| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Papa Jack" |
| Date: |
11 Sep 2003 02:42:31 PM |
| Object: |
Missouri House Overrides Abortion Bill Veto |
On Wed, Sep. 10, 2003, The Kansas City Star posted an article
by Kit Wagar and Tim Hoover titled: "Missouri House Overrides
Holden's Vetoes of Abortion, Gun Bills." Go to:
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascitystar/6738053.htm
______________________________________________________________________
Excerpts:
The Missouri House today overrode Gov. Bob Holden's vetoes
of bills that would legalize concealed weapons and mandate
a 24-hour waiting period for a woman to have an abortion.
The action sets up a showdown on both bills in the Senate.
To the cheers of abortion opponents who packed the upper
galleries, the Republican-led House easily found enough votes
to override Holden's veto of the abortion bill. Override sup-
porters needed 109 of 163 votes and got 120, with 35
members voting against an override.
Sponsored by Rep. Susan Phillips, a Kansas City Republican,
the bill would prohibit doctors from performing an abortion
unless they have consulted with the patient and discussed the
health risks and effects of an abortion 24 hours prior to the
procedure.
[...]
______________________________________________________________________
Papa Jack commented:
Actually, many "chop shop" abortionists seldom even see
the women until they enter the "chop" room to begin the
abortion.
Much of the so-called "consulting" is done by clerks trained
only as salespersons.
.
|
|
| User: "Pat Winstanley" |
|
| Title: Re: Missouri House Overrides Abortion Bill Veto |
14 Sep 2003 03:12:17 PM |
|
|
In article <9U%8b.243584$2x.68138@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>,
Zuukie@Comcast_nospam_.net says...
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19ce8d1caee0b67a98ad9c@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <FFZ8b.440062$YN5.294804@sccrnsc01>,
Zuukie@Comcast_nospam_.net says...
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19cdeda2e1bc220f98ad45@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <QjF8b.233524$2x.66580@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>,
Zuukie@Comcast_nospam_.net says...
"Pat Winstanley" <wallopcods2003@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.19ccd73589a55ab598ad06@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <Uqs8b.230623$2x.64853@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>,
Zuukie@Comcast_nospam_.net says...
Subject: Re: Missouri House Overrides Abortion Bill Veto
From: "Dorothy" <Zuukie@Comcast_nospam_.net>
Newsgroups: talk.abortion, alt.abortion
Another chop shop article:
I saw nothing in what followed relating to shops where cut of
beef,
pork, lamb, chicken, duck etc can be procured for consumption at
home
(ie. 'chop shop').
Perhaps you posted the wrong article.
Try looking under "cookery" or "retailing" next time if you want
to
find
an article about procuring good quality ingredients for a
meat-based
rather than vegetarian/vegan repast.
The law defines the act of operating a chop shop
Then provide a law that does so!
Too lazy to click to a link that speaks of that law.? Too bad.
The link you provided led nowhere... try again! ;-))
As I wrote elsewhere, if you pro-aborts were as stupid as you pretend to be,
you would be locked up for your own safety.
The link led to safety laws. There you hit the little blue words that say
chop shop, which leads to:
NEW STATE LAW TARGETS AUTO THEFT
Nashville (July 17, 2000) -- A law passed by the Tennessee General
Assembly earlier this year provides a definition and punishment for a method
of auto theft previously unrecognized by state statute, effectively raising
the stakes against individuals who try to make a business out of stealing
cars and trucks.
Defining and providing penalties for operating a chop shop will give
auto theft investigators a powerful new tool in prosecuting this crime, says
Safety Commissioner Mike Greene. The Department of Safety's Criminal
Investigations Division is primarily responsible for investigating and
preventing auto theft in Tennessee.
The Motor Vehicle Chop Shop Act was passed as House Bill 1130 and Senate
Bill 1614. It was part of Gov. Don Sundquist's legislative package and was
sponsored in the House by Reps. Keith Westmoreland of Kingsport and Stancil
Ford of Talbott and in the Senate by Sen. Tommy Haun of Greeneville. The law
defines the act of operating a chop shop - a common term used to describe
the process of disassembling autos and destroying or disguising the identity
of the vehicle or its parts so that it can be resold. Previously, Tennessee
law did not define or provide a criminal penalty for operating a chop shop.
The new law went into effect July 1.
"Before this law was passed, investigators could only charge individuals
engaged in this crime with theft, and depending on the value of the item in
question, this often amounted to only a misdemeanor charge," says Greene.
"The Chop Shop Act makes this offense a Class D felony and provides a
minimum mandatory fine of $3,500. This gives us a powerful enforcement tool
and also provides a deterrent in the form of increased punishment and
fines."
The new law also provides criminal penalties for individuals who
knowingly buy from or sell to a chop shop. Those penalties will be
determined by the value of the property bought or sold. In addition, the law
increases the penalty from a Class C misdemeanor to a Class A misdemeanor
for an individual selling, offering to sell or having in their possession a
vehicle engine or transmission which has a destroyed or altered serial
number.
"Commissioner Greene has made auto theft a top priority within this
division, which has led to stepped-up enforcement, improved officer training
and an increase in public awareness through educational campaigns," says CID
Director Sam Nelson. "We are now seeing the results of that initiative.
According to the FBI's Uniform Crime Report, auto theft in Tennessee
decreased by 16.7 percent between 1997 and 1998. Although the 1999 report
has not yet been completed, preliminary figures indicate a second decrease
in Tennessee's auto theft rate."
The Criminal Investigations Division consists of 42 agents, including an
Odometer Enforcement Unit. In 1998, division agents made 1,919 arrests as a
result of auto theft investigations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Back to Department of Safety Homepage
Now that chop shop has been very clearly defined, you can reread the posts
which explain how an abortion clinic which sells off the body parts of
killed humans can be compared to an automobile chop shop.
What, exactly, makes you think that the above is in any way relevant to
women getting medical treatment?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dorothy" |
|
| Title: Re: Missouri House Overrides Abortion Bill Veto |
12 Sep 2003 05:12:42 PM |
|
|
Another chop shop story:
http://worldmag.com/world/issue/10-23-99/cover_1.asp
The harvest of abortion
Fetal-tissue research: Making the best of a bad situation, or sliding
further down the slippery slope? Congress and the Clinton administration's
lifting of the fetal-tissue research ban has turned human-remains
trafficking into big business
By Lynn Vincent
Warning: This story contains some graphic detail.
As Monday morning sunshine spills across the high plains of Aurora, Colo.,
and a new work week begins, fresh career challenges await Ms. Ying Bei Wang.
On Monday, for example, she might scalpel her way through the brain stem of
an aborted 24-week pre-born child, pluck the brain from the baby's
peach-sized head with forceps, and plop it into wet ice for later shipment.
On Tuesday, she might carefully slice away the delicate tissue that secures
a dead child's eyes in its skull, and extract them whole. Ms. Ying knows her
employer's clients prefer the eyes of dead babies to be whole. One once
requested to receive 4 to 10 per day.
Although she works in Aurora at an abortion clinic called the Mayfair
Women's Center, Ms. Ying is employed by the Anatomic Gift Foundation (AGF),
a Maryland-based nonprofit. AGF is one of at least five U.S. organizations
that collect, prepare, and distribute to medical researchers fetal tissue,
organs, and body parts that are the products of voluntary abortions.
When "Kelly," a woman who claimed to have been an AGF "technician" like Ms.
Ying, approached Life Dynamics in 1997, the pro-life group launched an
undercover investigation. The probe unearthed grim, hard-copy evidence of
the cross-country flow of baby body parts, including detailed dissection
orders, a brochure touting "the freshest tissue available," and price lists
for whole babies and parts. One 1999 price list from a company called
Opening Lines reads like a cannibal's wish list: Skin $100. Limbs (at least
2) $150. Spinal cord $325. Brain $999 (30% discount if significantly
fragmented).
The evidence confirmed what pro-life bioethicists have long predicted: the
nadir-bound plummet of respect for human life-and the ascendancy of death
for profit.
"It's the inevitable logical progression of a society that, like Darwin,
believes we came from nothing," notes Gene Rudd, an obstetrician and member
of the Christian Medical and Dental Society's Bioethics Commission. "When we
fail to see life as sacred and ordained by God as unique, this is the
reasonable conclusion ... taking whatever's available to gratify our own
self-interests and taking the weakest of the species first ... like jackals.
This is the inevitable slide down the slippery slope."
In 1993, President Clinton freshly greased that slope. Following vigorous
lobbying by patient advocacy groups, Mr. Clinton signed the National
Institutes of Health (NIH) Revitalization Act, effectively lifting the ban
on federally funded research involving the transplantation of fetal tissue.
For medical and biotech investigators, it was as though the high government
gate barring them from Research Shangri-La had finally been thrown open.
Potential cures for Parkinson's, AIDS, and cancer suddenly shimmered in the
middle distance. The University of Washington in Seattle opened an
NIH-funded embryology laboratory that runs a round-the-clock collection
service at abortion clinics. NIH itself advertised (and still advertises)
its ability to "supply tissue from normal or abnormal embryos and fetuses of
desired gestational ages between 40 days and term."
But, this being the land of opportunity, fetal-tissue entrepreneurs soon
emerged to nip at NIH's well-funded heels. Anatomic Gift Foundation, Opening
Lines, and at least two other companies-competition AGF representatives say
they know of, but decline to name-joined the pack. Each firm formed
relationships with abortion clinics. Each also furnished abortionists with
literature and consent forms for use by clinic counselors in making women
aware of the option to donate their babies' bodies to medical science.
According to AGF executive director Brent Bardsley, aborting mothers are not
approached about tissue donation until after they've signed a consent to
abort.
Ironically, it is the babies themselves that are referred to as "donors," as
though they had some say in the matter. Such semantic red flags-and a
phalanx of others-have bioethicists hotly debating the issue of fetal-tissue
research: Does the use of the bodies of aborted children for medical
research amount to further exploitation of those who are already victims?
Will the existence of fetal-tissue donation programs persuade more mothers
that abortion is an acceptable, even altruistic, option? Since abortion is
legal and the human bodies are destined to be discarded anyway, does it all
shake out as a kind of ethical offset, mitigating the abortion holocaust
with potential good?
While the ethical debate rages in air-conditioned conference rooms, material
obtained by Life Dynamics points up what goes on in abortion clinic labs:
the cutting up and parting out of dead children. The fate of these smallest
victims is chronicled in more than 50 actual dissection orders or
"protocols" obtained by the activist group. The protocols detail how
requesting researchers want baby parts cut and shipped: "Dissect fetal liver
and thymus and occasional lymph node from fetal cadaver within 10 (minutes
of death)." "Arms and legs need not be intact." "Intact brains preferred,
but large pieces of brain may be usable."
Most researchers want parts harvested from fetuses 18 to 24 weeks in utero,
which means the largest babies lying in lab pans awaiting a blade would
stretch 10 to 12 inches-from your wrist to your elbow. Some researchers
append a subtle "plus" sign to the "24," indicating that parts from
late-term babies would be acceptable. Many stipulate "no abnormalities,"
meaning the baby in question should have been healthy prior to having her
life cut short by "intrauterine cranial compression" (crushing of the
skull).
On one protocol dated 1991, August J. Sick of San Diego-based Invitrogen
Corporation requested kidneys, hearts, lungs, livers, spleens, pancreases,
skin, smooth muscle, skeletal muscle and brains from unborn babies of 15-22
weeks gestational age. Mr. Sick wanted "5-10 samples of each per month."
WORLD called Mr. Sick to verify that he had indeed ordered the parts. (He
had.) When WORLD pointed out that Invitrogen's request of up to 100 samples
per month would mean a lot of dead babies, Mr. Sick-sounding quite
shaken-quickly aborted the interview.
Many of the dissection orders provide details of research projects in which
the fetal tissue will be used. Most, in the abstract, are medically noble,
with goals like conquering AIDS or creating "surfactants," substances that
would enable premature babies to breathe independently.
Other research applications are chilling. For example, R. Paul Johnson from
Massachusetts' New England Regional Primate Research Center requested
second-trimester fetal livers. His 1995 protocol notes that the livers will
be used ultimately for "primate implantation," including the "creation of
human-monkey chimeras." In biology, a chimera is an organism created by the
grafting or mutation of two genetically different cell types.
Another protocol is up-front about the researchers' profit motive. Systemix,
a California-based firm, wanted aborting mothers to know that any fetal
tissue donated "is for research purposes which may lead to commercial
applications."
That leads to the money trail.
Life Dynamics' investigation uncovered the financial arrangement between
abortionists and fetal-parts providers. The Uniform Anatomic Gift Act makes
it a federal crime to buy or sell fetal tissue. So entities involved in the
collection and transfer of fetal parts operate under a documentary rubric
that, while technically lawful, looks distinctly like a legal end-around:
AGF, for example, pays the Mayfair Women's Center for the privilege of
obtaining fetal tissue. Researchers pay AGF for the privilege of receiving
fetal tissue. But all parties claim there is no buying or selling of fetal
tissue going on.
Instead, AGF representatives maintain that Mayfair "donates" dead babies to
AGF. Researchers then compensate AGF for the cost of tissue recovery. It's a
service fee, explains AGF executive director Brent Bardsley: compensation
for services like dissection, blood tests, preservation, and shipping.
Money paid by fetal-tissue providers to abortion clinics is termed a "site
fee," and does not, Mr. Bardsley maintains, pay for baby parts harvested.
Instead the fee compensates clinics for allowing technicians like Ms. Ying
to work on-site retrieving and dissecting dead babies-sort of a
Frankensteinian sublet.
"It's clearly a fee-for-space arrangement," says Mr. Bardsley. "We occupy a
portion of their laboratory, use their clinic supplies, have a phone line
installed. The site fee offsets the use of clinic supplies that we use in
tissue procurement."
According to Mr. Bardsley, fetal-tissue recovery accounts for only about 10
percent of AGF's business. The rest involves the recovery and transfer to
researchers of non-transplantable organs and tissue from adult donors. But,
in spite of the fact that AGF recovers tissue from all 50 states, Mr.
Bardsley could not cite for WORLD an instance in which AGF pays a "site fee"
to hospital morgues or funeral homes for the privilege of camping on-site to
retrieve adult tissue.
Mr. Bardsley, a trained surgical technician, seems like a friendly guy. On
the phone he sounds reasonable, intelligent, and sincere about his
contention that AGF isn't involved in the fetal-tissue business for the
money.
"We have a lot of pride in what we do," he says. "We think we make a
difference with research and researchers' accessibility to human tissue.
Every time you go to a drug store, the drugs on the shelf are there as a
result of human tissue donation. You can't perfect drugs to be used in human
beings using animal models."
AGF operates as a nonprofit and employs fewer than 15 people. Mr. Bardsley's
brother Jim and Jim's wife Brenda founded the organization in 1994. The
couple had previously owned a tissue-recovery organization called the
International Institute for the Advancement of Medicine (IIAM), which had
also specialized in fetal-tissue redistribution, counting, for example, Mr.
Sick among its clients. But when IIAM's board of directors decided to
withdraw from involvement with fetal tissue, the Bardsleys spun off
AGF-specifically to continue providing fetal tissue to researchers.
Significantly, AGF opened in 1994, the year after President Clinton
shattered the fetal-tissue research ban. Since then, the company's revenues
have rocketed from $180,000 to $2 million in 1998. Did the Bardsleys see a
market niche that was too good to pass up? Brenda Bardsley, who is now AGF
president, says no. AGF's economic windfall, she says, is related to the
company's expansion into adult donations, not the transfer of fetal tissue.
She says she and her husband felt compelled to continue providing the
medical community with a source of fetal tissue "because of the research
that was going on."
"Abortion is legal, but tragic. We see what we're doing as trying to make
the best of a bad situation," Mrs. Bardsley told WORLD. "We don't encourage
abortion, but we see that good can come from fetal-tissue research. There is
so much wonderful research going on-research that can help save the lives of
wanted children."
Mrs. Bardsley says she teaches her own children that abortion is wrong. A
Deep South transplant with a brisk, East coast accent, Mrs. Bardsley and her
family attend a Southern Baptist church near their home on the Satilla River
in White Oak, Ga. Mrs. Bardsley homeschools her three children using, she
says, a Christian curriculum: "I've been painted as this monster, but here I
am trying to give my kids a Christian education," she says, referring to
other media coverage of AGF's fetal-parts enterprise.
Mrs. Bardsley says she's prayed over whether her business is acceptable in
God's sight, and has "gotten the feeling" that it is. She also, she says,
reads the Bible "all the time." And though she can't cite a chapter and
verse that says it's OK to cut and ferry baby parts, she points out that God
commands us to love one another. For Mrs. Bardsley, aiding medical research
by supplying fetal parts qualifies.
If they were in it for the money rather than for the good of mankind, says
Mrs. Bardsley, AGF could charge much higher prices for fetal tissue than it
does, because research demand is so high.
The issue of demand is one of several points on which the testimonies of
Mrs. Bardsley and her brother-in-law Brent don't jibe. He says demand for
fetal tissue "isn't all that high." She says demand for fetal tissue is "so
high, we could never meet it." He says "only a small percentage" of aborting
moms consent to donate their babies' bodies. She says 75 percent of them
consent. He says AGF charges only for whole bodies, and doesn't see how the
body-parts company Opening Lines could justify charging by the body part.
She says AGF charges for individual organs and tissue based on the company's
recovery costs.
Founded by pathologist Miles Jones, Opening Lines was, until recently, based
in West Frankfort, Ill. According to its brochure, Opening Lines' parent
company, Consultative and Diagnostic Pathology, Inc., processes an average
of 1,500 fetal-tissue cases per day. While AGF requires that researchers
submit proof that the International Research Board (IRB), a research
oversight commission, approves their work, Opening Lines does not burden its
customers with such technicalities. In fact, says the Opening Lines
brochure, researchers need not tell the company why they need baby parts at
all-simply state their wishes and let Opening Lines provide "the freshest
tissue prepared to your specifications and delivered in the quantities you
need it."
Opening Lines' brochure cloaks the profit motive in a veil of altruism. The
cover tells abortionists that since fetal-tissue donation benefits medical
science, "You can turn your patient's decision into something wonderful."
But in case philanthropy isn't a sufficient motivator, Dr. Jones also makes
his program financially appealing to abortionists. Like AGF, he offers to
lease space from clinics so his staff can dissect children's bodies on-site,
but also goes a step further: He offers to train abortion clinic staff to
harvest tissue themselves. He even sweetens the deal for abortionists with a
financial incentive: "Based on your volume, we will reimburse part or all of
your employee's salary, thereby reducing your overhead."
Again the money trail: more dead babies harvested, less overhead. Less
overhead, more profit.
But Dr. Jones' own profits may be taking a beating at present. When Life
Dynamics released the results of its investigation to West Frankfort's
newspaper The Daily American, managing editor Shannon Woodworth ran a
front-page story under a 100-point headline: "Pro-Lifers: Baby body parts
sold out of West Frankfort." The little town of 9,000 was scandalized. City
officials threatened legal action against Dr. Jones and his chief of staff
Gayla Rose, a lab technician and longtime West Frankfort resident. The story
splashed down in local TV news coverage, and Illinois right-to-life
activists vowed to picket Opening Lines. Within a week, Gayla Rose had shut
down the company's West St. Louis Street location, disconnected the phone,
and disappeared.
Area reporters now believe Dr. Jones may be operating somewhere in Missouri.
WORLD attempted to track him down, but without success.
The demands of researchers for fetal tissue will continue to drive suppliers
to supply it. And all parties will continue to wrap their grim enterprise in
the guise of the greater good. But some bioethicists believe that even the
greater good has a spending cap.
Christopher Hook, a fellow with the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity
in Bannockburn, Ill., calls the exploitation of pre-born children "too high
a price regardless of the supposed benefit. We can never feel comfortable
with identifying a group of our brothers and sisters who can be exploited
for the good of the whole," Dr. Hook says. "Once we have crossed that line,
we have betrayed our covenant with one another as a society, and certainly
the covenant of medicine."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Missouri House Overrides Abortion Bill Veto |
11 Sep 2003 09:57:39 PM |
|
|
In article <6f9e1b49.0309111142.6260c8df@posting.google.com>,
(Papa Jack) wrote:
Papa Jack commented:
Actually, many "chop shop" abortionists seldom even see
the women until they enter the "chop" room to begin the
abortion.
Much of the so-called "consulting" is done by clerks trained
only as salespersons.
What makes you such an expert on this?
.
|
|
|
| User: "M is for Malapert" |
|
| Title: Re: Missouri House Overrides Abortion Bill Veto |
11 Sep 2003 11:06:06 PM |
|
|
"David Barnes" <dbarnes@barnsco.com> wrote in message
news:dbarnes-984DFE.19573911092003@news.west.cox.net...
In article <6f9e1b49.0309111142.6260c8df@posting.google.com>,
papajack@stic.net (Papa Jack) wrote:
Actually, many "chop shop" abortionists seldom even see
the women until they enter the "chop" room to begin the
abortion.
Much of the so-called "consulting" is done by clerks trained
only as salespersons.
What makes you such an expert on this?
A rich fantasy life supplemented by pro-lie propaganda.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
