Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Anti-abortion movement gets a new media twist

33 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

I like it...

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-abortion26-2009apr26,0,5408628.story

The girl's voice in the videotape is tiny and tentative. She is talking to a nursing aide in a Planned Parenthood clinic in Bloomington, Ind. The girl wants an abortion.

The aide explains that the girl will need a parent's consent because she is only 13.

The girl balks; she does not want to name the father.

"Cause, I mean, he would be in really big trouble," says the girl. Her boyfriend, she explains, is 31.

The aide drops her head into her hands.

"In the state of Indiana," says the aide, "when anyone has had intercourse and they are age 13 or younger . . . it has to be reported to Child Protective Services."

There is a 60-second gap in the tape, according to the running timer on the video. What happens next is meant to be explosive.

"OK," says the aide, "I didn't hear the age. I don't want to know the age. It could be reported as rape. And that's child abuse."

"So if I just say I don't know who the father was, but he's one of the guys at school or something?" asks the girl.

"Right," says the aide, who has just stepped into a carefully laid trap.

As it happens, the boyfriend does not exist. The girl is not pregnant. Nor is she 13.

She is Lila Rose, a 20-year-old UCLA history major with a little voice and a bold plan to expose what she and many abortion foes see as Planned Parenthood's wrongdoings.

Since 2006, Rose has orchestrated undercover "stings" at Planned Parenthood clinics in Los Angeles, Indianapolis, Bloomington, Tucson, Phoenix and Memphis.

More to the story...

But I wish the LATimes had not posted her picture. Good for her though to do what she's doing.

http://www.liveaction.org

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

why the gap?

Clearly the staffers are more interested in helping the "girl" than punishing the man and dragging her into the inevitable fracas. Good job playing on the sympathies of the clinic staffers that care about the girls that come in more than revenge.

I'm not saying it's right, but in a case like this, if I were in the staffers shoes, I would be more concerned with the girl than in the mistake she made with the man. If she had said she was raped by a 31 year old man it would have been a different story I am sure.

Another pathetic attempt to manipulate public opinion by selective editing and focusing on something other than these girls actual problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

It's about statutory rape.

btw...what selective editing. She posts the entire videos on her website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

It's in your own post, Mr. Wizard.

There is a 60-second gap in the tape, according to the running timer on the video. What happens next is meant to be explosive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

so what is the argument here? that she should be forced to have the rapist's baby against her will?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

It's in your own post, Mr. Wizard.

Read the entire article. I believe all the full videos are on the website....or still on youtube.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

This is so retarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

so what is the argument here? that she should be forced to have the rapist's baby against her will?

No. PP is supposed to report the father of the baby to Child Protective Services to begin statutory rape charges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

No. PP is supposed to report the father of the baby to Child Protective Services to begin statutory rape charges.

what does that have to do with the "anti-abortion movement" as you noted in the title?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

No. PP is supposed to report the father of the baby to Child Protective Services to begin statutory rape charges.

What if the father is younger? Say the father was 12, and the mother was 13. Why would the father get in trouble? I ******* hate double standards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

so what is the argument here? that she should be forced to have the rapist's baby against her will?

No, she cried and sobbed her way into getting the organization to assist her in breaking the law. If there is even a hint that an adult had some kind of sexual relations with a 13 year old (willing or not), they have to be tried.

PP should have contacted the police while talking with the girl. They have to. Yes, the girl will have "betrayed" him by whatever unwritten law young people go by but the bigger picture has to be realized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

what does that have to do with the "anti-abortion movement" as you noted in the title?

Because it's targetting Planned Parenthood...don't like the "anti-abortion" label. Take it up with the LA Times. The use of the word actually reinforces my prolife stance in showing that the LA Times is liberal. They have chosen to label it as a pure anti-abortion topic when it's clear in the article it's more about Planned Parenthood abiding by state laws. Thanks for pointing that out rodeo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites