The Three Stupid Ways Planned Parenthood Fanatics Defend the Murderous Organization

The Three Stupid Ways Planned Parenthood Fanatics Defend the Murderous Organization August 3, 2015

We’ve all seen the same videos — the undercover filming of Planned Parenthood officials sipping wine while they discuss how to harvest butchered baby parts at the highest rates of profitability.

I’m amazed at how many celebs have come out and defended the barbaric organization.  David French, over at National Review, has investigated their excuses, which boil down to these three:

The desperate, the immoral, and the nonsensical.  To take it from the top, David writes:

1.  The first — and most desperate — defense relied on buzzwords like “extremist,” and “anti-woman,” and “politically motivated” — almost always paired with an allegation that the tapes were edited. Yet by releasing the full tapes simultaneously with the condensed versions, the Center for Medical Progress was able to respond with simple truth. Yes, they were pro-life, and yes, they were running a sting. But the Planned Parenthood officials said what they said, and it was shockingly brutal.

But if that argument fails, here’s another:

2.  Then came the immoral claim — that harvesting aborted fetal tissue for medical research is actually a good thingHere’sSlate’s Mark Joseph Stern: “The graphic images of aborted fetuses are meant to disgust me, to convince me that abortion is abarbaric act of killing. But I don’t see death in these videos. I see hope.” How can one see hope in a mutilated child? Stern claims that by killing these kids and selling (or, excuse me, receiving handsome reimbursements for) their body parts, Planned Parenthood is helping advance medical research toward curing diseases like ALS, which killed a friend of his.  I too have known people who’ve died from ALS, and it is indeed a horrible disease. But the ALS sufferers I’ve known would never ask a single baby (much less thousands) to die for the sake of research that one day might possibly yield a treatment. And this is especially true when advances in adult-cell research may very well yield methods of potential treatment that don’t rely on fetal tissue at all. The only way for Stern and others to justify their moral calculus is to dehumanize the aborted child — and to do so in a way that defies science. After all, from the moment of conception a child is a distinct and separate human being, possessing its own DNA. In the face of this inarguable fact, Stern and others like him are judging not just that one human life is worth more than another but that other humans can and should be chopped to pieces, their body parts apportioned to labs for the sake of preserving a favored population.

And then, least convincingly:

3.  Planned Parenthood’s most nonsensical defense is calculated to appeal to the wavering middle, to those who don’t like abortion but also don’t necessarily want to see it outlawed. We’ll call this Planned Parenthood’s “pro-life” defense — that defunding Planned Parenthood will actually increase abortions by depriving women of much-needed contraceptives. Planned Parenthood claims that the 327,000 abortions it performs annually represent just 3 percent of its total services, and that its contraceptive distribution programs actually prevent 216,000 abortions per year. But if the contraceptive services are so valuable and the abortions so inconsequential to Planned Parenthood, why not drop 3 percent of its business to save the 97 percent? If Planned Parenthood stopped killing babies on a mass scale, it would no longer be America’s most controversial “health care provider.”  But Planned Parenthood would rather close its doors than stop killing babies — because of ideology and self-interest. The 3 percent number has always been misleading. Planned Parenthood counts both distributing a pack of birth control pills and performing an abortion as “services,” yet the abortion yields far more revenue. Its protestations to the contrary, abortion is big business for Planned Parenthood, and the group is working furiously to keep it that way.

The whole article — complete with charts and further breakdown — is well worth the read.

Read more on the Patheos Faith and Family Channel, follow Nancy on FacebookTwitter, and Instagram!

"and what makes this even better is that the two girls are sisters http://www.huffingtonpost.c..."

Black activists cried "racism" over this ..."
"It's heart wrenching to hear about this. Our country is getting more vile and depraved ..."

Target proudly welcomes men to use ..."
"a wolf dressed as a sheep is still a wolf - if u have a ..."

Target proudly welcomes men to use ..."
"I am picturing a little turd in pajamas sipping coffee."

Los Angeles Craigslist ad somehow captures ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Politics Red
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Robert Caleb Potter

    Abortion is about Women’s Rights. We are all familiar with
    the argument. The question I have is; aren’t some of those aborted babies
    female? Would they not have grown up to be women?

    Now, a part of me can understand a little gleeful cheer from Planned Parenthood professionals when it is discovered the soon to be aborted fetus is male. This puts into perspective the pure joy in the announcements we have recently witnessed that the parts to be dissected are to come from a male baby. “It’s a boy” they celebrate before crushing, slicing and carving. But is there a more solemn mood when the fetus is female? Are lights lowered and candles lit? I doubt it.

    So, if this is simply about women’s rights, which woman are we talking about, the woman of today or the woman of tomorrow? Of course we are talking about the woman of today because the woman of tomorrow has no voice. The woman of today is bigger, stronger and can easily dominate the woman of tomorrow.

    The woman of today, those who support Planned Parenthood are nothing more than selfish big bullies. Seems to me someone needs to speak up for the woman of tomorrow, the woman with no voice.

  • Anton

    ‘Abortion on demand without apology’

    Who is asking for an apology? Sounds like someone is trying to assuage their guilt. In reality the only person they would need to apologize to is dead.

  • Burger Fan

    Thank you both for writing this. It is helpful for me to try to understand a little of the mental gymnastics people who are trying to defend these atrocities have to go through. Once they accept the premise that it’s ok to kill in this way, then everything downstream of that gets more and more irrational, because they are then perverting their God-given intellects, and using them not to seek the good, but to try to creatively excuse and rationalize the evil that, at some level, they have to know is being done. This is by no means a “necessary evil”, as some liberals seem to think. Trying to convince an abortion apologist who has basically abandoned reason, who is maniacally defending this sort of atrocity, can be difficult and in some cases futile. But bravery coupled with thoughtful analysis may be helpful in reaching those who can be reached. I thank God for CMP, but folks like you are part of the team, too. Thanks.

  • guycooksey

    PP is a baby-killing mill and they are trying to defend the indefensible. Hopefully, the public sees this hypocrisy and will turn against PP and the dems (and some Pubs) who support it. it is worth shutting the corrupt government down to see PP defunded. Right now only Trump and Cruz want this. BTW Trump/Cruz would be a great GOP ticket. Wow! Can you imagine how the country would be great again if these two were elected.

  • guycooksey

    Wow! Great point and the GOP is always accused of a war against women. No, it is PP and the dems who support the mother’s right to dismember her own baby that is to blame–and for fetal science–give me a break.

  • James

    Wow, what an echo chamber… By all means, continue to bash away at strawmen.

  • ugluk2

    Why the focus on planned parenthood? Shouldn’t the emphasis be on outlawing the use of fetal tissue from late term abortions for research purposes? The emphasis on PP alone seems more like a political stunt–what about their customers in the research community?

    And while we’re at it, if you think abortion is murder, then shouldn’t the mothers be in jail?

    I’m in the mushy middle on all this–the loud partisans on both sides seem to be arguing in bad faith. The pro-abortion types literally give no thought to the notion that maybe late term abortions are immoral–they run from the topic. And the so-called pro-lifers who claim that all abortions are murder don’t act in any way that suggests they really mean it. Should all miscarriages be investigated as possible homicides, for instance? Would they limit themselves to impassioned blog posting if people had been murdering 50 million children outside the womb?

  • Sven2547

    Planned Parenthood officials sipping wine while they discuss how to harvest butchered baby parts at the highest rates of profitability

    Pretty hard to take the post seriously when you start off with this whopper.

  • Korou

    Liars for Jesus. It doesn’t count if you’re lying for a good cause.

  • The Happy Atheist

    Y’all, this is Nancy French we’re talking about. She’s been an outspoken shill for far-right Christian causes for a decade. Anyone who takes anything she writes seriously is dumber than she is.

  • Badgersss

    I take it that’s satire.

  • Badgersss

    Media Matters did a better job of investigating the edited videos against the unedited ones and boiling the deceit down