TOTALLY GEEKED!

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Planned Parenthood Is Going on the Offensive with Massive Lawsuit


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 9186
Date:
Planned Parenthood Is Going on the Offensive with Massive Lawsuit
Permalink  
 


Planned Parenthood Is Going on the Offensive with Massive Lawsuit

 
489451178-right-to-life-advocates-pray-during-a-sit-in-in-front_1Anti-abortion protesters pray during a sit-in in front of a proposed Planned Parenthood location on September 21, 2015, in Washington, D.C.

Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images

Thanks to the Center for Medical Progress, Planned Parenthood spent the latter part of 2015 getting kicked in the teeth. The CMP’s highly edited undercover videos, which purported to show Planned Parenthood officials selling fetal organs, created a hurricane of terrible publicity and spurred political attacks across the country. Anti-clinic harassment shot up exponentially. Protestors targeted Planned Parenthood doctors at their homes. Five congressional committees and eighteen states launched investigations. (Ten of those state investigations cleared Planned Parenthood of wrongdoing.) A madman ranting about “baby parts” murdered three people at a Planned Parenthood in Colorado Springs.

Now, Planned Parenthood is going on the offensive. On Thursday afternoon, it announced a massive lawsuit against CMP, charging it with, among other things, violating the Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organization, or RICO, act—a law originally used against the Mafia. The lawsuit seeks restitution for actual losses caused by CMP as well as compensatory and punitive damages and attorneys fees. It hasn’t named a dollar figure, but it claims that CMP’s actions have cost Planned Parenthood millions. Should Planned Parenthood prevail, it would be a profound economic blow to the anti-abortion movement.

CMP wants to paint the suit as an attack on free speech. In a statement, the group called it a “frivolous lawsuit in retaliation for CMP’s First Amendment investigative journalism.” CMP may indeed have a First Amendment defense to at least some of Planned Parenthood’s charges, but the fraud and deception outlined in the lawsuit are not what investigative journalists do, even when they go undercover. In pulling off its anti-abortion coup, the suit alleges, CMP made use of fake driver’s licenses and fake credit cards. It stole the identity of one of founder Daniel Deleiden’s pro-choice high school classmates, Brianna Allen. And of course, it registered a fraudulent tissue procurement company, Biomax.

This case is not going to be resolved any time soon. The last time Planned Parenthood took on the anti-abortion movement like this was in the 1990s, when it sued 12 anti-abortion activists and two anti-abortion groups for creating “Wanted” posters targeting clinic doctors. That case dragged on for a decade, though it was ultimately resolved in Planned Parenthood’s favor in 2006. Whatever happens in Planned Parenthood vs. Center for Medical Progress, Deleiden and his colleagues have already been sentenced to a long, grueling legal battle. 

 

 



__________________

The Principle of Least Interest: He who cares least about a relationship, controls it.

Always misinterpret when you can.



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

This will be interesting. As the Plaintiff, Planned Parenthood bears the burden of proof. They will have to prove a lot.

__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 9186
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:

This will be interesting. As the Plaintiff, Planned Parenthood bears the burden of proof. They will have to prove a lot.


I think it's going to be easy to prove.

 

 



__________________

The Principle of Least Interest: He who cares least about a relationship, controls it.

Always misinterpret when you can.



On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

ed11563 wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

This will be interesting. As the Plaintiff, Planned Parenthood bears the burden of proof. They will have to prove a lot.


I think it's going to be easy to prove.

 

 


 To get a jury to side with them - they will also have to prove what was reported was false. 



__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 25897
Date:
Permalink  
 

Well, there are a lot of STUPID juries out there LL.

__________________

https://politicsandstuff.proboards.com/



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 9186
Date:
Permalink  
 

Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:

This will be interesting. As the Plaintiff, Planned Parenthood bears the burden of proof. They will have to prove a lot.


I think it's going to be easy to prove.

 

 


 To get a jury to side with them - they will also have to prove what was reported was false. 


They should be able to force disclosure of the entire, unedited recordings. I'd like to see them.

 



__________________

The Principle of Least Interest: He who cares least about a relationship, controls it.

Always misinterpret when you can.



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 25897
Date:
Permalink  
 

Of course, let's squash investigative journalism. That way, we can't see the fraud, crime and corruption .

__________________

https://politicsandstuff.proboards.com/



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 9186
Date:
Permalink  
 

If you think this was "investigative journalism" you're a fool.

This was a "frame job" from inception to execution.

 



__________________

The Principle of Least Interest: He who cares least about a relationship, controls it.

Always misinterpret when you can.



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 25897
Date:
Permalink  
 

Framed? You can't be "framed" if you are actually engaging in the acts. So, yeah. Nice try.

__________________

https://politicsandstuff.proboards.com/



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 9186
Date:
Permalink  
 

You're basing that on your own preconceived thoughts and the highly edited, agenda guided videos you've seen.

Not good enough.

 



__________________

The Principle of Least Interest: He who cares least about a relationship, controls it.

Always misinterpret when you can.



Give Me Grand's!

Status: Offline
Posts: 13802
Date:
Permalink  
 

Ed, your opinion of the case is also based on your own prejudice for PP.

I hope they loose big time and I also hope the companies they sold the baby parts too also loose big time.

PP is sick.



-- Edited by just Czech on Sunday 17th of January 2016 11:40:29 AM

__________________

I drink coffee so I don't kill you.

I quilt so I don't kill you.

Do you see a theme?

Faith isn't something that keeps bad things from happening. Faith is what helps us get through bad things when they do happen.



My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Status: Offline
Posts: 38325
Date:
Permalink  
 

As said in the article, they won't rely on proof.

They will drag it so long that the defendants will pay because it is more cost efficient.

PP doesn't win anything based on proof. PP wins cause they can outlast their opponents.



__________________

A flock of flirting flamingos is pure, passionate, pink pandemonium-a frenetic flamingle-mangle-a discordant discotheque of delirious dancing, flamboyant feathers, and flamingo lingo.



Give Me Grand's!

Status: Offline
Posts: 13802
Date:
Permalink  
 

I would donate to CMP's "GoFundMe" account.

__________________

I drink coffee so I don't kill you.

I quilt so I don't kill you.

Do you see a theme?

Faith isn't something that keeps bad things from happening. Faith is what helps us get through bad things when they do happen.



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 25897
Date:
Permalink  
 

ed11563 wrote:

You're basing that on your own preconceived thoughts and the highly edited, agenda guided videos you've seen.

Not good enough.

 


 Highly edited?  So, they put those words in the doctor's mouths?  Sure Ed.  You know if you want to defend the disgusting act of abortion, then defend.  Just say "It's a Kid and I don't care if we hack a kid into pieces and sell the organs".   If that's what you believe then that's what you believe.  But, let's stop the pretense.



__________________

https://politicsandstuff.proboards.com/



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 9186
Date:
Permalink  
 

just Czech wrote:

Ed, your opinion of the case is also based on your own prejudice for PP.

I hope they loose big time and I also hope the companies they sold the baby parts too also loose big time.

PP is sick.



-- Edited by just Czech on Sunday 17th of January 2016 11:40:29 AM


  Me Too!



__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 4882
Date:
Permalink  
 

theweek.com/articles/584576/how-fetal-tissue-used-medical-research

__________________


On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Status: Offline
Posts: 27192
Date:
Permalink  
 

I wonder how the Discovery period is going to go. Planned parenthood will have to cough up a lot of their records. And they have privacy laws to deal with. This will be a difficult lawsuit for them.

Have the Defendants set up a Gofundme for their legal expenses, yet? I need to know where to donate.

__________________

LawyerLady

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 4882
Date:
Permalink  
 

Has PP set up a GoFundMe account for their legal expenses yet?
I need to know where to donate.

__________________


Itty bitty's Grammy

Status: Offline
Posts: 28124
Date:
Permalink  
 

weltschmerz wrote:

Has PP set up a GoFundMe account for their legal expenses yet?
I need to know where to donate.


 Ditto.

flan



__________________

You are my sun, my moon, and all of my stars.



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 9186
Date:
Permalink  
 

weltschmerz wrote:

theweek.com/articles/584576/how-fetal-tissue-used-medical-research


 

How fetal tissue is used in medical research

The Week Staff
42-70230735.jpg?itok=3mc46eMF&resize=1260x560
Chris Henderson/Corbis
 
 
 
  Planned Parenthood has been heavily criticized for providing cell tissue from aborted fetuses to medical researchers. Here, a quick look at the legitimacy of those claims:

How do scientists use fetal tissue?
It's used to find potential treatments for a wide range of common diseases and afflictions, including cancer, diabetes, birth defects, HIV, multiple sclerosis, ALS, and Alzheimer's. Unlike adult tissue cells, fetal tissue cells can be manipulated into almost any kind of tissue, are less likely to be rejected by a host, and have the capacity to replicate rapidly — making them perfect for analysis into how diseases work. They are also being tried as actual treatments for Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injuries, and diabetes, with researchers injecting fetal cells directly into organs in hopes of regenerating them. Fetal tissue was also a vital component in the development of vaccines for polio, chicken pox, rubella, and shingles. The polio vaccine alone saves 550,000 lives a year. Alta Charo, a bioethicist at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, says fetal tissue research has benefited "virtually every person in this country."

How long has this research been conducted?
Since the 1930s. To develop the polio vaccine, scientists infected fetal kidney cells with the virus in Petri dishes, then used the weakened virus in those cells to teach the immune system how to repel the virus — a development that earned its creators the 1954 Nobel Prize in medicine. In 1968, the donation of tissue from aborted fetuses was formally legalized. President Ronald Reagan imposed a five-year moratorium on such research, but in 1993, President Bill Clinton and Congress again authorized the practice. The law imposed several conditions: Abortion providers cannot profit from the distribution of fetal tissue; donors must give their signed consent, which can be sought only after they have agreed to the abortion itself; and abortion methods cannot be altered to make it easier to extract tissue. The National Institutes of Health spends about $76 million of federal funds on fetal tissue research each year.

Why has this become an issue?
Because of a series of undercover "sting" videos released by the Center for Medical Progress, a pro-life group. These videos show officials from the women's health group Planned Parenthood blithely discussing reimbursement costs for the storage and transport of fetal tissue, and graphically describing how doctors performing abortions try to ensure that fetal organs remain whole. "We've been very good at getting heart, lung, liver," one official was recorded saying, over a glass of wine and a salad. "I'm gonna basically crush below [the organ], I'm gonna crush above, and I'm gonna see if I can get it all intact." Since the release of the videos, Republican lawmakers have been trying to strip Planned Parenthood of its federal funding.

Were any laws broken?
If Planned Parenthood changed abortion practices to get specific fetal organs, it might be a violation of the 1993 federal law. Planned Parenthood denies that it did so, saying the "comments of one employee" do not reflect the organization's practices. The organization also says it did not profit from the transfer of fetal tissue to researchers, and that it charges only $30 to $100 for transportation. The tissue-donation program exists in only six of its 700 clinics, in California and Washington state. (To counter charges that it's selling tissue, Planned Parenthood has announced it will henceforth absorb those costs itself.) Defenders of the fetal tissue donation system argue that if the tissue from legal abortions were not used for lifesaving research, it would simply be discarded. Critics say positive outcomes cannot justify a practice that is itself immoral. "You're basically taking the life of one member of human society to use for the life of another," says Kathleen Schmainda, a professor at the Medical College of Wisconsin. "It corrupts the science."

Are there any alternatives?
Yes, though imperfect ones. Cells from umbilical cord blood have been used in some studies. Fetal tissue can be extracted from miscarriages — but there's far too little of such tissue to supply scientific demand. More promising are the recent advances in stem cell technology, which allow adult cells to be reprogrammed into "blank check" cells. Most scientists accept that this process, which is already being used in some studies, could eventually phase out the need for fetal tissue collection altogether. But stem cell technology is still new, and for the time being, scientists working on treatments for dreaded diseases contend that fetal tissue remains vital to their research.

Will fetal research continue?
For now, although congressional Republicans are investigating and want it stopped. In response to the furor over the Planned Parenthood videos, several universities have suspended the acquisition of fetal tissue. Ultimately, the debate over fetal tissue has become inextricably linked with the ever-divisive question of abortion. Pro-lifers believe doing anything with an aborted fetus is morally wrong, because abortion itself is wrong; pro-choicers say that since abortion is both legal and inevitable, why not use discarded fetal tissue for research that may relieve the suffering of millions of people? As Tom Beauchamp, a professor of philosophy at Georgetown University, puts it: "You can't make this fundamental clash of perspectives go away."

The real tissue traders
Planned Parenthood isn't making any money from the sale of fetal tissue, but other organizations certainly are. Many laboratories rely on middlemen who pay abortion providers small fees — usually $100 or less — for specimens, extract from the specimens whichever cells are in demand, and then deliver those cells to researchers. While the firms cannot legally profit from selling the tissue itself, they can charge whatever they like for processing and preparing it. A small vial of fetal liver cells, for example, can fetch more than $24,000. The companies argue these prices merely reflect the cost of isolating the cells. "These are hard processes, expensive processes," says Cate Dyer, founder of the for-profit StemExpress. "Just to attempt to do some of these isolations can cost us thousands of dollars, and it may not even work." But critics see the reimbursement policy as a gaping loophole — one that could easily be closed. "What's going on now is probably legal, but Congress won't like it," says Boston University bioethicist George Annas. "The law can easily be changed."



__________________

The Principle of Least Interest: He who cares least about a relationship, controls it.

Always misinterpret when you can.



Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 4882
Date:
Permalink  
 

Ben Carson was howling about fetal tissue research, but used it himself in his research.
I guess he was hoping nobody would find out.

__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 9186
Date:
Permalink  
 

Well if abortion is ok and it isn't a baby till he/she is born then it shouldn't matter that people find out what they do with the poor babys body parts.

__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 25897
Date:
Permalink  
 

Ben Carson has nothing to do with this. Deflect deflect.

__________________

https://politicsandstuff.proboards.com/



My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Status: Offline
Posts: 38325
Date:
Permalink  
 

Yes. Fetal tissue has been used in testing and science for a very long time.

The difference is how it is obtained.

Donated after death is a HUGE difference from killed for it.

__________________

A flock of flirting flamingos is pure, passionate, pink pandemonium-a frenetic flamingle-mangle-a discordant discotheque of delirious dancing, flamboyant feathers, and flamingo lingo.



Vette's SS!!

Status: Offline
Posts: 2297
Date:
Permalink  
 

lilyofcourse wrote:

Yes. Fetal tissue has been used in testing and science for a very long time.

The difference is how it is obtained.

Donated after death is a HUGE difference from killed for it.


 I have not heard of a single person getting pregnant for the express purpose of getting an abortion so she can donate the fetus to science. These women were all already getting abortions.



__________________


My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Status: Offline
Posts: 38325
Date:
Permalink  
 

So that makes it ok?

What a twisted world.

__________________

A flock of flirting flamingos is pure, passionate, pink pandemonium-a frenetic flamingle-mangle-a discordant discotheque of delirious dancing, flamboyant feathers, and flamingo lingo.



Vette's SS!!

Status: Offline
Posts: 2297
Date:
Permalink  
 

lilyofcourse wrote:

So that makes it ok?

What a twisted world.


 So what makes what okay?

I believe abortion should be legal. I also believe that we need a serious overhaul of the way this country views sex, sex ed, and preventative measures to lower the abortions rates to as close to none as possible. 

But, ad long as there are women, there will be abortions, and if it is a choice between the fetus going to science or throw out as human waste? 

Yeah. Science wins. 



__________________


My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Status: Offline
Posts: 38325
Date:
Permalink  
 

So justify abortion.

Gotcha.


__________________

A flock of flirting flamingos is pure, passionate, pink pandemonium-a frenetic flamingle-mangle-a discordant discotheque of delirious dancing, flamboyant feathers, and flamingo lingo.



Vette's SS!!

Status: Offline
Posts: 2297
Date:
Permalink  
 

lilyofcourse wrote:

So justify abortion.

Gotcha.


Are you even reading????

Who is justifying it??  



__________________


My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Status: Offline
Posts: 38325
Date:
Permalink  
 

You seem to be.


__________________

A flock of flirting flamingos is pure, passionate, pink pandemonium-a frenetic flamingle-mangle-a discordant discotheque of delirious dancing, flamboyant feathers, and flamingo lingo.



Vette's SS!!

Status: Offline
Posts: 2297
Date:
Permalink  
 

No I am not.

__________________


My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Status: Offline
Posts: 38325
Date:
Permalink  
 

Paraphrasing, "as long as women are getting abortions, might as well use it".

To me, that's justifying abortion.



__________________

A flock of flirting flamingos is pure, passionate, pink pandemonium-a frenetic flamingle-mangle-a discordant discotheque of delirious dancing, flamboyant feathers, and flamingo lingo.



Vette's SS!!

Status: Offline
Posts: 2297
Date:
Permalink  
 

lilyofcourse wrote:

Paraphrasing, "as long as women are getting abortions, might as well use it".

To me, that's justifying abortion.


Of course it is.



__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 4882
Date:
Permalink  
 

lilyofcourse wrote:

Yes. Fetal tissue has been used in testing and science for a very long time.

The difference is how it is obtained.

Donated after death is a HUGE difference from killed for it.


 Donated after death? What on earth are you talking about? Like a miscarriage?

They don't use tissue from miscarriages for research, because there's usually something wrong with it. Ergo the miscarriage.

Nobody is killing fetuses for their parts. That's crazy talk.



__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.



Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard