Planned Parenthood Annual Report 2005-2006

[estesbob]

TexasRoofer has expressed:[sign]I am amazed at the disparity between the statistics and the comments, or in other words the comments seem to be justified by a poor base. [/sign]

One of the comments he took issue with was that of the original poster PLAL who remarked about the photographs in PP annual report: “complete with smiling babies and children it missed killing.”

For the sake of clarity, let us see if indeed PLAL has committed “an offense against justice and truth” concerning the reputation of Planned Parenthood. After all, this is the contention which one can reasonably deduce from postings #22 and #29 of Texas Roofer. I looked up the report and indeed found the photos both on the cover and inside the report. So there was no “deliberate intention of leading a neighbor into error” on PLAL’s part. Perhaps Texasroofer was slighted with the “missed killing” claim. Granted, it may have been clumsy wording but it is a far stretch to conclude such sarcasm entails a “duty of reparation” to PP for damage to their reputation. (CCC 2487 originally quoted by TR)

Active and informed pro-lifers are well aware approximately 47,841,695 American children are missing since the killing fields of abortion opened on Jan.22,1973. By their own admission, PP has contributed substantially to this death toll both directly and indirectly. Therefore the comment was indeed fair.

Furthermore, PP intentionally selected photographs of black Americans to prominently feature in their annual report. For this reason, it is worth contrasting this slick public relations ploy with the following article by Dr. Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Given the blatant hypocrisy of PP, euphemisms such as “reproductive rights” and doing more than any other organization in U.S. to “protect women’s health” such a visceral reaction from pro-lifers is indeed understandable. Unmasking works of darkness is the proper work of Christians. No lies are needed. Simply cast the light of truth.

priestsforlife.org/africanamerican/index.htm

Great post. I thnk you sum it up preety well.In light of 47 million dead children I am at a loss as to why anyone would defend PP .

 

[Texas_Roofer]

You mentioned an assumption of both insincerity and ‘ill intent’

Could you provide, via cut and paste, what was said that constitutes either insincerity or ill intent?

No need your current post is quite sufficient. If you are blinded by something you may try dividing the post into nouns and verbs.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Same discussion going in with Roofer in another thread. For the life of me I dont know why he is upset with people quoting from the PP reports. its almost as if he wants to change the subject away from what a vile, evil organization PP is.The simple fact of the matter is they make money off killing children No amount of parseing the statistics can undo that,

Yes rather concerning is the choice of discussion over documentation. I would much appreciate you documenting your post, this should not be much of a problem if the post is correct, however if the post is incorrect you may have a problem. BTW I am not upset,ehh: does that create another problem?) surely you will not argue your assertion of my state is superior to my knowledge of my state? However given the threads it would be in line with past actions (by others) on the threads.

 

[Lady_Cygnus]

I’ve been tested for STDs, tested for pregnancy, and screened for breast cancer at Planned Parenthood. All while being given the morning after pill. They confirmed that I had a yeast infection (no STDs), that I wasn’t pregnant yet, and showed me how to do a breast exam.

They did this then told me that the morning after pill didn’t kill a child. The child, sorry fetus, wouldn’t be alive since it wasn’t attached to the uterus. She demonstrated this by bouncing a cotton ball on a piece of paper. You must make a decision now, if you wait it’ll be too late. Makes me wonder what they tell young women seeking an actual abortion…

Someone said that PP isn’t so bad because it does positive things. Everything “positive” they did I learned in a doctors office six months later. None of it was worth even the potential loss of a child.

 

[estesbob]

Yes rather concerning is the choice of discussion over documentation. I would much appreciate you documenting your post, this should not be much of a problem if the post is correct, however if the post is incorrect you may have a problem. BTW I am not upset,ehh: does that create another problem?) surely you will not argue your assertion of my state is superior to my knowledge of my state? However given the threads it would be in line with past actions (by others) on the threads.

Just very “interesting” your reaction to th OP in the two threads on this-your first reaction was to tell us all the GREAT things PP does(other than killing a quater of a million children a year that is) then you preceeded to attack the stastics used by those who pointed about what a vicious, evil, downright satanic oranization it is. Why anyone would spend one millisecond defending them is beyond me.

 

[catholicbuckeye]

education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/infer
in•fer (n-fûr) KEY

VERB:
in•ferred , in•fer•ring , in•fers
VERB:
tr.

1)To conclude from evidence or premises.
2)To reason from circumstance; surmise: We can infer that his motive in publishing the diary was less than honorable.
3)**To lead **to as a consequence or conclusion: “Socrates argued that a statue inferred the existence of a sculptor” (Academy).
4) **To hint; imply. **

VERB:
intr.

To draw inferences

Would like to pick another word which describes the transition in your post?

Good try.
grammartips.homestead.com/imply.html
INFER vs. IMPLY

      The best way to remember the difference between these two words is to think in terms of the model used by communications theorists. Communication consists of a message, a sender, and a receiver. The

sender can imply, but the receiver can only infer. The error that usually occurs is that the word infer is mistakenly used for imply.

Anyways, there is nothing more frustrating than someone who will justify 250,000 murders annually on account of the murderers performing cancer screens or std screens for people. The absolute lack of perspective is nauseating.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Just very “interesting” your reaction to th OP in the two threads on this-your first reaction was to tell us all the GREAT things PP does(other than killing a quater of a million children a year that is) then you preceeded to attack the stastics used by those who pointed about what a vicious, evil, downright satanic oranization it is. Why anyone would spend one millisecond defending them is beyond me.

First, I am assuming his means you ether can not or will not document your initial post?

Second, as I am not upset there is a serious accuracy problem in your proceeding post.
Third, is it not obvious to all you will not be documenting the “your first reaction was to tell us all the GREAT things PP does” because it also does not exist in the form you display.

Bob
I hope you take some time to understand the post which precedes your current one. It is a heart breaking post from a woman, who now wonders if she was pregnant. The problem is the PP workers we not completely honest with their definition of pregnant when they told her she was not pregnant. At the same time it is clear many who portray themselves as Catholic feel not need to be completely honest with her either!!! The church calls this license. The PP actions show a self evident belief in license in regard to abortion. While many so called Catholic show a self evident license in regard to any issue with PP. :tsktsk: It is not faith alone, faith and works. We can only be better when we act better, it is really that simple.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

… Anyways, there is nothing more frustrating than someone who will justify 250,000 murders annually on account of the murderers performing cancer screens or std screens for people. The absolute lack of perspective is nauseating.

Sure there is ; Try being falsely accused of “justify 250,000 murders annually on account of the murderers performing cancer screens or std screens for people.”

Maybe your nausea is from what you “infer” not what you are reading?

BTW feel free to discuss the dictionary issues with the dictionary people as it is not my concern.