Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  Abortion

How Planned Parenthood Is Getting F’d By a Muckraking Student Activist

The evidence is damning. A 13-year-old goes to Planned Parenthood to get an abortion, tells her counselor that her boyfriend who impregnated her is 31, and the counselor advises her to lie about the baby’s father’s age — otherwise the girl can’t get the abortion and will instead have to deal with making statutory rape charges. Except the girl isn’t 13. She’s 20. Her name is Lila Rose. She’s a UCLA student and anti-abortion activist. And she recorded the whole thing for YouTube.

The story isn’t new. Rose has been recording videos since 2006. She’s been on Bill O’Reilly’s television show (see video, right). But the repercussions of Rose’s videotaped investigation are coming to fruition: Planned Parenthood faces the loss of three-quarters of a million dollars in taxpayer dollars, and that’s just in Tennessee.

Ideally, it’s fair to assume, Rose wants to see abortion outlawed, but as the Los Angeles Times notes, that’s unlikely to happen anytime soon. Instead, her pro-life position is being propped up in other ways, like with legislators canceling Planned Parenthood’s contract.

 

lilarose

Tennessee lawmakers said they would seek to end a $721,000 contract with Planned Parenthood, citing outrage over what they saw in a video Rose had posted two days earlier from a Memphis clinic. She posed there in July as a 14-year-old impregnated by a 31-year-old; a Planned Parenthood staffer says, “Just say you have a boyfriend, 17 years old, whatever.”

Last month, the Orange County Board of Supervisors voted to suspend a grant worth nearly $300,000 to Planned Parenthood that was earmarked for sex education, not abortions. A conservative Tustin businessman raised the issue with Supervisor John Moorlach after meeting Rose and seeing her videos.

Last year, after the Indiana videos were posted on Rose’s website, Bloomington’s Herald Times reported that the nurse’s aide seen on the tape had been fired. A second Planned Parenthood staffer, in Indianapolis, resigned: Rose’s tape appeared to show that employee directing the young woman across the state line to a clinic in Illinois, which doesn’t have a parental consent law.

A grand jury is investigating whether Planned Parenthood violated the law, said Mario Massillamany, a spokesman for the prosecutor of Marion County, where Indianapolis is located. “After we stated we were conducting an investigation, they hired a group to conduct better training for their staff,” he added.

The brand damage suffered by Planned Parenthood and pro-choice causes, meanwhile, is immeasurable. In Rose’s version of things, organizations like Planned Parenthood are promoting abortions over sexual exploitation, overlooking rape to protect a woman’s right to choose.

It’s hard to argue with the footage. But Planned Parenthood must. Its leaders argue Rose’s videotapes are isolated incidents, and with 30,000 employees and volunteers in 850 clinics, it’s impossible to police all behavior. They’re “investigation” the “authenticity” of the videos.

One question that remains, however, is whether somebody (or some organization) is backing Rose’s efforts. Her films are produced by something called Live Action Films, which was legally formed only last year and thus has no tax trail yet, though Rose says she began the organization at age 15. Rose, who works with another activisit, James O’Keefe, says she uses “mostly student volunteers” and makes do with “a very low budget.” She was awarded $50,000 in February by the “Gerard Health Foundation, a Massachusetts-based charity founded by a Catholic businessman that funds antiabortion and abstinence-only sex education efforts.” She was awarded something called the 2008 Life Prize Award (see video of her acceptance speech). Her tactics mimic Mark Crutcher, who in 2002 “taped fake calls to hundreds of Planned Parenthood clinics around the country featuring women posing as pregnant minors.”

On Friday, Rose appeared on Glenn Beck’s show on Fox News to showcase her latest infiltration of a Memphis clinic.

Lisa Rose is, undoubtedly, polarizing. But is she a menace to the pro-choice movement? Or is she a hero to young girls whose sexual exploitation is being overlooked by Planned Parenthood?

By:           editor editor
On:           Apr 27, 2009
Tagged: , , , , ,

  • 119 Comments
    • gunshy61
      gunshy61

      I think she is foul and hope she falls down an elevator shaft.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 1:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mickey Mouse
      Mickey Mouse

      Perhaps if people wouldn’t fucking lie to start with!!! Man those holier than thou times are really bad people to start with. How is lying a virtue to hold up when attempting to smear somebody else. This idiot chick sure ain’t 13 but if you ask me she should have been aborted.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 2:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tarcash
      Tarcash

      I for one would love to see how many other interviews she did where the clinic’s employees told her the right thing. I bet they wont release those, or how many did follow the law. Seriously, full disclosure please.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 2:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • countervail
      countervail

      I don’t necessarily agree with this woman’s tactics but I think she’s absolutely right to expose malpractice within the organization. Yes it is difficult to police a large organization, but there are procedures that can be instituted. She could at the same time be selectively releasing singular examples of detrimental video while not releasing others showing perfectly acceptable encounters.

      Planned Parenthood needs to step up their own internal monitoring, and at the same time protect themselves better from this kind of organizational sabotage.

      It seems the problem is in putting the burden of social work on these organizations. I personally think that any girl under the age of consent should have to have a parent, guardian or licensed social worker sign off on an abortion thus taking the responsibility off Planned Parenthood. They’d be smart to institute better internal programs to deal with minors.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 2:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CONFESSIONS OF A BAD BOY
      CONFESSIONS OF A BAD BOY

      What I want to know who on earth would believe this woman was 14?she looks about 30. That is the real crime here

      Apr 27, 2009 at 2:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D-Sun
      D-Sun

      What I don’t get is why, since she’s putting her face out all over Fox News’ nightly bigot round-up, doesn’t Planned Parenthood just send her picture out and tell their employees to turn her away as soon as she walks in the building?

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jim Casola
      Jim Casola

      It’s a man’s world Liar Rose. Odd that they couldn’t press charges against the case worker, because no crime has been committed, but when government agents entrap people, their lives go in the crapper. I guess a simple, “please stop in for a consultation” would put an end to this scam, but not to the huge black market for sexually exploited women and children, who usually never get the chance to consider whether they want a abortion or not. Maybe you could help them Rose! Heck, even Oprah can’t help them.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • lab
      lab

      I was sorry to read this article. Planned Parenthood is really a great organization! There is so much more that they offer and it is tragic to drag them through the mud like this girl is. My question is why? Why is she doing this? It can not be just her anti-abortion issues. As a young women I used Planned Parenthood. I never received inappropriate advise or direction. It was nice to have the support they offered. I hope that Tennessee changes it’s mind about their financial support to this needed business. Sorry to surprise you Miss Rose, but THERE ARE pregnant teens out there and Planned Parenthood didn’t get them pregnant! Planned Parenthood is trying to lead them down a path of least resistance to what will be a challenging future. I’m sure that if a teenage girl came in and was pregnant from what was obviously rape, Planned Parenthood would handle it as such. Hurting Planned Parenthood is not the path Miss Rose should be using to get her message across.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Reality
      Reality

      Man… that sucks, now we won’t be able to murder babies anymore. This is gonna cramp a lot of people’s style.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      How is this a gay issue? This article is about an anti-abortion zealot, there aren’t too many gays and lesbians out there who are going to accidentally get knocked-up and need the abortion services of Planned Parenthood.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • lab
      lab

      Planned Parenthood doesn’t give abortions – do they?
      As far as I know they didn’t.?.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • American Citizen
      American Citizen

      Way to go, young lady. I guess some of you don’t like it when the truth makes it way out into the forefront.

      Do you also get upset when an undercover agent ‘lies’ about trying to buy drugs?

      Sometimes, the truth hurts.

      Whether you are Pro-Life or not, this sort of ‘counseling’ needs to be stopped.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • American Citizen
      American Citizen

      @Mickey Mouse: Real mature. Are you always this classy?

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      What planned parenthood did was wrong by the letter the law, no question, but that doesn’t argue against the mission of planned parenthood nor does it even approach a case against pro reproductive rights. This devious wingnut activist did something to get her name in the paper and on a few talkshows. Impersonating a pregnant 13 year old alleging that the father was 31 to score cheap talking points for the radical right isn’t very upstanding…kinda seedy, actually.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • lab
      lab

      Watch the video. I don’t think the counselor was that bad. The video was doctored to repeat things to make it sound more harsh. She went there with the intention to get an abortion; I didn’t hear anyone talking her into getting one.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @Cam: Planned Parenthood offers a lot of services to the LGBT community. For gay men in particular, STD and HIV testing and counseling services. They also provide condoms and comprehensive sex ed. So a hit to Planned Parenthood’s budget can and does affect the gay community.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @American Citizen: Do you also get upset when an undercover agent ‘lies’ about trying to buy drugs?

      Yes.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pragmatist
      Pragmatist

      Good for her. A 13 year-old statutorily raped and impregnated by a 31 year-old doesn’t need a hush-hush abortion; she needs counseling, and the guy needs prosecution. Regardless of whether one agrees or disagrees with the rightness of legalized abortions, organizations like Planned Parenthood have been exposed on quite a few occasions for having less than ethical practices.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Percival
      Percival

      @lab: Yes, they do provide abortions
      @Cam: Planned Parenthood provides more than just contraception and woman-centered health care. They also offer STD screenings and treatment and are welcoming to LGBT patients.

      Lila Rose has connections to SEVERAL well-known anti-abortion organizations, and is attempting to “expose” an institutionalized pattern of covering up child sexual abuse to “promote” abortion – false rhetoric that anyone close to the issue can see from a mile off as coming from anti-choice nutjobs.

      These people don’t give a lick about women’s health – all they care about is de-funding Planned Parenthood.

      What PROBABLY happened between the elapsed time you don’t see on these heavily doctored tapes, is the girl told the counselor that her and 31-year-old boyfriend are SO in love, that their parents would never understand, and they she doesn’t want to incur the wrath of her physically abusive parents. Now, as a health care provider, when you have a patient whose two options are to expose the man she loves as a “rapist” (even though the sex was consensual) and shoving a coat-hanger up her cooter, what would YOU choose? It’s not so cut & dried as “the law’s the law”.

      Instead of working to subvert an organization that devotes 95% of its resources to PREVENTING unintended pregnancy, why doesn’t Lila Rose try advocating for some decent comprehensive sex education in our schools?

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @Pragmatist: Regardless of whether one agrees or disagrees with the rightness of legalized abortions

      The only reason these women come to Planned Parenthood is because their parents object to abortions; those are the people who are going to seek a judicial bypass. This is just about making it more difficult for women to obtain reliable information.

      How do we know this girl wasn’t violating the law when, at 20, she fabricated this story to obtain free services? I’m sure I could find a statute she could conceivably have violated….

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • lab
      lab

      @pragmatist: What about the ethics and morals of the thirteen year old having sex? “hush-hush abortion” Please! She has to go before a judge for approval.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mylilpip
      mylilpip

      @Pragmatist: i agree. i am a supporter of planned parenthood im sorry they were duped butbut these kinds of actions are not acceptable.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • playasinmar
      playasinmar

      “In Rose’s version of things, organizations like Planned Parenthood are promoting abortions over sexual exploitation, overlooking rape to protect a woman’s right to choose.”

      In the real world version of things organizations like Planned Parenthood are promoting abortions over sexual exploitation, overlooking rape to protect their bottom line.

      Planned Parenthood sells fetal tissue for huge ammounts of money.

      I don’t actually object to abortion but selling fetal tissue for profit is too weird.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • lab
      lab

      @Percival: No. They may refer women to places that offer them.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 3:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Percival
      Percival

      @lab: I’m sorry but that’s incorrect. http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/abortion/in-clinic-abortion-procedures-4359.htm

      Apr 27, 2009 at 4:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pragmatist
      Pragmatist

      @Alec: I think she was violating a law because she was committing fraud. But I have no problem with that; investigative journalists do that for a living, and they do it to bring previously secret policies and practices out into the open.

      For example, reporters recently took a handgun through the security checkpoint at Logan International Airport. While it’s certainly a serious offense to bring a concealed firearm through airport security, this was done to expose the lax security at Logan. I’m OK with that.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 4:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sal
      sal

      @Tarcash: good point@countervail: agree with ya@Reality: well i guess you were loud and proud at anti war demonstrations huh?since you believe in the sanctity of life?

      Apr 27, 2009 at 4:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      But I don’t think this is a widespread policy or practice. To suggest otherwise is an article of faith unsupported by evidence, but supported by some kinda belief…

      Apr 27, 2009 at 4:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @TANK:

      unsupported by evidence.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 4:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @Pragmatist: Are you OK with vigilantes who break the child pornography laws when they go after pedophiles online? Because the Justice Department isn’t. And the principle is the same, really.

      I’m not actually sure she did break any law. But, really, I have a hard time feeling much sympathy for this “activist” (and I’d wager she’d have nothing but contempt for gays, given the crowd the anti-abortion fanatics run with).

      Actually, if you don’t have a problem with her breaking the law, why do you have a problem with what Planned Parenthood did? They’re arguably serving the greater good…

      Apr 27, 2009 at 4:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rogue dandelion
      rogue dandelion

      This woman is just trying to limit access to abortion to frightened young women. If planned parenthood wasn’t there, these supposed girls would be in the same position, just pregnant.
      Planned Parenthood isn’t the police, they aren’t parents, they can’t stop rape or child abuse on their own.
      Frightened girls won’t go to planned parenthood if it is a sting operation designed to catch predators.
      any woman who is raped should go to the police and file a report- Planned parenthood shouldn’t have to make that decision for them.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 4:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @rogue dandelion: And that’s the crux of the matter, and the problem with the consent and notification laws. It really pits the confidentiality and privacy interests of the teenage girls against the legal obligations of organizations like Planned Parenthood. And it is unwise as a matter of policy, if you ask me.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 4:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pragmatist
      Pragmatist

      @Alec: To be honest, I can’t say because I don’t know anything about vigilantes and child pornography and pedophiles.

      But, I’ve seen TV investigations where reporters went into online chatrooms posing as underage girls and boys, and said things to make themselves sound vulnerable (like “I’m home alone a lot” and “I don’t have any friends”). Predictably, the predators on the other side of the conversation proposed meeting them, and when they showed up, they were busted by a TV crew and police.

      I don’t have a problem with that, at all, except I think it’s kind of trashy to televise the whole thing. But I’m totally OK with the misrepresentation that took place — it was for exposition.

      Careful how you label other people, Alec. You come off as closed-minded when you summarily dismiss “anti-abortion fanatics.” Yes, some opponents are fanatical. But many others are level-headed and some, like myself, hold some pretty far-left views. Abortion is a really delicate issue, and it’s just not suitable for that kind of reduction.

      I have a problem with what Planned Parenthood did because it is an organization operating in a delicate legal/ethical/moral area. I think this investigation uncovered acts that were done to further the organization’s own objectives rather than serving the best interests of the prospective patient. Besides, as I’ve implied, I think it’s OK to break a few rules to expose organizational fraud or incompetence, or to assist in the capture of dangerous criminals.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 4:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Percival
      Percival

      @Pragmatist: What exactly are Planned Parenthood’s “objectives”, in your view?

      Apr 27, 2009 at 4:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruno
      Bruno

      Normally I’d say it’s good to do this, this kind of research goes on all the time regarding racial practices at firms et al. But I have to wonder if “thou shalt not bear false witness” is a part of her life or not as well. You can’t have it both ways, either you believe in sin or you don’t, so it’d be hard for her to show herself as righteous about all this if she’s indeed religious and lying.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 4:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • KEVIN VANCOUVER BC
      KEVIN VANCOUVER BC

      so Yeah blastocyst/zygote not human therefore not murdering “babies” wtf is wrong with these people…

      Apr 27, 2009 at 4:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @Pragmatist: Not quite what I’m talking about, but similar. The courts have largely signed off on that, btw, but I do have problems with some of those “investigations” both by private citizens and law enforcement, where in some cases they take months and may actually create offenders. But I digress.

      And I stand by anti-abortion fanatics. This crowd is not level headed. Nor are its fanatical “pro-life” measures limited to abortion:

      In an awkwardly entertaining Live Action Films YouTube video, a student amasses over a hundred condoms from the UCLA Ashe Center and the Center for Women and Men. He gets them by detailing his plans for an orgy to the front desk attendants. The receptionists tell him to take just three, but the condom man smirks and explains he’ll need a lot more for his weekend plans. “We’re going to Catalina on a boat-ride,” he says enthusiasticaly. Ashe Center staff giggle off camera. It’s understandable they might laugh. Less understandable is their encouragement. “Can I come?” Ashe staff workers ask. “Are you going to have fun on the boat?” Sex with multiple partners? As our student leaves, clutching his condoms, Ashe staff tell him to “raise the roof!”
      However, as health professionals, Ashe’s staff ought to know some sobering facts. Condoms have about a 12% failure rate, according to the Sexuality Information and Education Council. That includes both condom breakage and errors in use. Having made off with 105 condoms in one run, the student can expect at least 12 rips and slips at his “orgy.” Failure could mean pregnancy or STDs. The health center staff mentioned none of these consequences

      http://liveaction.org/advocate/advocate3.pdf

      (You can read all about Lila Rose’s organization at its website; I am curious what that “failure rate” figure actually referred to. Sounds like more obnoxious Catholic Church lies to me).

      I think this investigation uncovered acts that were done to further the organization’s own objectives rather than serving the best interests of the prospective patient.

      I think that the notification requirements were passed without any regard to the best interests of patients. Planned Parenthood shouldn’t be in a position where its employees have to weigh preserving patient confidentiality and the girl’s constitutional right to reproductive choice against committing misdemeanor offenses or exposing themselves to civil liability.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 4:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pragmatist
      Pragmatist

      @Alec: I don’t have time to do a full reply because I’m heading out — but one comment about condom failure rates. They’re disconcerting! I don’t know where the 12% number came from, but UNAIDS circulated a report a while back that estimated the typical usage failure rate at 10%. :-(

      Apr 27, 2009 at 5:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • HeteroDefenseLeague
      HeteroDefenseLeague

      Look at the bigoted homosexuals wishing death upon this girl! Why am I not surprised at the venous bigotry spewed against her?

      Apr 27, 2009 at 5:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jaroslaw
      Jaroslaw

      Thanks Percival #18 & #30 Rogue Dandelion. I’ve said before, I personally think abortion is murder – but I’m not favoring making it illegal either. It’s a tough choice but not mine to make.

      I really can’t stand people like this “activist” – as one of you so well put it, she doesn’t give a lick about women’s or girls rights! It is only to promote her narrow religious agenda and/or get her name in the news.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 5:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jaroslaw
      Jaroslaw

      #38 in case you didn’t notice, heteros are in the majority – and they’re doing a pretty good job (OVERAL) keeping homos in line and without rights.

      And why are you here anyway? See any cute guys on morning goods you closet case?

      Apr 27, 2009 at 5:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      I don’t see what the relevance of the anti choice pro choice has on this particular matter… That’s a separate topic, really, and nothing this person has done addresses that debate. But, there are no good arguments (even the best one they have involving a version of the sorites paradox) on the opposing side.

      Further, bringing up the fact that this girl’s an unhinged crackpot is, at least, accurate… That’s not to suggest that everyone who is antichoice is an unhinged wacko, just quite a few of them…and fundamentalist christian, too.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 5:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Percival
      Percival

      @TANK: Lila Rose wouldn’t be doing this if she weren’t advocating one side of pro-choice, anti-choice debate. That’s part of why what she’s doing is so cunning. It throws everyone off the track of what this is REALLY about: denying women access to basic health care.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 5:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • HeteroDefenseLeague
      HeteroDefenseLeague [Different person #1 using similar name]

      I am a dumb redneck with no friends

      Apr 27, 2009 at 5:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Percival:

      I get that that’s her intent. But nonetheless, this doesn’t speak against the pro choice position, but instead, the mistake made by a planned parenthood employee.

      It has nothing to do, however, with whether or not allowing women reproductive rights is a bad idea… Anyone who believes otherwise has the burden of proving how it would connect up to the policy debate, and given that they’re separate issues without adding some hidden premises that reveal the ideology of the person making the argument, it seems fundamentally unsound.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 5:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @Pragmatist: There’s a difference between typical use and perfect use. Condoms rarely break when used properly. But you’ll notice that they don’t distinguish between the different causes of failure in their little article. The “12% failure rate” is cited in a vacuum to make people believe that condom use is far less effective than it is. These are the same people who don’t want to teach others how to use condoms properly, so we shouldn’t really be surprised.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 5:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Percival
      Percival

      @TANK: I see what you mean. But attempting to sully the name of the nation’s primary advocate for reproductive rights by framing them in an evil light at least implicitly speaks to those people who disagree with Miss Rose’s position in the pro-choice, pro-life debate. It’s an ad hominem (I think that’s the right word? :P) attack on Planned Parenthood and therefore the pro-choice movement.

      Guilt/invalidity by association, in other words.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 6:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Percival:

      Right. It’s invalid propagandist argumentation that, in fact, speaks right past the issue at stake, but could easily resonate with people who aren’t accustomed to…reflection. But if we’re going to talk about the appearance rather than the substance (the politics of it)…which we seem to be doing, then some contexting of her affiliations and beliefs will discredit her to the vast majority of americans who do endorse reproductive rights (qualification here and there).

      Apr 27, 2009 at 6:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • paulied
      paulied

      Did I miss something? When did it become legal to tape someone without her knowledge or consent in the absence of a warrant?

      Apr 27, 2009 at 6:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      That sucks, and she’s a conniving bitch, but they got busted fair and square.

      At least her cover is blown now, but you’d think the organization would have had a file on her before this. Perhaps they will learn now to not do sloppy shit like that.

      Didn’t she fill out a consent form when she came to talk to them?
      Didn’t she have to show some I.D., especially if she was a minor?

      There are ways of telling someone what their options are without coming right out and telling her to lie (like simply stating what the options are with no advice).

      I hate to say it, because I have no sympathy for those evil antichoice fuckers, and the fallout (killing sex education) is a tragedy, but PP were sloppy, stupid, and they probably deserved to get caught.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 8:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mike Barton
      Mike Barton

      I’ve noted several remarks criticizing the tactics used and referencing police activities in pursuit of drug dealers and pedophiles. The missing link here is that this young lady is not law enforcement or attached to any regulatory agency that has the authority to conduct such investigations, regardless of the tactics used. This young woman, a private citizen, wasted the resources of Planned Parenthood under false pretenses for the purposes of forwarding her political agenda, a gag for which I think Planned Parenthood should send her a bill.

      There are agencies that exist to oversee such organizations and the young lady should have worked with those agencies if she had reason to believe this was going on. There’s a right way to do it and a wrong way to do it – she did it the wrong way. Of course, if Planned Parenthood had done things the right way they would have reported the age disparity to law enforcement for action, which could have gotten the young lady slapped across the face with a charge of making a false report.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 9:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @Mike Barton:
      Nah, you don’t have to be the FBI or the cops to run a sting like that. I doubt she broke any laws, and there’s no way they’re going to send her a bill when they are scrambling to do damage control.

      News reporters do it, freelance writers, NGOs like Greenpeace, private investigators, and even groups like PETA do it.

      I hate what she stands for, but she got them fair and square.

      If PP had done things the right way they would have ID’d her, and they wouldn’t have counselled a minor to lie and this wouldn’t have happened in the first place. It was stupid and sloppy of them.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 10:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rick Hammer
      Rick Hammer

      Obviously many of the posters have no knowledge of the history of Planned Parenthood, founded by Margaret Sanger, who was a eugenecist, for the purpose of aborting black babies. Google “Black genocide,” “Margaret Sanger,” and “Sanger and the KKK.” You ignorant and uninformed posted would be sick.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 10:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @Rick Hammer:
      Interesting. I did not know that, thanks.

      The fact is there are many organizations that have a nasty or homophobic history.

      All that really matters to me is the fact they are doing good and necessary work now. In Canada that includes a lot of anti-homophobia and anti-STD work, and support for LGBT parents.

      So thanks for the history lesson (sincerely), but it’s kind of like trying to blame the German Green Party for the Third Reich (excuse the Godwinism).

      Apr 27, 2009 at 11:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @Rick Hammer: Like most right wing propogandists, you’re spreading lies and half truths. Like most of her contemporaries, Margaret Sanger did have views that would be denounced as racist today. But she was not an advocate of genocide, and condemned Germany’s persecution of the Jews. Moreover, she didn’t identify the “feeble minded” with any particular race.

      She was also, ironically, opposed to abortion. And while she was a proponent of eugenics, she shied away from coercive eugenics. That position, at the time, wasn’t terribly controversial.

      Anyone can google Sanger and read what she wrote. It isn’t terribly difficult.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 11:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @strumpetwindsock: You didn’t know it because it is false and a product of American right wing attacks on Planned Parenthood.

      Apr 27, 2009 at 11:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @Alec:
      Yeah, the conservatives up here were spreading an old tape of Tommy Douglas (head of our social democratic party, father of medicare and grandfather of Kiefer Sutherland) from the 60s saying that homosexuality was an illness in order to slag him.

      Fact is he said that while arguing vehemently in favour of decriminalizing sodomy, saying homosexuality was NOT a crime. You can’t always judge past acts by modern standards, even if the are sometimes wrong.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 12:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TikiHead
      TikiHead

      Gosh, so MANY new names in this comment thread. Welcome NEW NAMES, we’re sure you’re not trolls, and that you will contribute extensively to comments in future, even on non-abortion articles.

      No? Well then, please f*** off. :)

      Apr 28, 2009 at 12:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Rick Hammer:

      There’s nothing to know. That’s a whole mess of lunatic lies in one post…take your pills and get a good rest.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 2:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Like most of her contemporaries, Margaret Sanger did have views that would be denounced as racist today.

      That sounds like that nutter pragmatist.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 2:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Riandra
      Riandra

      I’m against abortion, yet I’m not a christian or a religious fundamentalist. I just believe women don’t have the right to deny life to another human being.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 7:15 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ousslander
      ousslander

      I still don’t get why abortion is a gay issue. Glad she exposed them. While I think abortion is murder, I do not think it should be declared illegal. They are another group that wants to take away from parents authority and put in the hands of the state or organizations like themselves.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 8:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ousslander
      ousslander

      and they fucked themselves!

      Apr 28, 2009 at 8:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @TANK: Well there’s this:

      The lower down in the scale of human development we go the less sexual control we find. It is said that the aboriginal Australian, the lowest known species of the human family, just a step higher than the chimpanzee in brain development, has so little sexual control that police authority alone prevents him from obtaining sexual satisfaction on the streets.

      Margaret Sanger, What Every Girl Should Know, 1920, pg. 47, http://archive.lib.msu.edu/DMC/AmRad/whateverygirl1920.pdf

      I’m not saying she was out of the ordinary for her time, but that’s fairly racist.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 9:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael vdB
      Michael vdB

      I find it ironic that the Tenn. government are quick to cut funding instead of investigating claims and asking that changes be put in place to protect against these things in the future. As said, there are many employees and it is hard to police them all but safeguards and education programs will show that the organization is working to address them.

      I don’t agree with the motive, but Lila is helping to expose something that needs to be fixed. That being said, we find problems with other organizations all the time (eg. government) but we do not witch hunt…we work to make the institutions better.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 9:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @ousslander:
      It’s a personal issue for any woman, including lesbians and bi women, and bi men.
      I consider it a pretty important human rights issue too, even though it doesn’t affect me.
      Also, many of the same people who are opposing it are the same ones who oppose our rights.

      And while, I think they deserved to be caught (I am NOT glad) PP are not trying to take power away from anyone. they provide counselling, support and education, including support for LGBT issues which aren’t strictly related to parenting.

      In short, they are a very good and important organization. A hell of a lot better than sending some scared kid to the parish priest for advice.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 9:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Synnerman
      Synnerman

      That woman’s face needs to be plastered everywhere. Fundies always try the gotcha game in this crap and they need to be recognized for the sneaky scum they are.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 10:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • paulied
      paulied

      @ousslander: Reproductive freedom speaks to the very basic liberty we all, at least theoretically, enjoy to control our own bodies. How do you not get the connection to LGBT issues?

      Apr 28, 2009 at 11:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • paulied
      paulied

      nd the founding fathers of the US were all slave holders; your point?

      Apr 28, 2009 at 11:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ben
      Ben

      @MM “If people wouldn’t LIE…” Give me a break. It would be a different story if the “lie” were gays trying to expose some injustice, right? I’m sick of gays supporting pro-abortion shit just because they support ours. Abortion is killing an innocent life. It doesn’t matter if you sugar coat it with terms like “personal choice”; it is what it is. What that PP person did was reprehensible and she should be dropped down an elevator shaft.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 11:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • stewie
      stewie

      I’m curious here…while I realize that rape and incest cases make up but a small percentage of abortions, do the people on here who say “abortion is murder” also believe that a woman who gets pregnant as the result of a rape should have to bear that child?

      it’s not like SHE had a say in the creation of it, or “made a mistake”, so is it still fair to make her bear the child of a horrible, violent act that will affect her for the rest of her life?

      Apr 28, 2009 at 12:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ousslander
      Ousslander

      @strumpetwindsock: They have fought agai st parental notifi cation laws and ifthey gad their way a14 yr old shiuld be able to consent to this medical procedure with parental involvement.

      I know many people who are against abortion but support gay equality. I doubt many lesbians have unplanned pregnancies. Bi males might be the only ones in our “community” to really need the services if an abortionist.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 12:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ousslander
      Ousslander

      @paulied: @paulied: then shouldn’t the fetus have a say about what happens to its body? The only one who gets a choice is the woman. Still not a lgbt issue. Ifthe sanger types of the world could they would abort babies they knew would be gay! But that would be ok eith cuz its their choice?

      Apr 28, 2009 at 12:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • atdleft
      atdleft

      @Percival: Yep. Thanks to this wingnut wacko, many thousands of REAL young girls in need of help in Orange County will be denied that help because our idiot Supervisors “don’t support abortion on demand”. Thanks to this right-wing extremist, millions of girls in Tennessee will be left helpless when they’re most in need of help. Thanks to this mean-spirited lady who obviously doesn’t mind distorting the truth to strip away a woman’s right to choose, all our civil rights are a little more endangered.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 12:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jason
      Jason

      I never have understood how the LGBT community supports the pro-choice movement just because that group is on the same side of the political aisle. I understand the position that a woman should have control over her own body but when it comes to pregnancy another life and its rights come into play. We all agree that it would be murder to abort a baby 1 week before the due date so logic says that as long as the baby can survive outside the womb then it would be murder. That bar is constantly being moved by technology. That same technology will enable parents in the future to abort(if unregulated) a child with a gay gene, brown eyes, girls etc. The LGBT community should be in favor of more regulation of abortion.

      I am by no means a pro-life fanatic but do understand the argument and consider abortion a very poor and selfish method of birth control. Kudos to this young lady for working so hard to uncover extremely unscrupulous behavior by a suspect organization.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 12:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • atdleft
      atdleft

      @Ousslander: Wow. It’s so easy for us boiz to tell these women what to do, but what would happen if the tables were turned and we were the pregnant teen girls? Especially the pregnant teen girls who were raped or molested? Would we like some outsider from “Focus on the Family” or “National Right to Life” stepping in our own personal situation to tell us to ruin our lives forever AND carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, giving birth to unwanted babies who can’t get health care, can’t get proper education, and may end up either in that unloving family or the brutally ugly maze of the state foster “care” system/dependency court?

      Why doesn’t anyone talk more about the long-term consequences of criminalizing contraceptive services? An even MORE out-of-control prison-industrial complex as doctors and young women are sent to jail? And of course, millions more unwanted children who end up being f*cked over by the foster “care” system?

      If the “pro-life” people are really pro-life, why don’t they ever think about caring for these kids once they are born?

      Apr 28, 2009 at 12:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • atdleft
      atdleft

      @Jason: Because it’s about civil rights. PERIOD. Remember how these same right-wing fanatics consider being queer to be a “poor life choice”? I bet this “young lady” applauded when Miss CA spewed her h8ful rhetoric on national teevee last week. And sorry, but this “gay people will be aborted too!” rhetoric is just smoke-and-mirrors meant to distract us from the big picture of this larger civil rights struggle for ALL oppressed minorities.

      It doesn’t matter whether we think abortion is a “poor life choice”. We should not be the ones making another person’s life choice. I mean, voters in AZ, CA, and FL just thought that lesbian & gay couples getting married is a “poor life choice”? What gives a (temporary) “popular majority” the ability to take away fundamental rights from a minority?

      It’s easy to beat up on these teen girls, but what would happen if their rights are taken away and ours are never granted?

      Apr 28, 2009 at 12:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ben
      ben

      @ADTLEFT – that reasoning doesn’t add up. Us boiz have to stand up for something wrong. The same way we would expect and appreciate a “straight” person standing up for our rights to be gay. As for your subsequent points, it still comes down to the fact that your solution is to kill the baby. You’re not solving the problem, you’re covering it up.

      And think about what that PP person did or attempted to do. By having that “young” girl lie about the age of the dad, she enabled the “real” father in that scenario to rape another child. …and the pro-lifers are wing-nut wackos?!!

      Apr 28, 2009 at 12:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ben
      ben

      @Jason — Yeah it’s about civil rights…. not the child’s however, he or she dies.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 12:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • another strumpet
      another strumpet

      atdleft, if men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 12:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jason
      Jason

      ATDLEFT,

      You are absolutley correct it’s about Civil Rights. It seems our Judiciary honors the civil rights of an un-born baby in the case of murder. Specifically, if you shoot and kill a pregnant woman and the baby dies as well; you will be charged with two counts of murder. Please reconcile this with unregulated abortion.

      Additionally, I am not saying that abortion should be outlawed but highly regulated. In your tirade regarding Civil Rights you ignored the possibility that there are two lives that are being impacted. The problem with the pro-choice side is they consider any regulation an infringment on their civil rights but its merely an attempt to manage the civil rights of the mother and an un-born citizen or that of a potential citizen. The issue is when does it become an un-born person vs. a zygot.

      The crazies on the pro-life side are just as nuts in their opposition to any method of ending the potential for a mass of cells to become a person.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jaroslaw
      Jaroslaw

      Stewie #70: Some feel that abortion is murder, so the rape while very very sad, the situation is not improved by the murder of an innocent child. Obviously, this is toughest call in the prolife movement.

      I forget who made which comment – but yes, a lot of prolife people DO help support unwanted children financially. This is a huge country – there are good, bad and hypocrites on every issue.

      The sad fact is a lot of issues raised here are SYMPTOMS of problems that are not addressed, and not the actual issues themselves. Our society has lot to do concerning the value of women, children, poverty, the inequities in our social & criminal justice systems etc.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ben
      ben

      One last thing, (can you tell I’m passionate about this) as pro-abortionist see this, this is not a man’s issue at all (Straight, gay, or bi-) Men have absolutely no choice or say in what happens to their child. Homeboys (gayboys) it’s a good thing you can’t knock each other up. If it were your child you couldn’t stop the abortion from happening. Can we go back to talking about hawt men?11

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sceth
      Sceth

      Better aborted than poor and desperate. Economics has it that abortion is responsible for many sharp falls in crime.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • getreal
      getreal

      @Sceth: Exactly conservative only care about babies when they are in utero the second they are born conservative are against everything that will help that baby actually thrive. They are against government sponsored pre-natal care, head start, pre-school, breakfast in schools, low coast school lunches for poor students you name it. The people who are so against abortion won’t give a nickel of their own money for the women who are stuck with a child they can’t afford they demonize these women and call them welfare queens but if a woman aborts a child she can’t afford she is a murderer. They are hypocrites they care so much about babies but they are against gays giving babies good homes. They almost never actually adopt themselves and they never adopt the children of the needy.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Jason:

      Because without sexism there wouldn’t be homophobia. Anti choice people are sexist, and often homophobic, that is, those who don’t believe women should have reproductive rights are sexist.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Alec:

      Yes. But even if it weren’t out of the ordinary, she’s just as responsible for her beliefs as someone advocating such a position today.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ben
      Ben

      @GETREAL: Seriously, get real. You’re prepared to speak about ALL conservatives. I mean, why don’t we get rid of all of them. Of course then SCETH’s crime rate would rise and we wouldn’t have anyone to blame for all of life’s problems. YES, some of them are nuts, but guess what…some of us are nuts, too. This type of generalizing does absolutely no good and makes us seem as extreme as those wierdos you write about. I think that extreme anything is bad.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      The abortion is murder screed equates a blastocyst to a fully developed human being. An uthinking, nonconscious lump of cells to something capable of writing the divine comedy…do you know utterly disgusting that is on a purely visceral level? It’s repugnant. But on a scientific level, there’s no qualitative difference between such a thing and a developing baby chick. You eat eggs, correct? Or, a brain dead coma patient (clinically deceased). So, according to you people, there’s no difference between a person and a clinically deceased human being…disgusting.

      What is it about a person that makes it a person? Do you have the first clue about this debate? Instead, you trot out some of the most tired and simple minded rhetoric the anti choicers have…

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • getreal
      getreal

      @Ben: I don’t believe in getting rid of anyone first of all second of all. I am talking about the platform of conservative politicians and the party line of the republican party on these matters. Not what “compassionate” conservative say they believe but how they vote. So before you jump in my face you could have asked me to clarify my position.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ben
      Ben

      @Tank: “Because without sexism there wouldn’t be homophobia.” I’m still digesting that. But the “anti-choice” label bugs me. I’m pro-choice. You have the choice to be gay or straight, to shop at Wal-Mart or K-Mart; to vote Democrat or Republican or to get your whoo-haa pierced. Those are personal choices. You don’t have the right to make a choice that negatively impacts the life of another; like gay bashing or murdering a pregnant woman or killing an unborn child. I know I said I was done but I lied. I can’t help it.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @TANK: True. Given the horrid state of anthropology at the time, though, it offers some context, and is a far cry from the claims of the far right that she supported the extermination of racial minorities.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sceth
      Sceth

      Lila has successfully put the case forward that kids should be able to walk into an abortion clinic and get abortions at will. I praise her dearly for this.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @Ben: You do, however, have a large degree of control over your own body. Even assuming that the fetus has interests that are entitled to some weight, prohibitions on abortion would severely curtail the rights of women.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Ben:

      First of all, your antigay propanganda’s showing. Perhaps your sexuality was a choice for you, but most people on this planet have a different experience: that they never chose to be sexually attracted to one sex or another or both. Maybe you’re the anomaly, but don’t project.

      Second, you keep referring to an unthinking lump of cells as a person entitled to rights and responsibilities while still an unthinking lump of cells that can’t suffer (and yes, having no sense of self eliminates the possibility of suffering…for there’s no entity that suffers from time t to t’, i.e.,duration doesn’t exist in such a nonconscious being). Why? Why is this? What’s your argument? But that defintiion of personhood, many non humans are people, too, you’ll find.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @Jason:

      If you had ever had to console a person wrestling with the decision to have an abortion you would not call it selfish. It is invasive surgery, and a lot of women who decide to have it consider their unborn child to be a living being, but have elected to make a difficult choice.

      You are free to have your own beliefs. You have no right to impose them on someone else. In that respect the fight for abortion choice is EXACTLY the same as our fight for recognition.

      I don’t support it because there are links to LGBT rights; I support it because it is the moral thing to do.

      And as a matter of fact Planned Parenthood do a lot of direct anti-homophobia and pro LGBT work that has nothing to do with reproduction. This stupid glitch aside, they are on OUR side (at least on mine).

      Apr 28, 2009 at 1:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • getreal
      getreal

      @Ben: So sexual orientation is a choice? That is ridiculous. What sexual orientation did you choose?

      Apr 28, 2009 at 2:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • atdleft
      atdleft

      @strumpetwindsock: Thank you, both strumpet’s! Why do we act like abortion is as painless as getting a botox injection? News flash: It’s NOT! There’s no such thing as “abortion on demand”. Rather, Planned Parenthood counsels young women to only seek abortion when they’re ready and when it’s necessary. What happened on video only happened because:

      1. of editing

      2. Lila went in not to ask for help, but to specifically ask to terminate her (fake) pregnancy

      3. Planned Parenthood is a HUGE organization, and as good as they are they’re not perfect

      @getreal: Amen! These “pro-life” hypocrites only care about fetuses before they’re born. But once the babies are born, they’re off to the streets or the foster care system to get f*cked up with inadequate health care and education.

      @another strumpet: Heh. And again, these anti-choicers’ sexism is showing. If these boiz could get pregnant, I bet they’d be the first to hop on a plane a Canada to get an abortion so that they wouldn’t miss a date at their favorite DL/Log Cabin dive bar.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 2:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rick Hammer
      Rick Hammer

      @stewie: But, it’s not the little b*st*rd’s fault, but kill him anyway. Right?

      Apr 28, 2009 at 2:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sceth
      Sceth

      @Rick Hammer: Yes; exactly! That’s the idea. It may be similar to manslaughter – depending on your legal system and your opinion – but what is not subject to opinion is that we permit many manslaughters with life as justification.

      Don’t overestimate the value of mere living.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 2:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jaroslaw
      Jaroslaw

      OK hold on here. Is anyone reading articles they don’t agree with, ever? Abortion may be major surgery, and kids are a lot of work too, but that doesn’t stop a very large percentage of women from having repeat abortions! Read some stats.

      And while I’ve already agreed a lot of conservatives talk one way and vote another, there are many others who give a lot to charities to address unplanned pregnancies. You’re listening to one.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 2:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • getreal
      getreal

      @Rick Hammer: As a woman I can tell you a baby up to about two months is not a baby but a small gelatinous collection of cells. Not to be too indelicate but women don’t pass babies monthly when they menstruate they pass a very small amount of blood that is all a baby is till around 3 months. So if you don’t really understand how womens bodies work why don’t you ask someone.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 2:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JC
      JC

      @paulied: Believe it or not, it is legal in Tennessee to record someone without their knowledge.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 2:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ben
      Ben

      Had to actually do some work.

      @Tank – Point of clarification, didn’t mean to offend anyone. But your sexuality is a choice in that you choose celibacy or when, where, with whom to express your sexuality. You may choose to remain in the closet or be out. My point is that these are all choices that affect only you and are yours to make. For example, I’m single and bi. It’s completely my choice with whom I engage and only becomes wrong if I deceive someone or if my choice puts someone at risk.

      Stop calling it anti-gay because it doesn’t fit what you believe. I’m in a steady relationship with a guy so I choose to not flirt with a woman or another man for that matter. Sometimes I feel like a closet hetero and that I have to hide the fact that nice boobs are a turn on and there’s nothing softer than …

      As for the unthinking lump of cells, WOW I don’t know where to begin. A late term abortion is more than a lump. This lump is a totally separate entity from the mother; different dna, everything. Totally dependent but different.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 4:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @Ben: Uh….

      For example, I’m single and bi. It’s completely my choice with whom I engage and only becomes wrong if I deceive someone or if my choice puts someone at risk.

      Stop calling it anti-gay because it doesn’t fit what you believe. I’m in a steady relationship with a guy so I choose to not flirt with a woman or another man for that matter.

      I don’t feel that I can address the points of someone who contradicts themselves within a single post. Could you elaborate?

      Apr 28, 2009 at 5:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      Gay sex is a part of gay orientation as it is the satisfaction conditions of gay desires. SO unless gay sexual desires aren’t a part of gay sexual orientation…gay sex is a part of homosexuality. So much for love the sinner hate the sin…

      Of course you can choose whether or not to engage in sexual activity, but it’s a part of your sexuality as the satisfaction condition(s) of those desires. Now why shouldn’t one act on their sexual desires is a separate topic.

      Don’t blame me for reacting to your unclear writing. And given your expressed ideological leanings, it’s not a left field interpretation.

      That’s one heckuva an argument you have against the personhood of a nonconscious lump of cells…

      Apr 28, 2009 at 5:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Alec:

      Nice catch. WTF, Ben?

      Apr 28, 2009 at 5:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • getreal
      getreal

      @Ben: No one said anything about late term abortions ( a right-wing boogeyman) which are illegal except when the mother and or the fetus will die during delivery. We are talking about within the standard legal confines of when abortions are confirmed in the first 8 weeks. 85% of abortions are performed in the first two months when the fetus is blood and tissue only. If you are really against it why not adopt a child and raise it with your boyfriend otherwise please don’t try to legislate what women do with their bodies I would never support legislation that told you what to do with your body.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 5:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ben
      Ben

      @Alec – I’m single (not married). I’m dating someone. We’ve made out but not fucked. While I’m doing this. I’m not going to pick up on anyone else. I don’t juggle well. You’ve summed up my point exactly. Because this doesn’t fit your mindset, everything I said must be wrong.

      @Tank – So late term isn’t the same. How about 7 months? How about 6? Babies have survived as early as 4. When is it a lump and when does that life loose it’s importance. That might be a gay lump.

      Apr 28, 2009 at 5:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TANK
      TANK

      @Ben:

      When it can fix me a fucking drink.

      Apr 29, 2009 at 12:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ben
      Ben [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Tank: All of a sudden, I want you.

      Apr 29, 2009 at 1:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ousslander
      Ousslander

      @atdleft: I already said it should not be made illegal. I personally find immoral. Maybe these teen girls you speak should not be having and if so live with the cobsequences. I do feel in cases of rape n incest exceptions should be made.

      And for the commenter that said better to abort than be poor n desperate i guess the poor of the earth should be sterilized or maybe a law that you cannot have children until you earn x amount of dollars. I grew up n am better for it. Yet somehow i managed not to resort to crime

      Apr 29, 2009 at 7:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @Ousslander:
      Aside from the fact that is a vile statement of jaw-dropping proportions, you should realize the rich don’t really want to limit the number of poor, desperate people.
      Where would you find your housekeepers, your soldiers, and the slaves in your prison-factories?

      And you speak as if there are no rich criminals. How do you think many of them god rich in the first place?

      Apr 29, 2009 at 11:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ousslander
      Ousslander

      @strumpetwindsock: @strumpetwindsock: oh strumpet i wS being sarcastic to the commenter that said better to abort than be poor n deseperate because they will turn to crime so abortion woul lower the crime rate.
      While i think peoplw should not have more than they coild financially take care of,money should be a precobdition of parenthood. You should direct your outrage to the other commenter.
      I would rather be poor n desperate n alive

      Apr 29, 2009 at 12:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • strumpetwindsock
      strumpetwindsock

      @Ousslander:
      Ah silly me.
      Here I just made a comment about “boneheaded literalists” in another thread and I got caught myself.

      Given the outlandish notions I have seen presented in here, sometimes it IS hard to tell when one is serious. Sorry.

      Apr 29, 2009 at 12:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MADAN
      MADAN

      GOd I hate humankind so much…..I wish this lady should die while giving a birth….She tried to help her and instead she screwed her..thats why my heart never cry if I see people lying on the street ABOUT TO DIE…instead i will laugh….thank god for giving me such a blessing to laugh at others pain……its because of the people like this….

      Apr 29, 2009 at 8:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Todd
      Todd

      Whether you are for or against abortion or despise or admire this activists methods, how can anyone defend plan parenthood in a case like this? While I recognize the concern to not drive a teenager away from potential help, most states have laws that require counselors to mandatorily report for good reason. A relationship as described or manufactured above is typically abusive to the child. I am dismayed that practices are not in place that such a video could even have been captured.

      Apr 30, 2009 at 12:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Percival
      Percival

      Personally, I think what many people overlook in the abortion debate is the WOMAN. Forget about the fetus, zygote, baby, whatever.

      When a woman is faced with an unintended pregnancy, do you REALLY think she doesn’t understand the gravity of the situation? Do you REALLY think that any woman who decides to end her pregnancy made that decision without heart-wrenching soul searching? Maybe there are some – I’d still be willing to bet that they’re a small percentage of the those who choose to abort.

      The bottom line is, because of ALL this gray area involved with the decisiont abort, you CANNOT blanketly legislate or outlaw abortion. For those who say that abortion should be legal, but heavily regulated – how exactly? Legal ONLY in cases of rape? What about incest? What about if the woman simply didn’t know how to protect herself against pregancy, due to the DISMAL state of sex education in this country’s public schools? What if the woman, in all truth and reallity, COULD NOT support the child – cannot rely on her estranged family and abusive boyfriend. What id the woman wants to give the child up for adoption, but happens to be a woman of color, and she finds out that there is a VERY small of chance of her baby living anywhere stable after going into the foster care system? There are just too many variables and and infinite number of situations that a woman can be in when she is faced with this decision.

      Given that, we should be focusing more on teaching people how to be RESPONSIBLE with their lives, choices, and bodies. To understand how to say “NO” to someone’s sexual advances. To know what methods of birth control are out there, and which ones are effective and which ones aren’t.

      I guess what I’m saying is – as horrifying as abortion is, we need to remember that the woman has an equal stake in the situation.

      Apr 30, 2009 at 7:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jaroslaw
      Jaroslaw

      #117 Percival – and others – we will probably not solve the abortion debate on this thread. Seriously though, I’ve done a lot of reading on both sides and yes for a time I was involved with right to life – (and they were all nice church ladies, no one was a fanatic) it seems there is no middle ground. There was a book on the pro choice side – many famous people wrote their stories – the most interesting comment I heard was “and I found myself pregnant.” , Really? Is that like “finding a penny on the sidewalk?” Human nature being what it is wants to take the easy way out. Yes, Percival, there are lots of variables as you say, but after 23 years of working the welfare and reading a LOT, the VAST VAST majority of the time “unplanned pregnancies” are just thoughtlessness on the part of the participants. I mean, most people would not drive with their eyes shut and say “I had an unplanned collision?” would they?

      And the other thing I want to say about the pro-choice book; there was never a reason NOT to have an abortion. Everyone was justifying themselves 100%. What you miss Percival, is what Ben said above, the CHILD doesn’t have a choice in the matter. And I don’t think women realize the gravity either. I’ve read the stats, they may be skewed for or against either side – but my gut tells me that most women don’t know when brain activity starts, or that a child has tiny fingers & toes at 10 weeks. And I do know for a fact in my state that when the pro life side wanted to mandate this kind of information be provided prior to the client having an abortion at a clinic, the pro choice side fought it tooth and nail. What could be wrong with providing scientific information? And Yes,many many on the pro-life side are just as adamant 100% in their views.

      May 1, 2009 at 9:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.