Media Blackout of Dr. Kermit Gosnell

[mmhmm]

Apr 15, 2013 14:02:50 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 15, 2013 13:44:21 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

It's kinda confusing, Virgil.  There's date of conception, and there's date of implantation.  Since most don't know the date of conception, or the date of implantation, doctors generally use the first day of the last period to determine a due date.  It's just not an exact science.

this is why RU486 is controversial in the US- because it is NOT a contraceptive.

mmhmm- what % of the time does a fertilized egg NOT implant?  do you have stats on that?

I don't, dj.  At least, not off the top of my head.  I'd have to look it up, but it's not a small percentage.  Probably, at least half of them, if memory serves.

[billisonboard]

Apr 15, 2013 11:25:07 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

...

It's absurd, but I at least count it a blessing that infanticide still isn't tolerated by most. And billisonboard, I certainly haven't forgotten our debate in the "after-birth abortion" thread where you unabashedly argued for the right to infanticide.

Wish I remembered that and/or there weren't the problems with finding old threads.

[Virgil Showlion]

Apr 15, 2013 14:23:10 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Apr 15, 2013 11:25:07 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

...

It's absurd, but I at least count it a blessing that infanticide still isn't tolerated by most. And billisonboard, I certainly haven't forgotten our debate in the "after-birth abortion" thread where you unabashedly argued for the right to infanticide.

Wish I remembered that and/or there weren't the problems with finding old threads.

The final few words in the sentence are a link to the thread.

[billisonboard]

Apr 15, 2013 14:42:17 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Apr 15, 2013 14:23:10 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Wish I remembered that and/or there weren't the problems with finding old threads.

The final few words in the sentence are a link to the thread.

Sweet. Thanks for including that. Great discussion back then.

I am very much pro-"staying the heck out of the decision that individuals need to make" in a great many areas including abortion. I am also of the opinion that if we are going to declare that women can not get legal abortions, that we need to put woman on trial and convict them of premeditated murder if they have an abortion. They need to be sentenced within the same guidelines of anyone else so convicted.

[Virgil Showlion]

Apr 15, 2013 17:57:51 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Apr 15, 2013 14:42:17 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

The final few words in the sentence are a link to the thread.

Sweet. Thanks for including that. Great discussion back then.

I am very much pro-"staying the heck out of the decision that individuals need to make" in a great many areas including abortion. I am also of the opinion that if we are going to declare that women can not get legal abortions, that we need to put woman on trial and convict them of premeditated murder if they have an abortion. They need to be sentenced within the same guidelines of anyone else so convicted.

I wondered about the same thing. If the kinds of abortions that Dr. Gosnell was performing were deemed murder by the law, are the women who received the abortions not also culpable for murder?

I'm sure the state is mindful of the ramifications of prosecuting hundreds or even thousands of women for murder.

[swamp]

Yes, they are culpable of nurder if it can be shown they knew the fetus was viable.

However, apparently Gosnell would routinely fudge the ultrasound measurements and tell the woman she was 24.5 weeks pregnant. That goes to negate their culpability.

[Deleted]

I know this is not to be another abortion debate thread and I'm not posting this to start one, but I thought I would share this pretty thoughtful article about the debate. 
Thoughts on  where it has been , why it may never end, and I think some pretty good thoughts on both sides of the issue.
It's kind of long.


 
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324030704578422883948238160.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLETopOpinion

[djAdvocate]

Apr 15, 2013 13:07:28 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Apr 15, 2013 12:23:38 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

BS.  we accused you of impugning 21% of the US population.  nothing more or less.  i never for one instant thought you supported/defended NAMBLA, only that you were operating under the mistaken notion that anyone else here, either tacitly or by association, did.

I wasn't referring to you.

yes you were.  me, and 50M other Americans who call themselves liberal.

[weltschmerz]

Holder’s ties to the abortion industry explain a lot – his attacks against pro-life activists and that he looks the other way on abortion industry skulduggery

Interesting that you didn't mention Romney's ties to abortion and how much money he made off them....

[Virgil Showlion]

I wasn't referring to you.

yes you were.  me, and 50M other Americans who call themselves liberal.

That's just festering under your skin, isn't it?

When you wake up in the morning, the sunrise is a little grayer, your bowl of cornflakes is a little blander, the music in your radio is a little duller... because in your mind it keeps repeating like a refrain: Virgil believes NAMBLA is liberal. Virgil believes NAMBLA is liberal.

No! You cry out. Nobody can believe such a thing. Madness! Again today I will rebuke him!


...Slowly eating away at the edges of your world.

...Slowly claiming your sanity.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 16, 2013 15:29:15 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

yes you were.  me, and 50M other Americans who call themselves liberal.

That's just festering under your skin, isn't it?

of course!  if i were to say they were Christian, would it bother YOU?

When you wake up in the morning, the sunrise is a little grayer,

my windows face west.

your bowl of cornflakes is a little blander,

i don't eat cereal.

the music in your radio is a little duller...

that is probably true.  i hate that station my wife listens to.

because in your mind it keeps repeating like a refrain: Virgil believes NAMBLA is liberal. Virgil believes NAMBLA is liberal.

No! You cry out. Nobody can believe such a thing. Madness! Again today I will rebuke him!


...Slowly eating away at the edges of your world.

...Slowly claiming your sanity.

hey, as many times as you shout it out, i will be there to say "NAMBLA is nutty and despicable", "NAMBLA is nutty and despicable".  we'll see how many fall into your camp.

but it is true, if you drive me sufficiently insane, i might actually agree with you.

[TonyTiger]

Apr 16, 2013 15:29:15 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

yes you were.  me, and 50M other Americans who call themselves liberal.

That's just festering under your skin, isn't it? ...

You're Mean Streak is showing today...    

[Virgil Showlion]

of course! if i were to say they were Christian, would it bother YOU?

If you could prove it, certainly.

[Cookies Galore]

Apr 12, 2013 15:54:35 GMT -5 usaone said:

Its been on our local news almost every day here in Philly.

Yup. It's been hard to avoid reading the stories now that the trial has started. I work near where his clinic was. When the story first broke and I read the grand jury report, I couldn't believe how often I've walked past the building not knowing what horrible things were happening inside.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 16, 2013 18:31:13 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

of course! if i were to say they were Christian, would it bother YOU?

If you could prove it, certainly.

really, now?  i would be FAR more upset if one were to claim it without any proof whatsoever.  that would royally piss me off, in fact.

we are very different people if that is NOT your reaction, as well, Virgil.

[Virgil Showlion]

Apr 17, 2013 0:02:50 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 16, 2013 18:31:13 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

If you could prove it, certainly.

really, now?  i would be FAR more upset if one were to claim it without any proof whatsoever.  that would royally piss me off, in fact.

we are very different people if that is NOT your reaction, as well, Virgil.

If I got upset about everything PMers wrongly claimed about Christianity, I'd be a miserable individual indeed.

Furthermore, I've already argued (and you've more or less agreed) that Christianity must comport with a specific doctrine--namely the teachings of Jesus Christ. No such rigorous standard exists for liberalism. Doctrinal liberalism changes every decade. A liberal from 1912 is a very different creature from a liberal of 1812 is a very different creature from a liberal today. The only consistency is in the desire for change based on individual perceptions of freedom and the common good, which is consequently why the dictionary does not tie "liberal" down to any one philosophy or ethical standard.

I think you realize this, which is why you've dredged up the debate post mortem in two separate threads now. You've challenged me to argue the reasonableness of a moral or ethical standard where pedophilia is acceptable, which I've refused to do because evil is at times quite reasonable.

[mmhmm]

Apr 16, 2013 15:40:45 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 16, 2013 15:29:15 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

That's just festering under your skin, isn't it?

of course!  if i were to say they were Christian, would it bother YOU?

When you wake up in the morning, the sunrise is a little grayer,

my windows face west.

your bowl of cornflakes is a little blander,

i don't eat cereal.

the music in your radio is a little duller...

that is probably true.  i hate that station my wife listens to.

because in your mind it keeps repeating like a refrain: Virgil believes NAMBLA is liberal. Virgil believes NAMBLA is liberal.

No! You cry out. Nobody can believe such a thing. Madness! Again today I will rebuke him!


...Slowly eating away at the edges of your world.

...Slowly claiming your sanity.

hey, as many times as you shout it out, i will be there to say "NAMBLA is nutty and despicable", "NAMBLA is nutty and despicable".  we'll see how many fall into your camp.

but it is true, if you drive me sufficiently insane, i might actually agree with you.

If you do, I will personally arrive on your doorstep with about 50 other people and we'll do an intervention! 

[frankq]

Apr 12, 2013 9:47:46 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

If the baby had no mouth, how could they tell it was "screaming"?

Beat me to it.....

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

We're five weeks into a story of an abortion mill house of horrors where there is testimony of screaming babies being delivered alive, infant decapitations, babies ripped apart, body parts in jars-- all at a clinic apparently owned by the wife of Attorney General Eric Holder who has gone to extreme measures to abuse the power of his office to restrict the free speech rights of the opponents of abortion. And NOTHING from the fringe left media.

Now, I want you to imagine the Huffington Post, MSLSD, ABC, SEE BS, et al ignoring a story where a PMC was running a black prison where it was discovered that 52,000 islamist militants, and maybe some civilians, were held for three days and water boarded. Not killed, not tortured- water boarded. I want you to tell me that wouldn't be considered a story. And yet this is far worse, and its tentacles reach into the US Executive Branch and *crickets*

Marc Lamont Hill (a far left wing liberal) also admits what conservatives and pro-live advocates for the right to life of unborn babies have known for almost a month now:

The fringe left media has blacked out this story out of fear that it may impact the abortion debate negatively for the pro-abortion side:

“For what it’s worth, I do think that those of us on the left have made a decision not to cover this trial because we worry that it’ll compromise abortion rights. Whether you agree with abortion or not, I do think there’s a direct connection between the media’s failure to cover this and our own political commitments on the left. I think it’s a bad idea, I think it’s dangerous, but I think that’s the way it is.” - Marc Lamont Hill

There is video of this posted at The Blaze- I was not able to find it directly on HuffPo Live which is where it is from Maybe I just can't Google today.

www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/16/huffpost-live-host-admits-i-do-think-that-those-of-us-on-the-left-have-made-a-decision-not-to-cover-gosnell-trial/

[swamp]

Slate covered the story 2 years ago and is covering it now. That's about is liberal as sit gets.

As for holders wife owning the place, are you responsible for the meth lab your tenants are running back in Indiana? You know there's at least one.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

As mmhmm has reminded us, this will NOT turn into a discussion of abortion. We've been there and we will NOT be doing that. The topic is the media blackout of this story. Stick to it.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Apr 17, 2013 9:07:53 GMT -5 swamp said:

Slate covered the story 2 years ago and is covering it now. That's about is liberal as sit gets.

As for holders wife owning the place, are you responsible for the meth lab your tenants are running back in Indiana? You know there's at least one.

If my wife is the AG of Illinois and she chooses to go after the people protesting the place instead of the cooks- you would think that passes the smell test?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

The point isn't that you can't find instances of this story. The point is that this is headline news, every channel, front page of every paper, national-conversation material-- and we're getting *crickets*. The fact is we spent more time talking about Rush Limbaugh calling Sandra Fluke- a 30 year old "college student" begging the government to use force against an insurance company to compel them to include birth control in her health insurance at no extra cost to her.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Apr 17, 2013 9:07:53 GMT -5 swamp said:

Slate covered the story 2 years ago and is covering it now. That's about is liberal as sit gets.

As for holders wife owning the place, are you responsible for the meth lab your tenants are running back in Indiana? You know there's at least one.

And btw- when the D.E.A. showed up, I was cooperative; but I didn't get the impression they were apt to permit me to ignore them.  I likely would have been taken in to custody had I hung up on them, or slammed the door in their faces.  I had to hire an attorney (at my own expense) and go down on my own time and my own dime to talk to agents.  My property was seized.  They haven't even mentioned her name with respect to this story.  To the best of my knowledge, she's never been asked what she knew, if anything, about what was going on at this clinic.

[swamp]

Maybe she was interviewed. We don't know.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Regardless- this is a national story. And yet, it's not. I have no doubt that you can find instances- and you'll find more instances as the left wing press is dragged kicking and screaming into covering it.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Apr 17, 2013 9:22:06 GMT -5 swamp said:

Maybe she was interviewed. We don't know.

Isn't it the media's job to be curious about this for us, and find out?

[Deleted]

Don't mind Paul... those goalposts aren't going to move themselves...




A few days ago, you were irritated that the "liberal media" was "covering up" this story... usually that is a euphemism for the mainstream press.
Now, you are complaining that the liberal "fringe" is covering up the story.  So, what is that in your world?  Mother Jones? The Atlantic?

[TonyTiger]

Apr 17, 2013 9:26:38 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Regardless- this is a national story. And yet, it's not. I have no doubt that you can find instances- and you'll find more instances as the left wing press is dragged kicking and screaming into covering it.

This strikes me as having the ring of truth to it.

The lamestream media spend a great deal of time and money focused upon Pro-Choice stories.

But the story of the Baby Butcher of Philadelphia is buried, pretty much across the spectrum of media services.

Paul's point seems well-taken in this instance and dead on target.

[djAdvocate]

Apr 17, 2013 6:05:21 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Apr 17, 2013 0:02:50 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

really, now?  i would be FAR more upset if one were to claim it without any proof whatsoever.  that would royally piss me off, in fact.

we are very different people if that is NOT your reaction, as well, Virgil.

If I got upset about everything PMers wrongly claimed about Christianity, I'd be a miserable individual indeed.

Furthermore, I've already argued (and you've more or less agreed) that Christianity must comport with a specific doctrine--namely the teachings of Jesus Christ. No such rigorous standard exists for liberalism.

debatable, but continue....

Doctrinal liberalism changes every decade.

bzzzzzzzzt.  liberals are non-doctrinal.

A liberal from 1912 is a very different creature from a liberal of 1812 is a very different creature from a liberal today.

conservatives are also quite different, even though they are far more dogmatic.  in fact a conservative of 2012 looks an awful lot like an 1812 liberal.  i am of the opinion that they are simply 200 years behind, and that they will eventually catch up to where we are today......in 2212.

The only consistency is in the desire for change based on individual perceptions of freedom and the common good, which is consequently why the dictionary does not tie "liberal" down to any one philosophy or ethical standard.

true.  however, just because it "feels good" doesn't make it ethically valid.  there is a separate standard for that which ALL systems must meet. 

I think you realize this, which is why you've dredged up the debate post mortem in two separate threads now.

introspection is not your strong suit, Virgil. 

You've challenged me to argue the reasonableness of a moral or ethical standard where pedophilia is acceptable, which I've refused to do because evil is at times quite reasonable.

examples?