Tuesday, November 10, 2015

There will be more to the story, but not less

Selling baby parts.  The director of Planned Parenthood has stated that such an accusation is fictitious, and that the organization is innocent of wrongdoing.

Not all the details of the case are available, but some facts are established. There will be more to the story, but not less.

The unveiling of behind-the-scene business practices has established several facts. Aborted fetuses are being differentially extracted, dismembered, preserved, and provided via a funded and contracted pipeline to various organizations within a bottom-line managed business model. It doesn't happen in every abortion case, nor does it happen in every clinic, but it is documented and admitted by both the clinics and the buyers.

Despite Planned Parenthood's claim that by service count, most of what they do is health care, the dollar count shows abortion to be the financial centerpiece of their business.
Planned Parenthood CEO, Cecile Richards,
assures Congress that her organization
doesn't do anything illegal.  She may
be right.  The practices they follow
may not be illegal, although they
do skirt the gray areas.  Legality
isn't what's on the agenda with
critics.  It's what's being done
that's caused the uproar, and
now the law itself is under
fire. Apparently, you can
remove a viable baby
from the womb, take
it apart, and sell the
parts.  Legally.


There's more to the story, but not less.  The emotion-charged debate among players is off the mark for the moment.  The question is not one of whether or not the law was broken but rather whether or not the regulation is adequate for the industry and ethical practice.

Despite the facts, narrowly focused debates have centered on the 'sale of baby parts', the 'sexist and anti-feminist' questions from Congress, and the undercover videos.  None have as yet addressed the root concern.

In the earliest discussions before abortion was legalized, promises were made that there were no children involved, just tissue blobs, fetuses without identity or personhood or even recognizable shape.  In the years that followed, science gave us a better look, and we discovered that some were perfectly formed children being dismembered in the womb.  They woke up and struggled as their limbs were cut and torn from their bodies.

As such information has been exposed, folks who had accepted the fetal blob description realize they've not considered the whole truth.  There's more to the story, but not less.

In the 50's, birth control was contraception, or preventing a pregnancy.  In their information pamphlet from that time, Planned Parenthood made the distinction clearly.  Abortion ends the life of a child after it has begun.  Today, their description is ambiguous, 'reproductive health care services' for women, and without reference to the child.  Their change of political verbiage does not change the science; abortion is not prevention of pregnancy, it is the termination of a life, however troubling that might be to acknowledge.

Cecile Richards, PPHood CEO, says she believes that life begins at delivery.  The law is perhaps inadequate on that point, but the science is not. Viability precedes delivery by an varying margin making legislation and ethical practice more difficult.  Awareness of pain precedes viability by an additional varying margin.

The most recent Democratic Party platform supports taxpayer-funded abortion through all nine months of pregnancy.

Polls show that a majority of Americans support the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (protecting viable unborn children as well as the mother's life).  Planned Parenthood opposes the bill for political rather than medical or science reasons.  Their apparent concern, that any recognition of responsibility for the unborn child will reduce the freedom to abort for any reason.

A reconciliation of science, ethics, and the law could be quite simple, but the political adversaries are unreasonably positioned and demanding.