Home - List All Discussions

NO -- Do NOT support the March of Dimes!

by: nancyu

They are PRO ABORTION. You don't eliminate poverty by killing poor people, and you don't eliminate birth defects by killing PEOPLE with birth defects.
http://www.michaelfund.org/

reply from: sander

They don't get a "dime" from me....between their support of abortion and animal torture they lost me years ago.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.michaelfund.org/media/Essay1.pdf
http://www.michaelfund.org/media/Essay2.pdf
http://www.michaelfund.org/media/Essay3.pdf

reply from: yoda

Got to agree with you, 100%.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4421&CFID=9662325&CFTOKEN=89753280

reply from: nancyu

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4421&CFID=9662325&CFTOKEN=89753280
BossMomma, there is a difference between using cadavers for research, and using intentionally killed innocent human beings for research.

reply from: BossMomma

So I guess pro-lifers would much rather just let all those preemies die, they aren't important anymore once they'er out of the uterus anymore right? PRO-FETAL-LIFER! You don't give a good god damn about babies, about life or, about quality of life unless there's an umbelical cord attached to it. From here on out I am not pro-life, I will not be associated with heartless bullsh*t artists with you. I will be without title, I gave more of a damn about babies than you when I was pro-choice.

reply from: BossMomma

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4421&CFID=9662325&CFTOKEN=89753280
BossMomma, there is a difference between using cadavers for research, and using intentionally killed innocent human beings for research.
The aborted fetuses would have been aborted anyway whether the MOD gained study off the cadavers anyway, the fetuses were not aborted specifically to provide the MOD with study material, they were aborted and the women donated the remains.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.michaelfund.org/media/MOD_Primer.pdf

reply from: BossMomma

I saw nothing to convict the MOD of supporting abortion, they are neutral. Some studies require human tissue to find a root cause and experimentation to find a cure. It was through these studies that we learned Folic acid can prevent neural tube defects like anacephaly.

reply from: nancyu

I saw nothing to convict the MOD of supporting abortion, they are neutral...
Then you are blind.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4421&CFID=9662325&CFTOKEN=89753280
BossMomma, there is a difference between using cadavers for research, and using intentionally killed innocent human beings for research.
The aborted fetuses would have been aborted anyway whether the MOD gained study off the cadavers anyway, the fetuses were not aborted specifically to provide the MOD with study material, they were aborted and the women donated the remains.
Just....wow.

reply from: BossMomma

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4421&CFID=9662325&CFTOKEN=89753280
BossMomma, there is a difference between using cadavers for research, and using intentionally killed innocent human beings for research.
The aborted fetuses would have been aborted anyway whether the MOD gained study off the cadavers anyway, the fetuses were not aborted specifically to provide the MOD with study material, they were aborted and the women donated the remains.
Just....wow.
Yeah, I wonder how many layers of stupidity that bit of logic will have to sink through to finally reach that tiny brain of yours.

reply from: BossMomma

I saw nothing to convict the MOD of supporting abortion, they are neutral...
Then you are blind.
Nope, my vision and my reading comprehension are leaps and bounds above yours. I'm willing to bet so is my college GPA.

reply from: CDC700

I'll continue to donate to the local women's maternity home. There's no question about their motives. They also don't hit up employers to payroll deduct "contributions".

reply from: nancyu

I saw nothing to convict the MOD of supporting abortion, they are neutral...
Then you are blind.
Nope, my vision and my reading comprehension are leaps and bounds above yours. I'm willing to bet so is my college GPA.
Maybe so...

reply from: CDC700

I saw nothing to convict the MOD of supporting abortion, they are neutral...
Then you are blind.
Nope, my vision and my reading comprehension are leaps and bounds above yours. I'm willing to bet so is my college GPA.
Maybe so...
Oh Yeah? Well my dad can beat up your dad!

reply from: BossMomma

I saw nothing to convict the MOD of supporting abortion, they are neutral...
Then you are blind.
Nope, my vision and my reading comprehension are leaps and bounds above yours. I'm willing to bet so is my college GPA.
Maybe so...
Oh Yeah? Well my dad can beat up your dad!
Probably, guy's in a nursing home.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4421&CFID=9662325&CFTOKEN=89753280
March of Dimes IS PRO ABORTION.
It's a simple fact.

reply from: BossMomma

March of Dimes IS PRO ABORTION.
It's a simple fact.
So is pro-life as long as the cord has been cut.

reply from: nancyu

March of Dimes IS PRO ABORTION.
It's a simple fact.
So is pro-life as long as the cord has been cut.
No. I don't support intentionally killing born children either. Nor do I support research on intentionally killed born children (even if their bodies were donated by the murdering parents.)
Not even if they "would have been killed anyway."

reply from: nancyu

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4421&CFID=9662325&CFTOKEN=89753280
BossMomma, there is a difference between using cadavers for research, and using intentionally killed innocent human beings for research.
The aborted fetuses would have been aborted anyway whether the MOD gained study off the cadavers anyway, the fetuses were not aborted specifically to provide the MOD with study material, they were aborted and the women donated the remains.
Just....wow.

reply from: BossMomma

March of Dimes IS PRO ABORTION.
It's a simple fact.
So is pro-life as long as the cord has been cut.
No. I don't support intentionally killing born children either. Nor do I support research on intentionally killed born children (even if their bodies were donated by the murdering parents.)
Not even if they "would have been killed anyway."
No, but you have no qualms about denying preemies the intensive care they need to survive do you baby killer?

reply from: nancyu

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4421&CFID=9662325&CFTOKEN=89753280

reply from: nancyu

March of Dimes IS PRO ABORTION.
It's a simple fact.
So is pro-life as long as the cord has been cut.
No. I don't support intentionally killing born children either. Nor do I support research on intentionally killed born children (even if their bodies were donated by the murdering parents.)
Not even if they "would have been killed anyway."
No, but you have no qualms about denying preemies the intensive care they need to survive do you baby killer?
Where? and when? have I suggested that?!
You've got real serious problems lady. I'll ask for some prayer to be sent your way.

reply from: sander

Between 1973 and 1975, the March of Dimes awarded $46,000 in donor funds to Dr. John F.S. Crocker at Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, for research into renal maldevelopment. Crocker used tiny but intact human embryos from aborted babies between the ages of five to twelve weeks gestation.
Don't they have the names mixed up?
Shouldn't that be, Dr. Mengele?
What horrid people.
Nope, they'll never, ever get a dime from me....did I mention not ever?

reply from: nancyu

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4421&CFID=9662325&CFTOKEN=89753280

reply from: nancyu

I'm glad to hear it Sander.
Send your dimes here instead:
http://www.michaelfund.org/
(but I don't recommend using paypal -- I think they're pro abort, too and they take some of the money)

reply from: nancyu

http://www.grtl.org/marchofdimesupdate.asp
March of Dimes: The Update
For years, Georgia Right to Life has held a no-support policy of the March of Dimes (MOD). One of the most frequent questions I'm asked is if there is any new information on MOD, or is our boycott is based on old information. After some recent study, there is new information. However, it does not bode well for the March of Dimes!
Just to refresh you, the MOD boycott began in 1972, because they sponsored and pushed the technique of amniocentesis in order to diagnose handicapped children in the womb, and then 90% to 95% of them were killed. (At that rate, we will not have "Special Olympics" for very much longer.)
We also knew that Henry Foster, who served on the March of Dimes' Medical Service Advisory committee, admitted doing nearly 700 abortions following the results of amniocentesis.
Amniocentesis is no longer an experimental technique - doctors seem to use this test on nearly every pregnant woman, so the reasons for the MOD boycott have slowly changed.
In 1995, the MOD sent records of all the grants they made for research in the previous two years to Rev. Robert Fleischmann, the national director of WELS Lutherans for Life, hoping that the boycott would be lifted. After they were evaluated, it was discovered that several projects apparently used fetal tissue from aborted babies. Rev. Fleischmann's requested that the MOD add an official policy that they would refuse grants for research projects involving the use of tissue from aborted babies - the MOD refused.
The MOD lobbies Congress for federal funds (your tax dollars) to use human embryo stem cells in research. To be an organization that claims to have the best interest of children in mind, the MOD doesn't seem to be protecting the interests of the unborn at all.
The MOD is also involved with Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD). Before human embryos are implanted into the womb by in-vitro fertilization, they are first screened for genetic imperfections or diseases. The human embryos that don't meet their standards are instead destroyed. During the March of Dimes 2002 Annual Clinical Genetics meeting, they taught a workshop on how to use PGD to identify more genetic diseases. This is truly a "search and destroy" mission.
Another startling discovery is that the MOD is involved with Planned Parenthood! According to a letter that MOD sent to Tennessee Right to Life, MOD staff and volunteers participate in coalitions along with Planned Parenthood, and some MOD chapters give community grants to the pro-abortion group.
In 2006, the MOD released their Global Report on Birth Defects, The Hidden Toll of Dying and Disabled Children. One of strategies it encourages is called "secondary prevention," which "aims to reduce the number of children born with birth defects." Although rarely stated explicitly, one potential 'treatment' at this stage is frequently implied: abortion.
We recognize that some of the things MOD has done are great, but their support of embryonic stem cell research, fetal tissue research, and abortion as an alternative to prenatal abnormalities is as anti-life as you can get.
There is an alternative to the March of Dimes. The Michael Fund is dedicated to intertwining scientific research for the prevention of genetic defects and the pro-life philosophy:
The Michael Fund may be reached at:
4371 Northern Pike
Pittsburgh, PA 15146
(412) 374-0111

reply from: nancyu

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4421&CFID=9662325&CFTOKEN=89753280

reply from: nancyu

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4421&CFID=9662325&CFTOKEN=89753280

reply from: sander

And to think non beings who don't exist have kidneys.
This is what the Mengele wannabe was experimenting on....albeit, dead, the darlings were alive once.
http://www.lifeissues.org/ultrasound/11weeks.htm

(nothing grahpic....promise)

reply from: 4given

Right? I will not donate to them again.. I will also add that one does not experiment on the remains of aborted beings to justify potential advancement for any cause. IOW no amount of justification makes those lives or the profit made from any experimentation worthy of their untimely end.
The Michael Fund Mission
Since The Michael Fund was created in 1978, it has been loyal to its original four-fold mission:
· First, to raise sufficient funds through direct contributions to support an international pro-life genetic research program aimed at finding treatments for chromosomal disorders including Trisomy 21, the most common and non-inherited form of Down syndrome. And to make our research findings available to others conducting similar research in related areas of genetic and metabolic birth disorders.
· Second, to advocate and encourage efforts to improve the care, treatment, education, evaluation and habituation of children with Down syndrome and related chromosomal anomalies which result in mental retardation, to the benefit of themselves, their families, and communities.
· Third, to serve as a defender of the rights of physically and mentally handicapped persons - born and pre-born - most especially the right-tolife upon which all other rights are predicated.
· Fourth, to stem and reverse the growing tide of eugenic abortion of affected pre-born children and the euthanasia murder of handicapped children and adults in the United States and abroad. This issue and the next of The Friends of the Michael Fund Newsletter are dedicated to furthering this objective
Thanks for the link. I will pass the information on.

reply from: 4given

Awesome and wonderful idea! I would love to have the finances to fund such a place.. I truly have so many ideas and others willing to donate time, energy and materials.. Unfortunate that those with the most giving hearts have the least amount of money though.. Right? Glad to read of your donations!

reply from: 4given

What is wrong BM? I don't think that you believe a bit of what you wrote. Is it necessary to falsely attack another because they disagree with you?..

reply from: Faramir

Do you have any figures as to what percentage of March of Dimes funds are used unethically?

reply from: BossMomma

What is wrong BM? I don't think that you believe a bit of what you wrote. Is it necessary to falsely attack another because they disagree with you?..
It's just as wrong to falsely accuse a good organization of supporting abortion. I have yet to see even one bit of attention focused on the good done by the MoD.

reply from: BossMomma

0% of their funds can be used for abortion research, procedures or, counciling.

reply from: 4given

Would any percentage of unethical research (ie. experimentation on aborted humans, cruelty to animals... support of abortion..) make this organization or any other less worthy of charitable contribution?

reply from: Faramir

Would any percentage of unethical research (ie. experimentation on aborted humans, cruelty to animals... support of abortion..) make this organization or any other less worthy of charitable contribution?
If their overal purpose is to support abortion, then they should not be supported.
If they have some misguided programs within their organization, and if support of abortion is a tiny percentage, then I would think it would be ethical to support them for the sake of the overall good they do, while putting pressure on them to cease the unethical things they're involved in.
Everything in our economy is so intertwined, it's impossible to be a purist.

reply from: 4given

Would any percentage of unethical research (ie. experimentation on aborted humans, cruelty to animals... support of abortion..) make this organization or any other less worthy of charitable contribution?
If their overal purpose is to support abortion, then they should not be supported.
If they have some misguided programs within their organization, and if support of abortion is a tiny percentage, then I would think it would be ethical to support them
How can you excuse or justify any injustice? Especially to the weak among us(including those in the womb). Apathy?
I understand we are not all alike. It is difficult for me to see how or why one would choose to support any organization that provides any amount of resources to a group that has a hand in abortion. Whether through experimentation or otherwise. "Tiny percentage" also refers to rape, incest and health justifications.

reply from: Faramir

Do you know what percetage of thiere funds are used for what we would see to be unethical?
It depends how much good is done with the funds that are used ethically.
What if withholding funds causes deaths that could have been prevented? What if those deaths are many times more than the abortion deaths?
I'm not saying anything one way or the other about MOD until I know for certain they use funds unethically, and what percentage it is of their overall funds, and what good they do overall.
Meanwhile, I would certainly give Bossmomma the benefit of the doubt that she believes in MOD and is giving to them in good faith with the intent to help people.

reply from: BossMomma

I do believe in them, their research saved my middle sister Christin, she was born at 28 weeks due to the trauma of my mother getting beat up on by her piece of crap husband. If not for that research neither she nor my beloved neice or nephew would be alive today.

reply from: 4given

How did it (their research) save her exactly? I know you have passion in regard to life. I can understand how you may perceive others as being less worthy of an opinion given all that you have said and done.. Do not take opposition personally. Nancy presented evidence of how and why MOD isn't ideal. From an ethical (pro-life)perspective, I can not support them. Sorry about your early trauma.. to you, your mom and baby sister. My sister was also born a few days shy of 28 weeks. She is a strong and independent woman much like Nancy and also you.

reply from: BossMomma

How did it (their research) save her exactly? I know you have passion in regard to life. I can understand how you may perceive others as being less worthy of an opinion given all that you have said and done.. Do not take opposition personally. Nancy presented evidence of how and why MOD isn't ideal. From an ethical (pro-life)perspective, I can not support them. Sorry about your early trauma.. to you, your mom and baby sister. My sister was also born a few days shy of 28 weeks. She is a strong and independent woman much like Nancy and also you.
The research done to preserve the lives of preemies came from MoD. If you don't jive with MoD that's fine, but don't slander them because you don't agree. Any and all credible research to find a cure was done using the exact same method of studying deceased human tissue and blood. The MoD is doing nothing unethical, the fetal tissue they study is donated, the MoD does not endorse or perform abortions.

reply from: nancyu

Would any percentage of unethical research (ie. experimentation on aborted humans, cruelty to animals... support of abortion..) make this organization or any other less worthy of charitable contribution?
If their overal purpose is to support abortion, then they should not be supported.
If they have some misguided programs within their organization, and if support of abortion is a tiny percentage, then I would think it would be ethical to support them for the sake of the overall good they do, while putting pressure on them to cease the unethical things they're involved in.
Everything in our economy is so intertwined, it's impossible to be a purist.
Their overall purpose is to support abortion.
Haven't you even skimmed this?
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4421&CFID=9662325&CFTOKEN=89753280
Try rereading it.

reply from: nancyu

Awesome and wonderful idea! I would love to have the finances to fund such a place.. I truly have so many ideas and others willing to donate time, energy and materials.. Unfortunate that those with the most giving hearts have the least amount of money though.. Right? Glad to read of your donations!
The Hope House in Maine gets funding from a local Hospital. Are there any hospitals in your area that might be willing to help get a project off the ground?

reply from: yoda

"I am suggesting .. linking up with other organizations such as the National Organization for Women, the AMA, Planned Parenthood... and abortion rights organizations.."
Careful now, Farty will not like you stepping on his toes.......

reply from: nancyu

http://www.operationrescue.org/archives/clarification-on-salk-institute-s-anti-life-history/
Letter to Operation Rescue
Re: Press Release of December 13, 2005
"Salk Institute Grows Human Brain Cells in Mice"
December 15, 2005 A.D.
From Randy Engel, Director, U.S. Coalition for Life and Director of the International Foundation for Genetic Research/The Michael Fund - the pro-life alternative to the March of Dimes.
Dear Operation Rescue:
I was saddened to see your press release exposing the anti-life activities of the Salk Institute marred by the
statement that "The Salk Institute is revered the world over for the discovery of its founder, Jonas Salk, of the cure for Polio."
The Salk Institute was spawned by the March of Dimes - the nation's premier promoter of eugenic abortion and fatal human experimentation on preborn children and their younger brothers and sisters at the early embryonic stage. The Institute has a long anti-life history as does its principal funder, the National Foundation/March of Dimes. For example:
For example, in 1968, the MOD funded the work of Dr. Roger Guillemin in the field of "reproductive biology" at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, California, which was built and largely supported with National Foundation funds. According to Guillemin, his passion for preventing "the birth of a child who is born where and when he is not wanted, where and when he cannot be properly fed and raised and educated," had led him to the Salk Institute to develop new methods of fertility control (almost certainly abortifacients).
That same year, 1968, the MOD funded the in vitro fertilization (IVF) research experiments of Dr. Georgiana Jagiello of Guy's Hospital Medical School, London, England. Dr. Jagiello's "research" included the development of super ovulatory drugs to extract large numbers of eggs from female donors, and the creation of human embryos as research objects to assess chromosomal damage resulting from particular drugs and chemicals.
In the last 1990s, the MOD, parent of the Salk Institute, awarded a $65,225 grant to well-known MOD researcher Dr. Kurt Hirschhorn, Professor of Pediatrics at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York: "To refine a method of ascertaining the chromosomal content of single cells. Goal: Preimplantation analysis of embryos in IVF settings and prenatal diagnosis using fetal cells from maternal blood."
Similarly, Dr. Evan Y. Snyder of Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, received a grant of $750,000 from the March of Dimes, that's three quarters of a million dollars folks, for human embryonic stem cell research to restore brain function.
Remember the MOD role in the severed-head-aborted babies experiments of Dr. Peter A.J. Adam and the equally fatal human fetal experimentation of aborted babies conducted by Dr. Robert Schwartz in the early 1970s?
All this is a matter of public record and well-documented by this writer over the past 30 years.
As for Dr. Jonas Salk, he was hardly the "hero" the MOD has, for public relations reasons, hailed as the savior of a nation with his ill-fated polio vaccine. But that lengthy debacle is well covered in my book - The McHugh Chronicles - Who Betrayed the Pro-Life Movement?
Suffice to say that both Salk and his competitor Dr. Albert Sabin, whose polio research was also funded by the MOD, were signatories to the viciously anti-Catholic Hugh Moore population control ads which ran in the New York Times in the 1970s.
It is time to rip the anti-life mask off the March of Dimes and its anti-life spawn, the Salk Institute.

reply from: 4choice4all

That link was from 1977....you are holding the MOD accountable for something someone in the organization said 32 years ago?

reply from: CDC700

Why the heck wouldn't you? Have they ever refuted any of it?

reply from: 4choice4all

Because perhaps in 32 years...goals have changed, agendas have changed, members have changed....just a thought.

reply from: CDC700

well, in over 47 years the PP agenda hasn't changed, only the members. They have had a lot of time to glorify their public view, but then, so has MOD......just a thought

reply from: 4choice4all

What is your point? Is there one? We aren't talking about PP....try to follow. We are talking about MOD and one of the arguments lobbed at them was something that was said by someone 32 years ago...and now the whole organization is being held accountable for that person's statement.

reply from: nancyu

Reposting this because apparently 4choice4all accidentally forgot to read it. This is present day, not 32 years ago.
(Not that it will make a bit of difference to her since she is one of them after all.)

reply from: galen

like many other mega charities, i find MOD too much like SGK... i refuse to give money to those who can not possibly trac the donation....
give directly to someone in need... or directly to the hospital funding a study... or even the doctor/scientist... then you know where you $$s are going.

reply from: nancyu

BossMomma I have a question for you. I hope it's not too difficult to answer. (It seems the ones I keep asking fari are really tough!)
What if MOD thought that sacrificing one of these preemies could help to cure a disease that afflicted older children? Would you object to that?
After you answer, I have a follow up question.

reply from: Yuuki

You might want to give her a day as opposed to just 5 hours, Nancyu. Some people have lives. BossMomma has a young baby to care for if I recall, as well as an older child.

reply from: AshMarie88

Personally I think anyone can claim that any charity (besides pro-life charities, specifically there for the abortion topic) supports abortion or animal abuse... Some charities I've seen it go back and forth, and I've either seen them support/not support abortion/animal abuse, or if that's not the case, then the case is that people working in the charity do or do not support abortion/animal abuse. It's not the organization itself, it's the workers in the organization/charity.
As for the march of dimes, I've seen it go both ways, I've seen people that support the charity that don't support abortion and I've heard of workers for it being neutral, so until I see hard proof evidence from the charity itself I'll vote "YES" for it. I don't support abortion, I support helping babies any way. And animals for that matter, altho I don't know their stance on animal abuse...

reply from: Yuuki

That is a very thoughtful post, thank you

reply from: nancyu

Take all the time you need BossMomma.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.michaelfund.org/index.php?pr=A_MOD_Primer
If you are opposed to eugenic killing; if you have a pro life bone in your body:
Do NOT support the March of Dimes.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.michaelfund.org/index.php?pr=A_MOD_Primer
by Randy Engel
A is for Alpha -The Beginning


On July 22, 1958, the National Foundation of Infantile Paralysis/March of Dimes (NF/MOD) announced it was turning its sights on preventing birth defects. Still reeling from a bad corporate conscience and massive cover-up concerning the "effective, safe and potent" Salk Inactivated Poliomyelitis Vaccine, "a vaccine which turned out to be inadequately studied, seriously flawed and prematurely introduced," the MOD stated it would become a new conscience for America by extending its purview from poliomyelitis to birth
defects.

Basil 0' Connor, President of the NF, and a very powerful national medical figure, became interested in medical genetics through his association with the Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor [***], instructional course initiated by Johns Hopkins University and the Jackson Laboratory. The Bar Harbor grant has continued for more than thirty years - the longest grant in the 50 year history of the foundation.

By the start of the 1970s, the MOD's commitment to eugenics and all that the commitment implies was evidenced by the plethora of openly pro-abortion speakers on the MOD circuit, by the addition of known eugenicists to its various National Advisory
Committees, by the eugenic writings found in their Original Articles Series, by their energetic funding and promotion of mid-trimester, non-therapeutic prenatal diagnostic research, clinical testing, and by their provision of seed monies to expand eugenic services at university-based medical centers throughout the United States .

Once the key officials of the NF/MOD accepted the fundamental premise of eugenics - that there are certain people who never should be born, and that it is a positive act for families and society to insure that such persons are not born - the fate of the
March of Dimes was chiseled in stone. This report is the story of the NF/MOD's journey into the killing fields of eugenics...
___________________________________________________________________________________
[***] The Jackson Labaratory was founded by CC Little - an outspoken eugenicist.
You can learn more about him here:
http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=4605
http://www.lifedynamics.com/library/
http://www.genetics.org/cgi/content/full/161/4/1357

reply from: nancyu

Take all the time you need BossMomma.
There is absolutely no pressure...whatsoever.

reply from: Yuuki

She HAS A LIFE. Clearly, you do not.

reply from: BossMomma

I would not support the MOD if it killed born children in search of a cure, searching for these cures via the already deceased is a different thing entirely.

reply from: BossMomma

Pssh, I only work full time, look after my three children plus babysit and go to school. I got all the time in the world to answer her idiotic question..:eyeroll:

reply from: Yuuki

Pssh, I only work full time, look after my three children plus babysit and go to school. I got all the time in the world to answer her idiotic question..:eyeroll:
Of course you do! You're a bad mom if you don't have time to blab on the internetz!

reply from: nancyu

I would not support the MOD if it killed born children in search of a cure, searching for these cures via the already deceased is a different thing entirely.
So when the "choice" to kill preemies is legalized, you won't have a problem using their remains (since they will already be dead anyway) for research?

reply from: nancyu

Pssh, I only work full time, look after my three children plus babysit and go to school. I got all the time in the world to answer her idiotic question..:eyeroll:
wah! wah! wah! I didn't give you a time limit did I? If you don't have time to debate, by all means go tend to your children and homework!
What a baby.

reply from: nancyu

I would not support the MOD if it killed born children in search of a cure, searching for these cures via the already deceased is a different thing entirely.
Why do you differentiate between born and unborn children?

reply from: Yuuki

Presumably she is doing it because you specifically asked about preemies.

reply from: nancyu

Presumably she is doing it because you specifically asked about preemies.
Why don't you mind your own business?

reply from: nancyu

Maybe you could show this to those who are pro life and support MOD. Some people are unaware of where their funds are heading.
I wrote a letter to my bank when I learned that they were raising funds for them, and when I showed them this information they removed the fund raising display, and then called me to thank me.
http://www.michaelfund.org/index.php?pr=A_MOD_Primer

reply from: 4choice4all

Is there any info that doesn't come from the competing charity The Michael Fund?

reply from: BossMomma

I would not support the MOD if it killed born children in search of a cure, searching for these cures via the already deceased is a different thing entirely.
So when the "choice" to kill preemies is legalized, you won't have a problem using their remains (since they will already be dead anyway) for research?
Where did legality enter in? I was speaking from a moral standpoint. Abortion is legal yet I do not support it. Do try to keep up snooky.

reply from: BossMomma

I would not support the MOD if it killed born children in search of a cure, searching for these cures via the already deceased is a different thing entirely.
Why do you differentiate between born and unborn children?
I don't, I differentiate between live and dead children. A dead child is gone, his/her problems are over, if knowledge can be gained from studying that dead child's remains and result in saving the life of another child I support the study.

reply from: BossMomma

Pssh, I only work full time, look after my three children plus babysit and go to school. I got all the time in the world to answer her idiotic question..:eyeroll:
wah! wah! wah! I didn't give you a time limit did I? If you don't have time to debate, by all means go tend to your children and homework!
What a baby.
Whatever dip*****, run along now and go collect rent and bills from your kids. Here's an idea though, why don't you go get a job and then get an education.

reply from: nancyu

I would not support the MOD if it killed born children in search of a cure, searching for these cures via the already deceased is a different thing entirely.
So when the "choice" to kill preemies is legalized, you won't have a problem using their remains (since they will already be dead anyway) for research?
Where did legality enter in? I was speaking from a moral standpoint. Abortion is legal yet I do not support it. Do try to keep up snooky.
Answer the question. If someone chooses to kill their preemies to help cure others will you support that or not?

reply from: nancyu

http://cornerstork.wordpress.com/2008/02/05/epsom-salt-reduces-cerebral-palsy-risk-march-of-dimes-gets-defensive/

reply from: nancyu

I would not support the MOD if it killed born children in search of a cure, searching for these cures via the already deceased is a different thing entirely.
But it's okay if it kills unborn children in search of a cure?
http://www.stemcellresearchcures.com/stemcellnews/ESCRsupporters.html
http://www.texasrighttolife.com/lifeIssues_abortion_truth.php
http://www.fightpp.org/show.cfm?page=stem_cell?page=stem_cell
I've got news for you brainy: If you support MOD you DO support abortion.

reply from: Yuuki

I've got news for YOU: it's OKAY to support the greater good.

reply from: BossMomma

I would not support the MOD if it killed born children in search of a cure, searching for these cures via the already deceased is a different thing entirely.
So when the "choice" to kill preemies is legalized, you won't have a problem using their remains (since they will already be dead anyway) for research?
Where did legality enter in? I was speaking from a moral standpoint. Abortion is legal yet I do not support it. Do try to keep up snooky.
Answer the question. If someone chooses to kill their preemies to help cure others will you support that or not?
I already answered your question.

reply from: BossMomma

I would not support the MOD if it killed born children in search of a cure, searching for these cures via the already deceased is a different thing entirely.
But it's okay if it kills unborn children in search of a cure?
http://www.stemcellresearchcures.com/stemcellnews/ESCRsupporters.html
http://www.texasrighttolife.com/lifeIssues_abortion_truth.php
http://www.fightpp.org/show.cfm?page=stem_cell?page=stem_cell
I've got news for you brainy: If you support MOD you DO support abortion.
No, I don't. The MOD does not support or fund abortion.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/bioethics/A000002163.cfm

reply from: nancyu

I would not support the MOD if it killed born children in search of a cure, searching for these cures via the already deceased is a different thing entirely.
But it's okay if it kills unborn children in search of a cure?
http://www.stemcellresearchcures.com/stemcellnews/ESCRsupporters.html
http://www.texasrighttolife.com/lifeIssues_abortion_truth.php
http://www.fightpp.org/show.cfm?page=stem_cell?page=stem_cell
I've got news for you brainy: If you support MOD you DO support abortion.
No, I don't. The MOD does not support or fund abortion.
Either you're a pro abort pretenda pro lifer, or you're extremely gullible.
If you want to send them all of your money it's no skin off my nose. But
they oppose personhood for unborn children. They fund and support embryonic stem cell research which will NOT be possible when laws against murdering unborn persons start being enforced.
They are FOR abortion. That's the fact jack, whether you like it or not. Looks to me like you like it.

reply from: faithman

I would not support the MOD if it killed born children in search of a cure, searching for these cures via the already deceased is a different thing entirely.
But it's okay if it kills unborn children in search of a cure?
http://www.stemcellresearchcures.com/stemcellnews/ESCRsupporters.html
http://www.texasrighttolife.com/lifeIssues_abortion_truth.php
http://www.fightpp.org/show.cfm?page=stem_cell
I've got news for you brainy: If you support MOD you DO support abortion.
No, I don't. The MOD does not support or fund abortion.
Either you're a pro abort pretenda pro lifer, or you're extremely gullible.
If you want to send them all of your money it's no skin off my nose. But
they oppose personhood for unborn children. They fund and support embryonic stem cell research which will NOT be possible when laws against murdering unborn persons start being enforced.
They are FOR abortion. That's the fact jack, whether you like it or not. Looks to me like you like it.
When you are breathing the foul air from a filth house, it makes the brain sluggish, and hard to keep up.

reply from: nancyu

I would not support the MOD if it killed born children in search of a cure, searching for these cures via the already deceased is a different thing entirely.
But it's okay if it kills unborn children in search of a cure?
http://www.stemcellresearchcures.com/stemcellnews/ESCRsupporters.html
http://www.texasrighttolife.com/lifeIssues_abortion_truth.php
http://www.fightpp.org/show.cfm?page=stem_cell?page=stem_cell
I've got news for you brainy: If you support MOD you DO support abortion.
No, I don't. The MOD does not support or fund abortion.
Either you're a pro abort pretenda pro lifer, or you're extremely gullible.
If you want to send them all of your money it's no skin off my nose. But
they oppose personhood for unborn children. They fund and support embryonic stem cell research which will NOT be possible when laws against murdering unborn persons start being enforced.
They are FOR abortion. That's the fact jack, whether you like it or not. Looks to me like you like it.
When you are breathing the foul air from a filth house, it makes the brain sluggish, and hard to keep up.
...excuses, excuses...

reply from: BossMomma

I would not support the MOD if it killed born children in search of a cure, searching for these cures via the already deceased is a different thing entirely.
But it's okay if it kills unborn children in search of a cure?
http://www.stemcellresearchcures.com/stemcellnews/ESCRsupporters.html
http://www.texasrighttolife.com/lifeIssues_abortion_truth.php
http://www.fightpp.org/show.cfm?page=stem_cell?page=stem_cell
I've got news for you brainy: If you support MOD you DO support abortion.
No, I don't. The MOD does not support or fund abortion.
Either you're a pro abort pretenda pro lifer, or you're extremely gullible.
If you want to send them all of your money it's no skin off my nose. But
they oppose personhood for unborn children. They fund and support embryonic stem cell research which will NOT be possible when laws against murdering unborn persons start being enforced.
They are FOR abortion. That's the fact jack, whether you like it or not. Looks to me like you like it.
I could care less about personhood, it is a stupid political term and no one can agree when it takes place. You will never overturn Roe v. Wade, get over it. The best we can do is work to minimize the percieved need for abortion. MOD saves millions of lives with the research they do and somehow I think that 24 week preemie that they nurse back to health is glad they got funding, otherwise he/she would be in a *****ing casket right now. I am neither pro-life nor pro-choice, I do not support abortion but I refuse to stoop to the depths of you and your ilk.

reply from: BossMomma

I would not support the MOD if it killed born children in search of a cure, searching for these cures via the already deceased is a different thing entirely.
But it's okay if it kills unborn children in search of a cure?
http://www.stemcellresearchcures.com/stemcellnews/ESCRsupporters.html
http://www.texasrighttolife.com/lifeIssues_abortion_truth.php
http://www.fightpp.org/show.cfm?page=stem_cell?page=stem_cell
I've got news for you brainy: If you support MOD you DO support abortion.
No, I don't. The MOD does not support or fund abortion.
Either you're a pro abort pretenda pro lifer, or you're extremely gullible.
If you want to send them all of your money it's no skin off my nose. But
they oppose personhood for unborn children. They fund and support embryonic stem cell research which will NOT be possible when laws against murdering unborn persons start being enforced.
They are FOR abortion. That's the fact jack, whether you like it or not. Looks to me like you like it.
When you are breathing the foul air from a filth house, it makes the brain sluggish, and hard to keep up.
Exactly, clean your damn house you scank nasty.

reply from: 4choice4all

For most of us...our beliefs are not formed in a vacuum. All of our life experiences, education, religious convictions and other outside sources stew together to form our guiding principles. Because of this, many people will hold opinions independent of group think or ideology. That's a threat to those that want to control thought...that want drones....BM..take a look at the people attacking you here...they are the same ones that follow each other in every thread and essentially ditto each other. It's a mob mentality...you are with us or against us. The biggest threat to their actions are independent thinkers and frankly, a healthy dose of common sense. You are revealing them...they use the prolife banner to try to create a moral high horse to look down on others when the reality is they do NOT care about life. They are more concerned that the tissue of a dead fetus is being used with no regard to the countless lives that tissue sample could save. It's ideology over morality ....pure and simple. That's why they tend to stick with insults and slurs...because if they engage in dialogue their true ilk is revealed.

reply from: sander

4death, you are funny, I'll give you that much.
The whole debate over abortion is a moral one. When you proaborts are totally void of any morality it's impossible to have an honest and open dialouge.
You don't get it because you can't get it.
If you do, then you will come face to face with the darkness you have embraced and that is a chilling thought, no matter how deep it resides at the moment.

reply from: 4choice4all

Thank you for proving my point that it's a tool to make you feel more righteous.

reply from: BossMomma

As of now I shed all titles, I'm neither pro-life or pro-choice and yes I know about our little mob, it's part of the reason I am so aggressive because kindness is simply trod upon here. I've learned a lot about myself in these past months, things that simply wont cotton with the average pro-life fundie. Our little hate club can pound sand till the cows come home but they will never achieve their goal.

reply from: Hosea

If my child is in a buring house and someone is willing to try and save them. I will not stand and debate in what circomstances they are willing to save my child. If people are willing to be pro-life but don't agree with your pro-life stance let them still save the child. You are willing to stand there and let the house burn down and the child die whie you argue who is right.
The devil loves when he can get Jesus' followers to divide.
Many of us have learned more truth over time becasue we were welcomed and we were allowed to think and then come to the right decision over time. Educating someone lovingly is much different than calling each other names and putting each other down.

reply from: BossMomma

If a house was burning with a kid in it I wouldn't be sitting on my ass debating with one of our village idiots, I'd be saving the kid. However, no house is burning, no kid needs saving so what's your problem?

reply from: nancyu

As of now I shed all titles, I'm neither pro-life or pro-choice ...
I would call you pro abortion.

reply from: Hosea

If a house was burning with a kid in it I wouldn't be sitting on my ass debating with one of our village idiots, I'd be saving the kid. However, no house is burning, no kid needs saving so what's your problem?
Relax, I am not attacking anyone.
My point is to welcome those who are against abortion in most circumstances. Pro-lifers should welcome them and continue to educate those people so they can come to conclusions that will help defend and save even more babies.
My point is if someone is against abortion for some circumstances let's save those babies instead of agruing over the circumstances of when the babies should be saved. Any baby that can be saved is progress toward the eventual goal of the unalienable rights for all people born and unborn.
In proper order
1) life
2) Liberty
3) pursuit of happiness (ownership of things)

reply from: Yuuki

This is a good post 4choice. No one but an extremist can classify themselves as a "true" follower of any ideology or belief, and they are the ones least likely to enact change, unless as part of their ideology they have true compassion and true love, like Ghandi or MLK Jr or Mother Theresa.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.michaelfund.org/index.php?pr=A_MOD_Primer
C is for Cystic Fibrosis

The funding of cystic fibrosis "search and destroy" operations was given top priority in the 1980's by the MOD. CF is the most prevalent inherited disease among Caucasians in the United States , and the discovery of a prenatal marker for the disease would make possible "a new program of mass genetic screening of vast proportions."
In 1981-82, the MOD got the CF-S&D ball rolling with a $108,000 research grant to abortionist and MOD National Advisor, Henry L. Nadler, M.D., for "pre-natal diagnosis of cystic fibrosis."
In 1983, the MOD, in collaboration with the CF Foundation, awarded a $50,000 grant to pro-abortionist and MOD National Advisor, Dr. Michael Kabac, to study the family-planning patterns of CF families and see "whether parents of affected children would be more likely to plan another pregnancy if a prenatal test [presumably backed by selected abortion of affected children] for CF were available."
In more recent years, Dr. Hope Punnett of St. Chris topher's Hospital for Children ($20,000/4-1-8 - 3-31-85), and Dr. Harry Harris of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine ($60,000/87-88-89), have received research grants for expanded prenatal testing of CF.

reply from: nancyu

I would not support the MOD if it killed born children in search of a cure, searching for these cures via the already deceased is a different thing entirely.
But it's okay if it kills unborn children in search of a cure?
http://www.stemcellresearchcures.com/stemcellnews/ESCRsupporters.html
http://www.texasrighttolife.com/lifeIssues_abortion_truth.php
http://www.fightpp.org/show.cfm?page=stem_cell?page=stem_cell
I've got news for you brainy: If you support MOD you DO support abortion.
No, I don't. The MOD does not support or fund abortion.
Either you're a pro abort pretenda pro lifer, or you're extremely gullible.
If you want to send them all of your money it's no skin off my nose. But
they oppose personhood for unborn children. They fund and support embryonic stem cell research which will NOT be possible when laws against murdering unborn persons start being enforced.
They are FOR abortion. That's the fact jack, whether you like it or not. Looks to me like you like it.
I could care less about personhood, it is a stupid political term and no one can agree when it takes place. You will never overturn Roe v. Wade, get over it. The best we can do is work to minimize the percieved need for abortion. MOD saves millions of lives with the research they do and somehow I think that 24 week preemie that they nurse back to health is glad they got funding, otherwise he/she would be in a *****ing casket right now. I am neither pro-life nor pro-choice, I do not support abortion but I refuse to stoop to the depths of you and your ilk.
You're a pro abort.

reply from: Hosea

If a house was burning with a kid in it I wouldn't be sitting on my ass debating with one of our village idiots, I'd be saving the kid. However, no house is burning, no kid needs saving so what's your problem?
Relax, I am not attacking anyone.
My point is to welcome those who are against abortion in most circumstances. Pro-lifers should welcome them and continue to educate those people so they can come to conclusions that will help defend and save even more babies.
My point is if someone is against abortion for some circumstances let's save those babies instead of agruing over the circumstances of when the babies should be saved. Any baby that can be saved is progress toward the eventual goal of the unalienable rights for all people born and unborn.
In proper order
1) life
2) Liberty
3) pursuit of happiness (ownership of things)
I don't give to the march of dimes and I try to educate others not to give to them either. They also were responsible for funding some terrible experiements in China.

reply from: nancyu

Good, me neither, and me too!
http://www.michaelfund.org/index.php?pr=A_MOD_Primer

reply from: fetalisa

So which is biggest abortion cootie factory now - is it PP or March of Dimes?

reply from: nancyu

Got to agree with you, 100%.


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics