Veil of Lies


My favorite liberal, Kirsten Powers, has a first rate column on the Planned Parenthood Worse Than Murder, Inc. videos:


Planned Parenthood head Cecile Richards apologized last week for the uncompassionate tone her senior director of medical research, Deborah Nucatola, used to explain the process by which she harvests aborted body parts to be provided for medical research.

Nucatola had been caught on an undercover video talking to anti-abortion activists posing as representatives of a biological tissue procurement company. The abortion doctor said, “I’d say a lot of people want liver,” and “a lot of people want intact hearts these days.” Explaining how she could perform later-term abortions to aid the harvesting of such intact organs, she said, “We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact.”

A second undercover video released Tuesday shows another Planned Parenthood official talking about using a “less crunchy” way to perform abortions while preserving salable fetal tissue.

This is stomach-turning stuff. But the problem here is not one of tone. It’s the crushing. It’s the organ harvesting of  fetuses that abortion-rights activists want us to believe have no more moral value than a fingernail. It’s the lie that these are not human beings worthy of protection. There is no nice way to talk about this. As my friend and former Obama White House staffer Michael Wear tweeted, “It should bother us as a society that we have use for aborted human organs, but not the baby that provides them.”

Richards worked to discredit the video by complaining it was “heavily edited.” But the nearly three-hour unedited video — a nauseating journey through the inner workings of the abortion industry — was posted at the same time as the edited video. Richards intoned menacingly that the video was “secretly recorded.” So what? When Mitt Romney was caught by “secret video” making his 47% remarks, the means of attaining the information was not the focus of the story.

Go here to read the rest.  The pro-aborts have never gotten much beyond their a “mere clump of cells” defense of abortion that I heard back when the abortion battle was new in the seventies.  The reality of abortion is so inhuman, so horror-filled, that the purveyors of abortion have to use lies to shield the grotesque reality.  Whenever the shield of mendacity is pierced, the pro-aborts are alarmed because in their hearts they know precisely what abortion is, and what they have become in their defense of disguised murder.

More to explorer


  1. “The pro-aborts have never gotten much beyond their a “mere clump of cells” defense of abortion that I heard back when the abortion battle was new in the seventies”

    Is that really true?

    In his Rethinking Life and Death (1996), Princeton bioethicist, Peter Singer submitted that “[The argument that a fetus is not alive] is a resort to a convenient fiction that turns an evidently living being into one that legally is not alive. Instead of accepting such fictions, we should recognise that the fact that a being is human, and alive, does not in itself tell us whether it is wrong to take that being’s life” and goes on to justify both abortion and infanticide.

    In 2012 a paper in the Journal of Medical Ethics, “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?” by Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva, expressed similar views.

    This is implicit in the Veil Law ((Law No. 75-17 of January 1975, concerning the Voluntary Termination of Pregnancy), “The law guarantees respect for every human being from the outset of life. There shall be no derogation from this principle except in cases of necessity and under the conditions laid down by this Law,”

    As Miss Anscombe pointed out, as long ago as 1958, “In present-day philosophy an explanation is required how an unjust man is a bad man, or an unjust action a bad one; to give such an explanation belongs to ethics; but it cannot even be begun until we are equipped with a sound philosophy of psychology. For the proof that an unjust man is a bad man would require a positive account of justice as a “virtue.” This part of the subject-matter of ethics, is however, completely closed to us until we have an account of what type of characteristic a virtue is – a problem, not of ethics, but of conceptual analysis – and how it relates to the actions in which it is instanced: a matter which I think Aristotle did not succeed in really making clear.” On this, I do not believe we are much further forward.

  2. “Is that really true?”

    Yep, outside of ivory tower “bio-ethicists”, and what an Orwellian formulation that is in his case, like Singer, pro-aborts would sooner eat ground glass than defend an accurate account of what goes on daily in the abortion mills.

    From an abortion mill in New York:
    “Contrary to anti-choice rhetoric, abortion does not kill babies or children. Abortion does not kill persons. Abortion is only performed before a person is formed and long before viability or any consciousness, which is the ultimate determination of personhood.”

  3. Where are our bishops? Where is the USCCB? Where is the outrage and, action as a result? PP must be defunded. There will be no better time.

  4. Judging from their news releases, the USCCB could care less about this story:

    “1Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, 2saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; 3therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them.…”

    At least the Scribes and Pharisees gave their flocks empty words. Our Bishops do not even do that. I do not doubt that the word has gotten around that a Bishop being strong against abortion and taking actions to match his words, is not a good career move under the current Pontificate.

  5. “Abortion is only performed before a person is formed…”

    Certainly, so preposterous an argument played no part in the debates that led to the Veil Law and would have had little traction in a country where the common term for an abortionist is « faiseuse d’anges » or “angel-maker.”

  6. Wrong. Cecile Richards did not apologise. Nor did she come close to apologising.

    She did the following:

    A) Justify the practise of donating the tissue of the aborted babies for scientific research by likening it to regular organ donation. A complete falsehood because in regular organ donation scenarios, the person must sign a consent form. The aborted child has not consented, and never can. How stupid is this woman.

    B) Undermined the clear video evidence, as an example of the disgusting organisation she heads, by claiming the video was heavily edited. And those that never bother to lightly scratch the surface on this claim will believe her.

    My blood boils.

    Cecile Richards is a bald-faced liar.

    And I hope, for her sake, she doesn’t end up in that special seat that the devil has carved especially for her in the fiery depths of hell.

    An evil evil lady.

  7. “Judging from their news releases, the USCCB could care less about this story:”

    But they are showing great strength of character in supporting the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

  8. “pro-aborts would sooner eat ground glass than defend an accurate account of what goes on daily in the abortion mills”

    I note that GOP presidential candidate Carly Fiorina (officially a “pro-choice” “moderate”) sent out the following tweet yesterday with a link to the PP video: “Whether you’re a pro-choice woman or a pro-life woman, this video is depraved.”

  9. For Cecile Richards. “I believe Man’s soul is immortal…. and will be treated with justice in another life respecting it’s conduct in this.”
    -Benjamin Franklin

    The justice that is not present in this life will, without a doubt, be present and final in the life to come. Watching C.Richards in the clip called to mind a puppet on a string. She did her floppy dance for the audience while Satan worked the strings.

    Poor soul.
    Let our prayer ask God for her conversion before she becomes another satanic toy for eternity.
    While we’re at it… ask God for help defUNding Murder Inc. $500,000,000 a year! This country has been desensitized and it may need shock-treatment as to appreciate the gift of life.

  10. What did the Lord God do to King Manasseh for making his children to walk through the fire in sacrifice to Molech? Will God change His response? Or does God remain the same? Jezebel was thrown out the window to the dogs for stealing Naboth the Jezreelite’s vineyard and arranging for his murder. What should Cecile Richards expect?

  11. PS I oppose violence. My questions are rhetorical. But even Robespierre got what he gave. That’s how God set up the Universe. Sow death, reap death. Lord have mercy – and He will – on the unborn babies. But nobody should throw PP people out windows. Let God do that if He so elects.

  12. “What should Cecile Richards expect?”

    Thomas Meagher in a 1848 Dublin statement upon his conviction and death sentence said that we will all appear before another judge (God), one of infinite justice and mercy; and that many of the decisions of this fell World will be reversed.

    I assume (you know what that means) the liberal anticipates oblivion: nothingness. They only have concerns about this world and its their sole duty to make it (what they feel is) better.
    In charity, we should attempt to persuade her to convert; to repent; to do penance; to amend her life; and to do good works to glorify God. For that, we would be labeled haters.
    Catholics would be concerned with the last things: death, judgment, Heaven or Hell. The PP apologists and democrat voters should be terrified about judgment: Whatsoever you did to the least of my brothers . . . FYI Christ isn’t working a set of scales: one mortal sin and you’re literally toast; voting to raise someone (who you hate) else’s taxes to pay more welfare isn’t one of the corporal works of mercy. Someone tell that to OH Gov. Kasich.

  13. T.Shaw-

    “For that we (could) be labeled haters.”

    We already are labeled haters for admonishing our wayward neighbors. Oh well. We do what were asked and with love we try to help them.
    It’s very difficult when the word sin is not in their vocabulary.

    I’ve been told by aquantices that they have never sinned. They just made bad choices that’s all.

    Funny world…sort of.

  14. One of the Spiritual Works of Mercy is “Admonish the sinner.” Charity for one’s neighbor includes concern for others’ eternal lives. By His life, death, and Resurrection Christ purchased for us the rewards of eternal life.
    Christ descended from Heaven in order to convert us, not to promise us a “rose garden” in the here-and-now.

    Mankind’s worst defeat (in the struggle for salvation) at Satan’s hand was when the demon deceived so, so many that he and sin do not exist.

    Another gang that (I think) are in deep spiritual distress and denial believe that they have no sin and ergo are “arrogant (not poor) in spirit.”

    Every time I see/hear the lie “Love wins” I silently scream “Sin wins.”
    We live in a fallen World. It’s a Vail of Tears. And, it’s spiritually crash-diving faster than Hell. God help us.

  15. T Shaw writes, “I’ve been told by aquantices that they have never sinned. They just made bad choices that’s all.”

    It is axiomatic that acts of the understanding are specified by their object and this should remind us that good and bad choices are no more equivalent than apprehension and misapprehension, truth and error are equivalent species of an identical genus; rather, bad choices are paralogisms, as Aristotle calls them (παραλογισμός = Unreasonable or fallacious). The good choice, “This – being such – is to be done,” is intelligible, because intelligent; the act of the bad will is a surd, ultimately unintelligible. True enough, we can often trace its causes to instinctive or dispositional factors, but it remains logically incoherent.

    That is why Aristotle insists that “All wicked men are ignorant of what they ought to do, and what they ought to avoid; and it is this very ignorance which makes them wicked and vicious. Accordingly, a man cannot be said to act involuntarily merely because he is ignorant of what it is proper for him to do in order to fulfil his duty. This ignorance in the choice of good and evil does not make the action involuntary; it only makes it vicious. The same thing may be affirmed of the man who is ignorant generally of the rules of his duty; such ignorance is worthy of blame, not of excuse” (EN 110b 25)

  16. Thank you MPS.
    You’ve opened the door to this idea of bad choices vs. sin, with the help of Aristotle it’s ignorance of duty vs. due diligence.
    As always… great points and interesting food for thought. I will be better prepared to help them.

  17. The “Love Wins” bumper sticker calls to my mind the final victory. Many who promote the message may not be aware of the author of Love. If so, the time will come when the meaning of the message might take them by surprise.

  18. “I’ve been told by aquantices that they have never sinned. They just made bad choices that’s all.

    Funny world…sort of.”

    My thoughts exactly Phillip.

    Again, too many do not want to scratch the surface, in other words, they refuse to reason that a bad choice goes against what is universally right. Going against what is right or good is going against the natural order. Which is what we define as sin.

    Many choose to stay in a state of confusion.

    Funny world indeed.

  19. “From an abortion mill in New York:
    “Contrary to anti-choice rhetoric, abortion does not kill babies or children. Abortion does not kill persons. Abortion is only performed before a person is formed and long before viability or any consciousness, which is the ultimate determination of personhood.””
    How do they know that the person is not acknowledging God in his transcendent soul while growing his body to worship and praise God in his immortal soul? How do they know? this elite intelligentsia is phishing and coming up with their wishful thinking that does not have a shred of proof or evidence, and is nothing more than hearsay in a court of law. Margaret Sanger said that we are” human weeds”. After God is removed from the public square, Planned Parenthood is saying that we are nothing more that a clump of cells. pink slime. This person is a constitutional posterity of George Washington and so are all other persons conceived. This person is also a constitutional posterity of Margaret Sanger. and now, I am a constitutional posterity of Cecile Richards and she would mutilate me as a clump of cells in a blender to get my stem cells. Freedom for all persons and our constitutional posterity.

  20. Mary,

    The crux of pro-abortion and all liberal projects is that they, not God or facts or data or hundreds of years of culture, make the determinations. They not only deny God and objective truth, they usurp God’s Will as to who lives and who dies. They exhibit peak hypocrisy whenever they utter the words “death penalty.”

    Soon they will be establishing death panels to rid the World of aged and infirm people.

  21. Can I drive over the Coochs Bridge Road without remembering T. Shaw?
    The principle of separation of church and state is used to silence church members, while the unborn have their souls separated from their bodies. The Court has made atheism, abortion and sodomy of “We, the people”, “We, the people” who constitute the government, while catering to sodomites, atheists and abortionists. Equal Justice.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: