PDA

View Full Version : Inside Look at an Abortuary



Nineveh
January 22nd, 2005, 09:35 AM
Police in New Jersey say an abortionist who flushed the remains of babies down toilets and tossed bloodied materials into garbage bins is now facing charges, just days after his receptionist was arrested for illegally performing terminations.

According to the Asbury Park Press, Dr. Flavius Thompson, 60, turned himself in at the Lakewood Police Department this week, and is accused of operating an abortion clinic without a license to process or store medical waste.

Thompson's office is at the Pleasant Women's Pavilion, a licensed abortion clinic, where a search warrant was executed last Saturday.

Officials say he's charged with violating the New Jersey Water Pollution Act by flushing "products of abortions" into the sanitary sewer.

The Press says Thompson also faces a charge of "dumping class-three regulated medical waste, mainly human blood products and items saturated, dripping or caked with human blood into the trash to be carted to a place not authorized to accept medical waste by the state Department of Environmental Protection."

The charges against Thompson come in the same week his receptionist was arrested for allegedly performing abortions without a license.

Liza Berdiel, 24, is accused of injecting abortion-inducing drugs into three patients. Prosecutors say she performed the abortions after-hours or when Thompson was not working. Both Berdiel and Thompson have been released by authorities pending future court dates.

"This investigation exposes some of the many abuses that occur daily inside the so-called 'safe and legal' abortion industry,'' Marie Tasy, executive director of New Jersey Right to Life, told LifeNews.com. cite (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42495)

Before anyone says, "Well, that's just one "clinic"..." , note that last paragraph. This is just one that's been caught and charged.

Crow
January 22nd, 2005, 12:05 PM
It's a sad comment on our twisted society.

Killing unborn children is considered to be less detrimental to society than polluting the water when disposing of their bodies.

Lighthouse
January 22nd, 2005, 06:50 PM
Liza Berdiel, 24, is accused of injecting abortion-inducing drugs into three patients.
But a woman is allowed to take a birth control pill?:kookoo:

Frank Ernest
January 23rd, 2005, 06:24 AM
Officials say he's charged with violating the New Jersey Water Pollution Act by flushing "products of abortions" into the sanitary sewer.

Gotta love the "political correctness" on that one. :rolleyes:

Zakath
January 23rd, 2005, 11:08 AM
But the laws about proper disposal of human tissue and/or body parts are there to prevent the spread of disease. Public health laws like those have nothing to do with the practice of abortion.

On the other hand, I think that if that clinic (or any clinic) was violating one or more laws it should be shut down. Period.

Art Deco
January 23rd, 2005, 12:24 PM
Originally posted by Zakath

But the laws about proper disposal of human tissue and/or body parts are there to prevent the spread of disease. Public health laws like those have nothing to do with the practice of abortion. Agreed, however, the arrest revealed the callous nature of the abortion industry in terms that the average Joe Blow can fully understand.

Posted by Zak:
On the other hand, I think that if that clinic (or any clinic) was violating one or more laws it should be shut down. Period. Again we agree, this is an ominous trend... :noid:

Zakath
January 23rd, 2005, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by Art Deco

Agreed, however, the arrest revealed the callous nature of the abortion industry in terms that the average Joe Blow can fully understand.A single callous clinic operator can no more be said to be indicative of an entire industry than a single child-abusing churchman can be said to be indicative of the sexual proclivities of the entire church leadership...


Posted by Zak: Again we agree, this is an ominous trend... :noid: One data point does not a trend make... but it does point out the need for inspections of the facilities (as well as pathology laboratories, hospitals, and other organizations that handle tissue) to ensure commpliance with local health codes.

Nineveh
January 23rd, 2005, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by Zakath

A single callous clinic operator can no more be said to be indicative of an entire industry....

I saw this remark coming a mile away.

Would you take the word (http://www.prolifeaction.org/providers/davis.htm) of an ex clinic worker? These (http://www.nrlc.org/news/2001/NRL03/southcaro.html) two? How many witnesses would it take to convince you this is more than just one clinic on either count (improper disposal and non liscence).


than a single child-abusing churchman can be said to be indicative of the sexual proclivities of the entire church leadership...

How many does it take?


One data point does not a trend make... but it does point out the need for inspections of the facilities (as well as pathology laboratories, hospitals, and other organizations that handle tissue) to ensure commpliance with local health codes.

I totally agree with you, it's plannedbarrenhood that needs convinced.

firechyld
January 23rd, 2005, 10:45 PM
But a woman is allowed to take a birth control pill?

Even they have to be prescribed by a doctor, lighthouse.

cattyfan
January 23rd, 2005, 10:51 PM
I hate the term "birth-control pill" as that is only one of that medicine's uses. (I know it's the most frequent use, but it isn't the only use.)

firechyld
January 23rd, 2005, 11:13 PM
I hate the term "birth-control pill" as that is only one of that medicine's uses. (I know it's the most frequent use, but it isn't the only use.)


I agree completely. I was originally put on one for medical reasons, at a rather early age. I hated being expected to explain why I was taking "birth control pills" when I went on things like school camps. Not that it was any of their business anyway.

Art Deco
January 24th, 2005, 07:49 AM
Originally posted by Zakath

A single callous clinic operator can no more be said to be indicative of an entire industry than a single child-abusing churchman can be said to be indicative of the sexual proclivities of the entire church leadership... Of course it is indicative of the entire industry, since the industry is based on the brutal murder of innocent babies in and out of the womb. How very clever to shift attention to sex in the church, and away from the steaming wickedness that passes for a lawful industry. :doh:

Free-Agent Smith
January 24th, 2005, 10:32 AM
Originally posted by Nineveh
I totally agree with you, it's plannedbarrenhood that needs convinced.

How about convicted instead of convinced?

Granite
January 24th, 2005, 10:39 AM
Originally posted by lighthouse

But a woman is allowed to take a birth control pill?:kookoo:

Not quite the same thing.

Knight
January 24th, 2005, 11:52 AM
Originally posted by Crow

It's a sad comment on our twisted society.

Killing unborn children is considered to be less detrimental to society than polluting the water when disposing of their bodies. You took thine words out of thine mouth.

Granite
January 24th, 2005, 11:53 AM
Dave Matthews's band dumps 800 pounds of human waste and everyone has a cow.

We turn infants into human waste and it's suddenly protected by the Constitution.

:shocked:

I dunno, just sounds like a "Twilight Zone" episode, or something...

Zakath
January 24th, 2005, 12:15 PM
Originally posted by Nineveh

I saw this remark coming a mile away.

Would you take the word (http://www.prolifeaction.org/providers/davis.htm) of an ex clinic worker? These (http://www.nrlc.org/news/2001/NRL03/southcaro.html) two? How many witnesses would it take to convince you this is more than just one clinic on either count (improper disposal and non liscence).So you have hard evidence of three problem clinics out of how many thousands? :think:

I know half a dozen former Catholic clergymen. Would you take the word of six ex-Catholic priests that their whole system is not corrupted?

:nono:

Probably not.

How many witnesses would it take to convince you that what you "know" isn't so? Perhaps you see only what you wish to see...


How many does it take? For me, enough to make a statistically reliable sample.

First, you need to know how many abortion providers there are in the U.S...




I totally agree with you, it's plannedbarrenhood that needs convinced. It's not PP's job to police all the clinics in the country, only their own. It is the job of the local health departments to do so. It appears that they are not doing so, at least in that town.

Why do you suppose that might be? :think:

On Fire
January 24th, 2005, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by Zakath
It's not PP's job to police all the clinics in the country, only their own. It is the job of the local health departments to do so. It appears that they are not doing so, at least in that town.

Why do you suppose that might be? :think: Because tens of thousands of wicked people are getting pregnant and choosing murder over responsibility thereby keeping these abortuaries in business and putting a strain on local health department workloads?

Granite
January 24th, 2005, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by On Fire

Because tens of thousands of wicked people are getting pregnant and choosing murder over responsibility thereby keeping these abortuaries in business and putting a strain on local health department workloads?

Is it reasonable to expect WICKED people to be RESPONSIBLE?

Zakath
January 24th, 2005, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by On Fire

Because tens of thousands of wicked people are getting pregnant and choosing murder over responsibility...... of which 70% describe themselves as Christians...
...thereby keeping these abortuaries in business and putting a strain on local health department workloads? Then revoke tax exemptions for churches and other non-profits and use the proceeds to hire enough inspectors...

:thumb: Case solved!

On Fire
January 24th, 2005, 01:10 PM
Originally posted by Zakath

... of which 70% describe themselves as Christians... Then revoke tax exemptions for churches and other non-profits and use the proceeds to hire enough inspectors...

:thumb: Case solved!

I prefer imposing a 20% atheist tax, assuming you guys actually work.

On Fire
January 24th, 2005, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by granite1010

Is it reasonable to expect WICKED people to be RESPONSIBLE?
I dunno.

Is it reasonable to electrocute baby murders?

Zakath
January 24th, 2005, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by On Fire

I prefer imposing a 20% atheist tax, assuming you guys actually work. There's not enough of us in the population to make a difference in the tax revenues... you Christians, on the other hand, with your billions in untaxed real estate and scores of billions in untaxed income... :greedy:

Granite
January 24th, 2005, 01:13 PM
Originally posted by On Fire

I prefer imposing a 20% atheist tax, assuming you guys actually work.

:darwinsm:

I forgot, non-Christians don't work.

On Fire
January 24th, 2005, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by granite1010

:darwinsm:

I forgot, non-Christians don't work.

Hey - I just didn't want to be accused of making assumptions. :chuckle:

Nineveh
January 24th, 2005, 01:39 PM
Originally posted by Zakath

So you have hard evidence of three problem clinics out of how many thousands? :think:

I know half a dozen former Catholic clergymen. Would you take the word of six ex-Catholic priests that their whole system is not corrupted?

How many does it take Z? How many victimized kids do we need to know an organization or it's policies are corrupt?


:nono:

Probably not.

How many witnesses would it take to convince you that what you "know" isn't so? Perhaps you see only what you wish to see...

It's the mounting evidence that is allowing me to "see" this isn't just one or two clinics. Why do you wish to ignore it?


For me, enough to make a statistically reliable sample.

Which would be? C'mon Z, give me a ballpark.


First, you need to know how many abortion providers there are in the U.S...

You ballparked thousands. Ballpark how many of them have to break a law before it's ok to say they are less than noble in practice.


It's not PP's job to police all the clinics in the country, only their own. It is the job of the local health departments to do so. It appears that they are not doing so, at least in that town.

Plannedbarrenhood threw a fit over SC even attempting to regulate "filthy facilities". That was a headline about 5 months ago or so.


Why do you suppose that might be? :think:

Because murdering babies is their goal. They don't seem to care about much of anything else.

Zakath
January 24th, 2005, 08:23 PM
Originally posted by Nineveh

How many does it take Z? How many victimized kids do we need to know an organization or it's policies are corrupt? How many abortion clinics who uphold the law of the land do you need to see before you believe they're not mostly like the two or three you've mentioned?

Seems a fair question...


It's the mounting evidence that is allowing me to "see" this isn't just one or two clinics. Why do you wish to ignore it?How many clinics is it, Nineveh? "Give me a ballpark."

:rolleyes:


Which would be? C'mon Z, give me a ballpark.Give me the total number of facilities providing abortion services in the US and I'll give it to you much closer than a "ballpark". It's only a simple matter of inferential statistics...


You ballparked thousands.Nope. I never threw out any numbers (to keep up with the baseball metaphor). You're pulling that one out of your hat...


Ballpark how many of them have to break a law before it's ok to say they are less than noble in practice.Just give me a number, oh knowledgable one. :ha:


Plannedbarrenhood threw a fit over SC even attempting to regulate "filthy facilities". That was a headline about 5 months ago or so.If you say so... :rolleyes:


Because murdering babies is their goal. They don't seem to care about much of anything else. Oh, perhaps you're ignoring all the other family planning and healthcare services they offer in addition to providing abortions at some of their facilities? Here's a partial list of non-abortion services provided by PP of Houston (the first one that popped up in google)...


Gyn exams
PAP tests
Laboratory tests
Birth control counseling and contraceptives
STI testing and treatment
Adoption referrals (yes PP does offer adoption referrals)
Pregnancy testing and counseling
Prenatal care
Vasectomy
Tubal ligation
Colposcopy
HIV/AIDS counseling and treatment
Mid-life counseling
Psychotherapy
Treatment of UTIs and Incontinence

Nineveh
January 25th, 2005, 07:31 AM
Originally posted by Zakath

How many abortion clinics who uphold the law of the land do you need to see before you believe they're not mostly like the two or three you've mentioned?

Seems a fair question...

Provide an example.

Here (http://traditionalvalues.org/1/pph/) are more examples of "clinics" breaking the law.


How many clinics is it, Nineveh? "Give me a ballpark."

:rolleyes:

Give me the total number of facilities providing abortion services in the US and I'll give it to you much closer than a "ballpark". It's only a simple matter of inferential statistics...

Do you own homework, it's your argument.


Nope. I never threw out any numbers (to keep up with the baseball metaphor). You're pulling that one out of your hat...

You said "how many thousands". Sounds like a "ballparked" figure to me.


Just give me a number, oh knowledgable one. :ha:

Your argument, your homework. Try google.com :)


If you say so... :rolleyes:

Oh, perhaps you're ignoring all the other family planning and healthcare services they offer in addition to providing abortions at some of their facilities? Here's a partial list of non-abortion services provided by PP of Houston (the first one that popped up in google)...


Gyn exams
PAP tests
Laboratory tests
Birth control counseling and contraceptives
STI testing and treatment
Adoption referrals (yes PP does offer adoption referrals)
Pregnancy testing and counseling
Prenatal care
Vasectomy
Tubal ligation
Colposcopy
HIV/AIDS counseling and treatment
Mid-life counseling
Psychotherapy
Treatment of UTIs and Incontinence

And which of those "good" services undoes their law breaking?

BTW... just about any GP or hospital offers those services, no need for plannedbarrenhood meatshops.

Granite
January 25th, 2005, 08:38 AM
Where there is demand, the market will meet it.

Unless you guys figure out a way to change hearts, and not just legislate your morality, abortions will continue to be performed, legal or not.

On Fire
January 25th, 2005, 08:43 AM
Originally posted by granite1010

Where there is demand, the market will meet it.

Unless you guys figure out a way to change hearts, and not just legislate your morality, abortions will continue to be performed, legal or not. Given the choice, I'd rather see a few idiots perform self-abortions than a law that allows babies to be murdered in so-called legitimate hospitals and clinics.

Granite
January 25th, 2005, 08:49 AM
Originally posted by On Fire

Given the choice, I'd rather see a few idiots perform self-abortions than a law that allows babies to be murdered in so-called legitimate hospitals and clinics.

Given the choice, anything we can do to limit abortion is of course preferable. But you're not going to have public support for illegalization for a while. If the people DID want abortion to go away, Washington leadership would get it done.

PureX
January 25th, 2005, 09:23 AM
Originally posted by granite1010

Where there is demand, the market will meet it.

Unless you guys figure out a way to change hearts, and not just legislate your morality, abortions will continue to be performed, legal or not. The sad truth is, though, that a lot of idealogues would rather punish those who disagree with them then they actually want change things. This is why they're far more interested in passing laws that will allow them to punish people then they are in changing people's hearts and minds, and eliminating the desire for abortions.

Granite
January 25th, 2005, 10:39 AM
Originally posted by PureX

The sad truth is, though, that a lot of idealogues would rather punish those who disagree with them then they actually want change things. This is why they're far more interested in passing laws that will allow them to punish people then they are in changing people's hearts and minds, and eliminating the desire for abortions.

When all else fails the church has repeatedly stamped its foot, run to Uncle Sam, and coerced the public. The minute the church realizes it can't get its way by playing nice, it throws a hissy fit.

The war on drugs and Prohibition come to mind...

On Fire
January 25th, 2005, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by granite1010

When all else fails the church has repeatedly stamped its foot, run to Uncle Sam, and coerced the public. The minute the church realizes it can't get its way by playing nice, it throws a hissy fit.

The war on drugs and Prohibition come to mind...
You want to see hissy fits.... http://www.michiganatheists.org/index.html

Granite
January 25th, 2005, 10:52 AM
Originally posted by On Fire

You want to see hissy fits.... http://www.michiganatheists.org/index.html

Uh...talking to the wrong guy, OF. So my birth state has some atheists running around. No offense, but big whoop.

Zakath
January 25th, 2005, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by On Fire

You want to see hissy fits.... http://www.michiganatheists.org/index.html ... and your point would be, what?

On Fire
January 25th, 2005, 12:40 PM
Originally posted by Zakath

... and your point would be, what?
I have never seen the church throw a hissy. I provided a link to an atheist site full of hissy.

Zakath
January 25th, 2005, 12:43 PM
Originally posted by Nineveh

Provide an example.

Here (http://traditionalvalues.org/1/pph/) are more examples of "clinics" breaking the law.Yeah, I recall Enyart chortling about that one a few years back, at least till someone pointed out that what the group was doing was also illegal...


Do you own homework, it's your argument.Nineveh's way of saying she's got a losing argument and needs to bail, fast... :rolleyes:


You said "how many thousands". Sounds like a "ballparked" figure to me.You obviously don't understand the meaning of the term then...


Your argument, your homework. Try google.com :)Nineveh's way of saying she's got a losing argument and needs to bail, again... :rolleyes:


And which of those "good" services undoes their law breaking?Which of those services are breaking the law? :think:


BTW... just about any GP or hospital offers those services, no need for plannedbarrenhood meatshops. Then don't patronize them, and while you're at it, perhaps you could convince your fellow Christians to stop patronizing them. If most of their customers went away, most of the clinics would close down. Then you'd get what you want... but first you have to convince "your people" to stop using the clinics... :think:

On Fire
January 25th, 2005, 12:47 PM
Originally posted by granite1010

Uh...talking to the wrong guy, OF. So my birth state has some atheists running around. No offense, but big whoop.

No, I'm pretty sure you're the one who accussed THE CHURCH of throwing a hissy fit every time it can't get it's way playing nice. Now THAT'S a big blanket.

Granite
January 25th, 2005, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by On Fire

No, I'm pretty sure you're the one who accussed THE CHURCH of throwing a hissy fit every time it can't get it's way playing nice. Now THAT'S a big blanket.

But this happens to be true. Unless you can think of an exception where a) the church, once it held civic power, DIDN'T abuse it, or b) where the church--just in America, say--NEVER resorted to legislative pressure when it couldn't get its way.

You won't because you can't.

I do like Zak's suggestion: why doesn't the Christian community stop tolerating abortion in its own ranks and puts its money where its mouth is?:devil:

On Fire
January 25th, 2005, 01:51 PM
Originally posted by granite1010
NEVER resorted to legislative pressure when it couldn't get its way.

Legislative pressure?!?! And have our law makers actually represent public opinions?

From a CBS news poll this month:

"Which of these comes closest to your view? Abortion should be generally available to those who want it. OR, Abortion should be available, but under stricter limits than it is now. OR, Abortion should not be permitted."

Generally Available 36%
Stricter Limits 35%
Not Permitted 26%
Unsure 3%

So 61% of Americans want at least stricter control. When's that gonna happen?

Gerald
January 25th, 2005, 02:36 PM
Originally posted by On Fire
I have never seen the church throw a hissy.Then you have lived a very sheltered life.

Granite
January 25th, 2005, 02:38 PM
Originally posted by On Fire

Legislative pressure?!?! And have our law makers actually represent public opinions?

From a CBS news poll this month:

"Which of these comes closest to your view? Abortion should be generally available to those who want it. OR, Abortion should be available, but under stricter limits than it is now. OR, Abortion should not be permitted."

Generally Available 36%
Stricter Limits 35%
Not Permitted 26%
Unsure 3%

So 61% of Americans want at least stricter control. When's that gonna happen?

Who knows. Maybe when and if Christians stop having abortions, or when the church actually gets its act together.

I'm not holding my breath. On the other hand, Christians do not have a monopoly on the pro-life movement.

Jackielabby
January 25th, 2005, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by granite1010

Given the choice, anything we can do to limit abortion is of course preferable. But you're not going to have public support for illegalization for a while. If the people DID want abortion to go away, Washington leadership would get it done.

Like most people I am anti-abortion but pro-choice. What right do certain religious groups have to try and take away that choice?

Nineveh
January 25th, 2005, 02:51 PM
Originally posted by Zakath

Yeah, I recall Enyart chortling about that one a few years back, at least till someone pointed out that what the group was doing was also illegal...

Mind giving some source? It would only be illegal is states that don't allow taping phone calls. Not like the illegality of that issue changes what's on the tapes. Last I knew it was used in a court case. Further info can be found by looking through that link.


Nineveh's way of saying she's got a losing argument and needs to bail, fast... :rolleyes:

Pardon? I've given you 4 witnesses so far. Not including all the testimony I could dig up pretty easily from Docs that have left. It only takes a google search Z.


You obviously don't understand the meaning of the term then...

That's much more simple to say than actually giving some info innit?


Nineveh's way of saying she's got a losing argument and needs to bail, again... :rolleyes:

Alright, so far we have more than one witness of more than one clinic doing more than one illegal activity and you have offered....?


Which of those services are breaking the law? :think:

The point being?


Then don't patronize them, and while you're at it, perhaps you could convince your fellow Christians to stop patronizing them. If most of their customers went away, most of the clinics would close down. Then you'd get what you want... but first you have to convince "your people" to stop using the clinics... :think:

They aren't needed, these "back allies with false fronts".

Nineveh
January 25th, 2005, 02:53 PM
Why not get back on the topic?

It's not a Christian abortuary breaking the law here folks.

Granite
January 25th, 2005, 03:10 PM
Originally posted by Jackielabby

Like most people I am anti-abortion but pro-choice. What right do certain religious groups have to try and take away that choice?

This question leads right back to the legitimacy (or otherwise) of abortion, and will probably hijack this thread...

Zakath
January 25th, 2005, 08:55 PM
Originally posted by Nineveh

Mind giving some source? It would only be illegal is states that don't allow taping phone calls. Not like the illegality of that issue changes what's on the tapes. Last I knew it was used in a court case. Further info can be found by looking through that link.The state laws regarding recording of telephone conversations (i.e. "wire tapping") are either one-party or two-party laws (a few have "all parties, which includes the telephone company). In a state with a one-party law, only one party needs to consent to the recording for it to be legal. In a state with a two-party law, both parties need to be consenting otherwise the recorder is breaking the law.

It gets interesting when the call is interstate between states with differing laws. Case law has held, in this instance, that the more restrictive of the two laws is upheld.

Here's how it works. West Virginia, where I live, is a one-party state. So if I secretly record a call from my one-party state to neighboring two-party state (say Maryland, for example), I am breaking the law. Additionally, by breaking the law in another state through interstate commerce (i.e. telephony, the Internet, or the U.S. Mail) I have now committed a federal crime and the case comes under the jurisdiction of the FBI...

As far as I am aware, there are ten two-party states. I checked the link you posted and all the tapes they mention are for the state of California - a two party state. This essentially makes all the tape inadmissible in court as evidence. Presumably the "Traditional Values Coalition" knows this which is why they haven't tried to get anyone prosecuted and are attempting to sucker people like you into doing their work for them. Additionally, if any of these tapes were recorded out of state and ended up in the hands of the FBI, your friends at TVC would be looking at, at the very least, the loss of their precious tax exemption.


Pardon? I've given you 4 witnesses so far. Not including all the testimony I could dig up pretty easily from Docs that have left. It only takes a google search Z.So how about doing one and coming up with a number? I'm quite willing to shoulder the burden of doing the statistical analysis, all you've got to do is come up with the number of abortion providers in the U.S...


That's much more simple to say than actually giving some info innit?Speaking from experience, eh? ;)



Alright, so far we have more than one witness of more than one clinic doing more than one illegal activity and you have offered....?Questions and inquiries. (And an occasional answer - see above). It's what I do... :)


The point being?That these organizations provide valuable services to their communities. And like churches, I would suggest we shouldn't condemn them all because a few are below par in their processes.



They aren't needed, these "back allies with false fronts". ... in your opinion. You religionists would have more credibility if you'd clean up your own business before presuming to tell the rest of the world how to take care of their business. I hear a lot of talk about "changed lives", but don't see much of it at all... deal with your own abortion seeking people first. :doh:

Nineveh
January 26th, 2005, 07:20 AM
Originally posted by Zakath

The state laws regarding recording of telephone conversations (i.e. "wire tapping") are either one-party or two-party laws (a few have "all parties, which includes the telephone company). In a state with a one-party law, only one party needs to consent to the recording for it to be legal. In a state with a two-party law, both parties need to be consenting otherwise the recorder is breaking the law.

It gets interesting when the call is interstate between states with differing laws. Case law has held, in this instance, that the more restrictive of the two laws is upheld.

Here's how it works. West Virginia, where I live, is a one-party state. So if I secretly record a call from my one-party state to neighboring two-party state (say Maryland, for example), I am breaking the law. Additionally, by breaking the law in another state through interstate commerce (i.e. telephony, the Internet, or the U.S. Mail) I have now committed a federal crime and the case comes under the jurisdiction of the FBI...

As far as I am aware, there are ten two-party states. I checked the link you posted and all the tapes they mention are for the state of California - a two party state. This essentially makes all the tape inadmissible in court as evidence. Presumably the "Traditional Values Coalition" knows this which is why they haven't tried to get anyone prosecuted and are attempting to sucker people like you into doing their work for them. Additionally, if any of these tapes were recorded out of state and ended up in the hands of the FBI, your friends at TVC would be looking at, at the very least, the loss of their precious tax exemption.

Thanks for the update, but that doesn't unsay anything on those tapes. You can always say they they are lying about what's on them and they staged them all of course. Made up all the names of the people, the clinics and the phone numbers they dialed. But you are fighting an uphill battle (with me at least) trying to make a taped conversation worse than telling an "underage girl" to "call back and don't tell us your age or the age of your boyfriend or we will have to report you".


So how about doing one and coming up with a number? I'm quite willing to shoulder the burden of doing the statistical analysis, all you've got to do is come up with the number of abortion providers in the U.S...

Try Google, it worked for me :)


Speaking from experience, eh? ;)

Well, ok...except the witnesses I've already provided.


Questions and inquiries. (And an occasional answer - see above). It's what I do... :)

Looks to me what you "do" is try to give outs to corrupt organizations.


That these organizations provide valuable services to their communities. And like churches, I would suggest we shouldn't condemn them all because a few are below par in their processes.

"Valuable services" provided by reputable physicians can be located in evey town/village/city one can locate an "ally with a false front".


... in your opinion. You religionists would have more credibility if you'd clean up your own business before presuming to tell the rest of the world how to take care of their business. I hear a lot of talk about "changed lives", but don't see much of it at all... deal with your own abortion seeking people first. :doh:

Zakath, I know you wanna bash a Christian whenever you get the opportunity. But let's keep this on topic. Or else we have to get into the Christians standing outside the clinics trying to change anyone's mind. And who started the abortion ball rolling to begin with. And who is pushing abortion now. And who screams the loudest when any dare to regulate any facet of it......

Zakath
January 26th, 2005, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by Nineveh

Thanks for the update, but that doesn't unsay anything on those tapes. Of course not.


You can always say they they are lying about what's on them and they staged them all of course. Made up all the names of the people, the clinics and the phone numbers they dialed. I never said that, but it is an outside possibility that the entire thing was staged as a publicity stunt.

I think the idea that not a single prosecution arose from 800 alleged violations of state laws in almost 50 states says alot about the quality of the alleged "evidence".


Looks to me what you "do" is try to give outs to corrupt organizations.What "organizations"? :think:


"Valuable services" provided by reputable physicians can be located in evey town/village/city one can locate an "ally with a false front".Is that "ally" or "alley"?


Zakath, I know you wanna bash a Christian whenever you get the opportunity. But let's keep this on topic. Or else we have to get into the Christians standing outside the clinics trying to change anyone's mind. And who started the abortion ball rolling to begin with. And who is pushing abortion now. And who screams the loudest when any dare to regulate any facet of it......

Who started the abortion industry doesn't matter nearly so much as who patronizes it decade after decade, millions of abortions upon millions.

It's you Christians!

Your attempt at redirecting conversation is an excellent illustration of the "big lie" about the alleged regeneration of the Christian "new birth." If these people were regenerated, why are hundreds of thousands of them every year doing what you claim your deity says is an abominable act?

Because your god isn't stronger than human nature?

Because your devil's followers are more powerful than your god's?

Because your allegedly wondrous born again experience is honestly incapable of changing human hearts and minds?

It appears that your "new birth" is just another human philosophical abstraction unavailable to the vast majority of the human race - either that or your god has failed in his ultimate attempt at reconciliation and is content with the greater majority of his creation sliding into oblivion.

Face facts, Nineveh. In most cases, purchasers of abortion services are from the very group of people who whine the loudest about the illegitmacy of the act itself. I think your continual banging of the gong of sexual predation and "failing morals" is merely to distract people. You're fighting a losing battle to keep out of public knowledge the failure of your religion to bring about the changes it so loudly claims are part and parcel of your alleged religious experience.

Outsiders don't have to "bash" Christians. Nothing we could ever do compares with the job you do on yourselves. :chuckle:

On Fire
January 26th, 2005, 01:34 PM
Originally posted by Jackielabby

Like most people I am anti-abortion but pro-choice. What right do certain religious groups have to try and take away that choice? WHy do you think murdering babies is OK?

Free-Agent Smith
January 26th, 2005, 01:42 PM
Can anyone name some Christian abortuaries?

And for those who are not defending abortion but still defending the ideas/concepts/laws/regulations involved therein, why are you doing so?

Nineveh
January 26th, 2005, 01:59 PM
Originally posted by Zakath

Of course not.

I never said that, but it is an outside possibility that the entire thing was staged as a publicity stunt.

I think the idea that not a single prosecution arose from 800 alleged violations of state laws in almost 50 states says alot about the quality of the alleged "evidence".

And you know what would happen if there was publicity over these tapes? I rather think they would welcome it.


What "organizations"? :think:

Like plannedbarrenhood, in this instance?


Is that "ally" or "alley"?

: ... rolls eyes ... :


Who started the abortion industry doesn't matter nearly so much as who patronizes it decade after decade, millions of abortions upon millions.

And neither are the subject of this thread. Make your own.


Your attempt at redirecting conversation...

You mean like by talking about anything but the clinics that are breaking the law, for instance?

Oh! And thanks for the handy example :



is an excellent illustration of the "big lie" about the alleged regeneration of the Christian "new birth." If these people were regenerated, why are hundreds of thousands of them every year doing what you claim your deity says is an abominable act?

Because your god isn't stronger than human nature?

Because your devil's followers are more powerful than your god's?

Because your allegedly wondrous born again experience is honestly incapable of changing human hearts and minds?

It appears that your "new birth" is just another human philosophical abstraction unavailable to the vast majority of the human race - either that or your god has failed in his ultimate attempt at reconciliation and is content with the greater majority of his creation sliding into oblivion.

Face facts, Nineveh. In most cases, purchasers of abortion services are from the very group of people who whine the loudest about the illegitmacy of the act itself. I think your continual banging of the gong of sexual predation and "failing morals" is merely to distract people. You're fighting a losing battle to keep out of public knowledge the failure of your religion to bring about the changes it so loudly claims are part and parcel of your alleged religious experience.

Outsiders don't have to "bash" Christians. Nothing we could ever do compares with the job you do on yourselves. :chuckle:

Gee, Z, nothin' like providing your own example of being a hypocrite in the "redirecting the conversation" thing, good job!

Art Deco
January 26th, 2005, 07:59 PM
Originally posted by granite1010

Given the choice, anything we can do to limit abortion is of course preferable. But you're not going to have public support for illegalization for a while. If the people DID want abortion to go away, Washington leadership would get it done. They didn't run a poll at the Supreme Court when they rammed Roe vs. Wade down our collective throats in 1973. To hell with what the anyone thinks, moral clarity requires an end to legalized abortion. Not in ten years...now!

Art Deco
January 26th, 2005, 08:04 PM
Originally posted by PureX

The sad truth is, though, that a lot of idealogues would rather punish those who disagree with them then they actually want change things. This is why they're far more interested in passing laws that will allow them to punish people then they are in changing people's hearts and minds, and eliminating the desire for abortions.

Shall we wring our hands over the NOW crowd's disappointment that Roe v. Wade was overturned or celebrate the fact that abortion is no longer the law of the land?

Art Deco
January 26th, 2005, 08:16 PM
Originally posted by Jackielabby

Like most people I am anti-abortion but pro-choice. What right do certain religious groups have to try and take away that choice? You may say you are anti-abortion but your actions speak otherwise. If you were anti-abortion you would simply say abortion is wrong for everyone except to save the life of the mother.

If you say who am I to tell anyone what is right or wrong, you have crossed into the world of moral relativism. You are now speaking the language of Secular Humanism. Those who subscribe to the Judeo-Christian World View do not hesitate to point out right from wrong. Moral clarity and certainty springs from the Judeo-Christian World View.

Zakath
January 26th, 2005, 08:26 PM
Originally posted by Nineveh

And you know what would happen if there was publicity over these tapes? I rather think they would welcome it.Enyart tried to stir something up but either his audience is so small that no one cared or perhaps most people know more about running entrapment schemes over interstate telephone lines than you do...


You mean like by talking about anything but the clinics that are breaking the law, for instance?We tried that, but you didn't want to do that.


Oh! And thanks for the handy example :Glad to oblige... :thumb:


Gee, Z, nothin' like providing your own example of being a hypocrite in the "redirecting the conversation" thing, good job! Ya gotta love "Christians", those folks who sponsor a debate forum then call people who show up to debate "hypocrites" when they don't agree with their pre-set positions.

I'm used to it. The irrationality and double standards are all part of TOL's quirky charm.

Zakath
January 26th, 2005, 08:27 PM
Originally posted by Art Deco
...To hell with what the anyone thinks... And thank you, AD, for summing up your and Nineveh's positions so well.

:D

Zakath
January 26th, 2005, 08:30 PM
Originally posted by Nineveh

Why not get back on the topic?

It's not a Christian abortuary breaking the law here folks. From my point of view, it doesn't matter what emblem a clinic hangs on its sign. If they have actually broken the law, they should be closed until either the problem is rectified or they go out of business.

Either way solves the problem of law breaking.

Next!

Lighthouse
January 27th, 2005, 02:54 AM
:sozo:ABORTION IS MURDER!

Murder is illegal in the US. All of it should be, with no partiality!

SOTK
January 27th, 2005, 03:58 AM
Originally posted by Crow

It's a sad comment on our twisted society.

Killing unborn children is considered to be less detrimental to society than polluting the water when disposing of their bodies.

What Crow said! :up:

Granite
January 27th, 2005, 07:22 AM
Originally posted by Art Deco

They didn't run a poll at the Supreme Court when they rammed Roe vs. Wade down our collective throats in 1973. To hell with what the anyone thinks, moral clarity requires an end to legalized abortion. Not in ten years...now!

SHOULD they have polled the public? It'd be a little embarrassing for you if public support in 1973 was on the side of the Court. Of course we may never know...

At least you're open about your authoritarianism. No need to sugar coat how you REALLY feel, Art. "Moral clarity" has been used to defend a lot in the past. Careful you don't get carried away fighting for one good cause and get sucked into a few rotten ones.

On Fire
January 27th, 2005, 07:34 AM
Originally posted by granite1010 and translated by OnFireThere's so much wrong with the world, if you can't fix it all you may as well not try to fix anything. Now excuse me while I crawl back under my rock.

:chuckle:

Granite
January 27th, 2005, 08:34 AM
Originally posted by On Fire

:chuckle:

:yawn:

You ever been arrested for protesting an abortion mill, OF? I have. What have YOU done (other than, ah, "prayer") to stop the butchery of the unborn?

Gerald
January 27th, 2005, 10:06 AM
Originally posted by granite1010

:yawn:

You ever been arrested for protesting an abortion mill, OF? I have. What have YOU done (other than, ah, "prayer") to stop the butchery of the unborn? I'd be interested to know that, too.

But from what I've seen of OF's posts, he's always been very tight-lipped about things he's done.

That's his prerogative, of course.

Nineveh
January 27th, 2005, 10:07 AM
Originally posted by Zakath

Enyart tried to stir something up but either his audience is so small that no one cared or perhaps most people know more about running entrapment schemes over interstate telephone lines than you do...

Refresher: This thread is still about abortuaries breaking the law.

Check out the part on this (http://www.childpredators.com/Tapes.cfm) link that says, "View a special Fox News report on Planned Parenthood concealing statutory rape:"


We tried that, but you didn't want to do that.

You mean the 4 witnesses I've provided so far? Let's add the above link as #5.


Ya gotta love "Christians", those folks who sponsor a debate forum then call people who show up to debate "hypocrites" when they don't agree with their pre-set positions.

I'm used to it. The irrationality and double standards are all part of TOL's quirky charm.

LOL you wanted to play the blame game and provided your own evidence for being a hypocrite, now you want to lay that off on all of Christianity, too...

What can I say but :darwinsm:

Granite
January 27th, 2005, 10:12 AM
Originally posted by Gerald

I'd be interested to know that, too.

But from what I've seen of OF's posts, he's always been very tight-lipped about things he's done.

That's his prerogative, of course.

Of course...:rolleyes:

Mr Jack
January 27th, 2005, 10:56 AM
Lighthouse,

Abortion is not Murder. Murder is a legal term, under which abortion does not fall. You might want it to be murder, but that does not make it so.

Zakath
January 27th, 2005, 12:14 PM
Originally posted by Nineveh

Refresher: This thread is still about abortuaries breaking the law.And I addressed that in my previous post. :)


What can I say but :darwinsm: Laugh it up while hundreds of thousands of your fellow believers murder their babies year after year...

:rolleyes:

Nineveh
January 27th, 2005, 12:21 PM
Originally posted by Zakath

And I addressed that in my previous post. :)

Looks to me like you can't help but keep trying to change the topic. : shrugs :

Bother to watch the vid on the just-one-more-law-breaking-abortuary?

Zakath
January 27th, 2005, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by Nineveh

Looks to me like you can't help but keep trying to change the topic. : shrugs :Looks to me like you can't come up with any response to my point.

Keep on laughin' :rolleyes:


Bother to watch the vid on the just-one-more-law-breaking-abortuary? What else would I learn in addtion to what has already been discussed, ad nauseum, here?

Nineveh
January 27th, 2005, 04:09 PM
Zakath,
The point is abortuaries are committing crimes. I started the thread on one getting busted for multiple infractions. If you don't have anything to offer on the topic, I dunno what to tell you. Your insistance on changing the topic seems like an attempt to "soap box" about other things. No one is stopping you from making a thread so you can gripe about whatever you want to your heart's content. TOL is a big place.

FYI the vid you didn't watch is a news segment.