science? Some questions exist that are fundamental to our existence and some people would like to seek out answers to them."

                    And usually, the answers are worse than useless, and create more problems than they solve.

                    So then would you have preferred we had never investigated genetics, cell biology, chemistry, aeronautics, or gravity? How about electricity? At what point did we know too much? Should we have never invented the printing press either?

                    "Do you believe that there are abortions performed for no reason other than to provide tissue for research?"

                    No. Even if a small minority were done merely to obtain tissue for research have the secondary purpose of providing extra money to the doctors who do them.

                    I'd be interested in knowing where you come up with that idea.

                    The only reason for a doctor to become an abortionist is the difference in pay

                    No. There are doctors who perform abortions that do it because they genuinely care about women's health and women's health issues. The notion of "abortionist" is absurd as well, there really are not that many

              • And so you think it's more ethical to cut open the screaming face of an infant that survived abortion to get it.

                You and Carly Fiorina seem to be describing the same part of the video. Unfortunately for both of you, there is no such segment in the video, even in the "non-edited" version [vox.com].

                And for that matter, biology (again) disagrees with you. Considering how many laws prohibit abortion after the first trimester, it is reasonable to expect that the lion's share are done well before 20 weeks. Almost no fetus at or before 20 weeks is capable of breathing on its own, so the "screaming" part is fictitious. For tha

                • Not quite. Mine is the testimony of a nurse who has now left Planned Parenthood. There is a similar segment where a worker describes this, but it is a second hand description.

                  Carly was referring to the "hunting through a pile of fetal remains" scene in the fifth video, where clearly some limbs are still moving (not uncommon at all in the fast paced world of an abortion every fifteen minutes clinics).

                  "And for that matter, biology (again) disagrees with you. Considering how many laws prohibit abortion after

                  • an abortion every fifteen minutes clinics

                    I call BS on that claim. Based on the numbers of abortions performed in this country - as I discussed in a previous comment - a clinic doing that many would have to have a large number of physicians and a disproportionate number of patients. Even at that, they would have to do doing them only on specific days for it to happen at that rate.

                    "And for that matter, biology (again) disagrees with you. Considering how many laws prohibit abortion after the first trimester, it is reasonable to expect that the lion's share are done well before 20 weeks. Almost no fetus at or before 20 weeks is capable of breathing on its own, so the "screaming" part is fictitious"

                    You don't need breath to scream. You need breath to have the scream heard.

                    Even for someone pushing fiction as hard as you are here, that is illogical. The fetus is dead before it makes it through the birth canal. Do you have the slightest

                    • At $2000/hr would YOU want to work every day for a full 8 hours?

                      "Even for someone pushing fiction as hard as you are here, that is illogical. The fetus is dead before it makes it through the birth canal."

                      Sure looks like it did to me [thefederalist.com]. I think I'd rather believe my own eyes than the testimony of a genocidal maniac.

                    • At $2000/hr would YOU want to work every day for a full 8 hours?

                      Considering the long trail you have laid down of statements created out of thin air, I suspect you don't have a reference to back up that assertion, either.

                    • $500 abortions, 4/hr. What, did you think people were doing this out of the kindness of their hearts, for free?

                    • $500 abortions, 4/hr.

                      That does not support your claim of the physicians making $2k/hour on it. For one, the physicians cannot perform 4 of them per hour in any reasonable manner. Even in your fact-free universe where this happens, that wouldn't result in the physician being paid $2k/hour as a large part of that cost is consumed by preparing the room, staffing it with additional people (nurses in particular), providing appropriate medication for the mother, etc. Even if the abortion itself took 15 minutes - which is fantasy

                    • "For one, the physicians cannot perform 4 of them per hour in any reasonable manner."

                      Nobody said that abortion clinics were reasonable.

                    • "For one, the physicians cannot perform 4 of them per hour in any reasonable manner."

                      Nobody said that abortion clinics were reasonable.

                      With the exception of those pesky numbers [slashdot.org] that show that there is no rational support for your claim that 4 abortions are performed per hour, anywhere.

                    • Your analysis would require doctors work a normal workweek, and thus, is irrational, as shown before.

                      Your arguments show signs of post-abortive syndrome.

                    • Your analysis would require doctors work a normal workweek, and thus, is irrational, as shown before.

                      If by "normal" you mean 40 hours a week, there is nothing irrational about that for an established physician. You wouldn't have fresh residents coming in to do this, they would need a supervising physician. Residents would get the experience at a hospital or larger clinic.

                    • "If by "normal" you mean 40 hours a week, there is nothing irrational about that for an established physician. "

                      These are not normal physicians. Normal physicians actually care whether or not they ever see the patient again. Your assumptions are understandable, given the disability of thinking that this is normal health care and not a scam.

                    • "If by "normal" you mean 40 hours a week, there is nothing irrational about that for an established physician. "

                      These are not normal physicians. Normal physicians actually care whether or not they ever see the patient again.

                      Just keep making stuff up. You're good at that. As usual you have nothing to support your claims.

                      Your assumptions are understandable, given the disability of thinking that this is normal health care and not a scam.

                      Just keep making stuff up. You're good at that. As usual you have nothing to support your claims.

                    • Planned Parenthood never cares for the women *after* the abortion, ever. They're anti-life, no better than Kermit Gosnell

                    • You keep making stuff up on the fly to support your view of the matter. You've shown you have no problem with substituting your opinion in the place of reality when you feel like it.

                    • Yeah, well so do you just keep making shit up out of thin air with no actual data other than propaganda from PP.

                    • Yeah, well so do you just keep making shit up out of thin air with no actual data other than propaganda from PP.

                      I am the only one in this discussion so far to have cited any numbers at all. You reject published and verified numbers, then substitute in their place the ones that make you feel good. You accusing me of the opposite of reality - while well in line with your ongoing campaign against reality in this discussion - is completely absurd.

    • Possibly you could answer your own question, accuser.

      • The film is false, a fraud. You pass it as truth. Again, there was no accusation from me. You are the accuser,and you base it on lies. For shame on you! How do you expect anybody to take your word seriously when you can't live by them yourself? We have here a clear case of you passing lies as truth, again. So, back to you... Why do you do it? Why do you feel that some lies are okay? And what gives you the right to interfere with the woman's rights? You have no standing on the matter, none at all. It doesn't

        • What if you are bearing false witness against me by not:
          (a) Stating precisely what you think I am "bearing" in the case of writing a poem against something I feel is diabolically evil?
          (b) Against what specific person you think this poem is directed? Name(s) would be helpful.
          (c) Offering an argument as to why you think the ideas I'm expressing here are false?

          If you're going to contend that all figurative language is "false witness", then it would seem to follow logically that all fiction, jokes, and fig

          • What you feel is totally, completely, utterly irrelevant. The film is fraudulent, and yet, here you are, basing you rant against PP as if it were true. It is not. Thus you are spreading lies, false witness. But keep on denying. It's what you do best.

            You know, I've been reading Huckabee's bullshit for a few days now. It seems he is the latest thing you have been imitating these days, and also, word for word while remaining in total denial... So, there is no point in bringing up any specifics while you will j

            • The film is fraudulent, and yet, here you are,

              Fraudulent? How so?

              basing you rant against PP as if it were true.

              Did you read the JE? The work happens to be about abortion.

              You know, I've been reading Huckabee's bullshit for a few days now.

              That makes one of us.

              It seems he is the latest thing you have been imitating these days, and also, word for word while remaining in total denial...

              This is a wholly original work of mine.

              So, there is no point in bringing up any specifics while you will just wave them off as you always do. In that I no longer have any interest.

              Wait: back to "It is a sin to bear false witness," or is your bluster and haste to drop the matter some sort of tacit indication that you were the false witness bearer?

  • the great difference between a well-formed and informed conscience, and a badly damaged by abuse in the public school system conscience.

    • Yes, the indoctrination, too, is disgusting.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close