Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

TNR: They’re Not Baby Parts, They’re ‘Products Of Conception’
federalist.com ^ | July 24, 2015 | D.C. McAllister

Posted on 07/24/2015 8:33:56 AM PDT by Morgana

After the release of two undercover videos by the Center for Medical Progress showing Planned Parenthood executives haggling over selling organs from aborted babies, OB/GYN Jen Gunter is complaining about the term “baby parts.” Writing for The New Republic, she says it’s better to use the term “products of conception.” While she thinks that’s just an accurate medical term, it’s really just dehumanizing babies to prop up the abortion industry.

“These are not ‘baby parts,’” Gunter says. “Whether a woman has a miscarriage or an abortion, the tissue specimen is called ‘products of conception.’ In utero, i.e. during pregnancy, we use the term ‘embryo’ from fertilization to 10 weeks gestation and ‘fetus’ from 10 weeks to birth. The term baby is medically incorrect as it doesn’t apply until birth. Calling the tissue ‘baby parts’ is a calculated attempt to anthropomorphize an embryo or fetus. It is a false image—a 10-12 week fetus looks nothing like a term baby—and is medically incorrect.”

In response, The Federalist cofounder Sean Davis sent Gunter a tweet asking the logical question, “Are you not also a ‘product of conception,” Dr. Gunter? If so, why is your liver a ‘body part’ but a younger person’s isn’t?” His question got him blocked.

(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Health/Medicine
KEYWORDS: abortion; plannedparenthood; productsofconception; prolife

1 posted on 07/24/2015 8:33:56 AM PDT by Morgana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Morgana
“These are not ‘baby parts,’” Gunter says.

Yep, thems 'baby parts'.

Just as "A rose, by any other name would still smell as sweet."
A Democrat, by any other name would still be just as evil.

2 posted on 07/24/2015 8:37:12 AM PDT by rjsimmon (The Tree of Liberty Thirsts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

This must be from the 1984 edition of TNR.


3 posted on 07/24/2015 8:37:31 AM PDT by glennaro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Disgusting. Are they going to put an added value tax on them for every step of production?


4 posted on 07/24/2015 8:42:54 AM PDT by mass55th (Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway...John Wayne)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

I held my nose and read the evil “doctor’s” article. Nothing there but willful denial of basic facts and rehash of the PP’s talking points. This hag would have made a wonderful Nazi apologist. She claims that it’s not “medically correct” to call a baby a baby until it has been birth. So, she essentially would be OK murdering the baby I guess until the very end?

This kind of mindset is what we’re up against. This is why the call to defund PP is going to meet with fierce resistance. These feminazis are just as radical in their beliefs as are ISIS and Al Qaeda about their.


5 posted on 07/24/2015 8:50:11 AM PDT by NohSpinZone (First thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Products of conception...... which is....... a baby.


6 posted on 07/24/2015 8:52:22 AM PDT by envisio (I ain't here long... I'm out of napalm and .22 bullets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

The placenta is a product of conception, as is the cord. However, when they call body parts of babies by the names of body parts of babies, it’s reasonable to conclude that what they are selling is the body parts of babies. Anyone but a liberal could understand that. “Heart”, “liver”, and “kidney” are not mere products of conception.


7 posted on 07/24/2015 8:53:37 AM PDT by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: envisio

Exactly. How stupid are these people? Fetus is Latin for offspring, which also means baby.


8 posted on 07/24/2015 8:54:32 AM PDT by Catsrus (WWWW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Catsrus

This is not a post to FreeRepublic.... this is a product of typing.


9 posted on 07/24/2015 8:58:11 AM PDT by envisio (I ain't here long... I'm out of napalm and .22 bullets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Hey Jen!

A BABY is the ONLY “Product of Conception”.

So, your Maoist attempts at renaming are of no value.


10 posted on 07/24/2015 9:01:17 AM PDT by G Larry (Obama Hates America, Israel, Capitalism, Freedom, and Christianity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

to say an amputated leg did not belong with the baby is absurd in the extreme.

was the leg on the baby at any point in time? yes.
then there can be no dispute it was a part of the baby.
therefore, it is a baby part.

of course, they’re concerned we’ll realize that the unborn child is actually a child and not a lump of cells (that just happen to have bones, knees, arms and legs)


11 posted on 07/24/2015 9:01:23 AM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Their mindset is that “unborn babies lives don’t matter.”


12 posted on 07/24/2015 9:10:33 AM PDT by sanjuanbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Not according to wiki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Products_of_conception

According to this definition they are the bits and pieces left behind after anything dealing with birth and the like. They are NOT bits of beings.

Stretching it to cover the parts of babies is craven.


13 posted on 07/24/2015 9:46:52 AM PDT by Adder (No, Mr. Franklin, we could NOT keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana
Calling the tissue ‘baby parts’ is a calculated attempt to anthropomorphize an embryo or fetus. It is a false image—a 10-12 week fetus looks nothing like a term baby...

Photo below shows a baby at fetal age 10 weeks. Nothing like a term baby?
Well, aside from the fact this "fetus" has eyes, nose, mouth, ears, hands, fingers, fingernails, feet, toes, toenails, heart, liver, pancreas, spine, brain ... yep, "nothing like a term baby."

From a "fetal development" website:
"The fetus is now about 2.5 inches (6cm) length and weighs about 0.7 ounce (20 g).
The feet are almost half an inch (1cm) long.
The fetus starts moving spontaneously.
The face is beginning to look like a baby's face.
The pancreas is functioning and producing insulin.
Fingernails and toenails appear.
The baby can suck his thumb, and get hiccups."

14 posted on 07/24/2015 10:29:31 AM PDT by shhrubbery! (NIH!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

I guess all those expectant mothers out there, the ones with no intent to murder their own children, are going to be surprised to learn that they’re not expecting a baby.

“Do you know what you’re having?”

“Well, we’re expecting a product of conception.”

“Oh. How interesting.”


15 posted on 07/24/2015 10:52:20 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (The judicial supremacist lie has killed 60 million innocents. Stop it before it kills America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson