Planned Parenthood & Child Predators

http://www.childpredator.com ^

[Diago]

From http://www.childpredator.com/

Who profits financially in cases of child sex abuse?

The dirty little secret is that Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Federation know they will sell more abortions, more birth control products and more treatments for sexually transmitted diseases when they turn a blind eye to child rape. Men involved with minors need to conceal these sexual relationships, so they take their underage victims to clinics that offer minors confidential abortion services and birth control. When Planned Parenthood and other family planning service providers ignore child abuse reporting laws, they help these men to continue their ongoing sexual abuse of children.

It's illegal for an adult man to seduce an underage girl into a sexual relationship. Every state has statutory rape laws that prohibit sex between adults and children. But Planned Parenthood, the National Abortion Federation, family planning service providers, and all other clinics that profit from selling products and services to sexually active underage girls, have a financial incentive to ignore the laws that were designed to protect children from sexual abuse. And now there’s proof that 91% of these businesses don’t comply with child abuse reporting laws. On the contrary, they actually help conceal child rape from law enforcement!

Who is using tax dollars to protect child abusers?

Men who prey on underage girls just have to put up the cash and Planned Parenthood clinics will quietly help these men cover up child rape. Despite receiving millions of tax dollars from various government entities, Planned Parenthood clinics consistently counsel underage girls to conceal ongoing child rape. Clinics do this because they profit every time they convince a minor child to utilize their services. Planned Parenthood's profits from selling pregnancy tests, abortions and other services to child rape victims would drop substantially if they actually obeyed the laws on reporting potential child sexual abuse.

All fifty states require healthcare workers and others to report suspected child abuse to Child Protective Services or some other law enforcement agency. But family planning services and abortion clinics operated by Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Federation continue to thumb their noses at child abuse reporting laws. The National Abortion Federation, Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics profit handsomely by ignoring child rape reporting laws and, if this issue comes up, they hide behind a lot of rhetoric about “privacy” in order to avoid the real issue - their willful failure to comply with these child protection laws.

The tapes don't lie, but Planned Parenthood does!

Our undercover investigation obtained over 800 taped conversations with Planned Parenthood and National Abortion Federation clinics all across America, which prove that Planned Parenthood and NAF fail to comply with the law. They ignore the law even in cases of child sex abuse where child rape is disclosed and acknowledged - not just suspected. These tapes have already been used in court by one state to defend their parental involvement law against a Planned Parenthood lawsuit. To learn more about this investigation and the evidence that proves that this failure to report is the policy and practice of these groups, Click here.

[LtdGovt]

But putting a gun to her head and forcing her to have an abortion is okay, by your logic.

I didn't say that. I said that it should be her choice, whether she wants to have an abortion or not. You see, I don't believe in putting guns to people's heads.

You still think that the trauma of a 12 year old carrying a child to term outweighs the trauma of going through an abortion. Chew on this for a bit; it might change your mind.

No doubt. I already was against forced abortions.

[LtdGovt]

Any pedophile who touches my child, will die. The one who forces her to have an abortion would just suffer a more painful death.

[MEGoody]

Common sense tells me that this is true; however, where are all the class action lawsuits stemming from such flouting of the child protection laws?

In Kansas, Atty General Phill Kline tried to investigate the efforts of Planned Parenthood and others to cover up child sexual abuse. There was a massive effort to get him out of the Attorney General position at the next election (before the investigation was complete). The effort succeeded, and the guy that was elected (Paul Morrison - the scumbag) dropped the investigation. Morrison was in the pocket of the abortionists, and that's who funded his campaign.

If you are looking for victims to file a class action lawsuit, you may as well stop. The victims hardly ever even go to the police to report their abuser. They aren't going to want to participate in a class action suit against the abortionists.

[Let's Roll]

Dr. Laura has maintained this for years.

That abortion on demand mostly benefits adult males who prey on minor girls.

[MEGoody]

Interesting that abortion opponents keep arguing that (1) women who are raped rarely if ever get pregnant, so there is no need to have an exception for cases of rape and (2) that in cases of child abuse, the victim does get pregnant (3) because the perpetrator is so stupid as to not use a condom. These positions seem inconsistent to me.

No one is claiming that child sexual abuse ALWAYS results in pregnancy. It probably is more common, however, because child abuse is a repetitive thing, whereas rape is not. Obviously, the more times one has sex, the more likely it is that pregnancy will occur.

But putting all that aside, wouldn't you support using every bit of information available to catch pedophiles?

Would they support forcing a 12-year old girl who has been raped to carry the child?

Speaking for myself: Unless the 12-year-old's life is medically at stake, yes. There's no reason to execute one of the innocent parties. If you want to kill someone, catch the rapist and kill him.

[RavenATB]

"You still haven't answered whether you support forcing a 12-year old girl who has been raped to bear the fetus."

What the hell is a 'fetus' but a not-yet-born human child?


Has a fetus ever come out of the womb as a dog, or a train, or a freaking palm tree? No! It's always a human.

So, you're advocating that somehow we should look at the killing of the innocent, yet-unborn child as a preference to the 12 year-old giving birth. As if somehow by killing the unborn child the 12 year-old is relieved of trauma?

[LtdGovt]

No one is claiming that child sexual abuse ALWAYS results in pregnancy. It probably is more common, however, because child abuse is a repetitive thing, whereas rape is not. Obviously, the more times one has sex, the more likely it is that pregnancy will occur.

Good point. But at least 40,000 abortions are for cases of rape, incest and for the life of the mother, and I base that on the statistics provided to me by a pro-life Catholic on this website. Even then, extreme pro-lifers keep talking about it as if the number is negligable.

I assume that if it's repetetive, it is more likely to be planned. If you have abused a child three times, you'll know that it's likely that you'll do it for a fourth time. Thus, I would submit that condom usage is more likely, if the pedophile has any brains.

But putting all that aside, wouldn't you support using every bit of information available to catch pedophiles?

Certainly. But not in the way that your hero Phil Kline has done, namely, by violating the privacy of women who have abortions.

Speaking for myself: Unless the 12-year-old's life is medically at stake, yes.

As I have already said: this position sickens me. I just can't believe that one human who considers himself to be a good and moral being would do that to another human, least of all a CHILD. It's a relief that such lunacy shall never be codified in the laws.

[RavenATB]

"But at least 40,000 abortions are for cases of rape, incest and for the life of the mother"

According to who?

[RavenATB]

"As I have already said: this position sickens me. I just can't believe that one human who considers himself to be a good and moral being would do that to another human, least of all a CHILD. "

And you take the moral high ground by advocating for killing the unborn child...

Nice...

[LtdGovt]

What the hell is a 'fetus' but a not-yet-born human child?

No, the 'human child' is not fully developed after 2 weeks. Therefore, it's not a human child, it's a fetus.

So, you're advocating that somehow we should look at the killing of the innocent, yet-unborn child as a preference to the 12 year-old giving birth. As if somehow by killing the unborn child the 12 year-old is relieved of trauma?

I know that this will greatly upset you, but you're not the person who gets to decide. The child gets to decide. I know you would impose any hardship on a child who has already suffered much (by putting a gun against her head and forcing her to continue to bear a rapist's child), if you could, but we as a society have decided that we won't provide people like yourself with that opportunity.

[LtdGovt]

And you take the moral high ground

Absolutely, and right I am. You think your position is worthy of the moral high ground? How laughable.

[Judith Anne]

Absolutely sickening. Don't you have a conscience? Folks like you scream foul when some stupid pill prevents a fertilized egg from implanation, but putting a gun to a 12-year old's head and forcing her to carry the fetus is okay. You care about unborn 'life', but not about children that are already born. As I said, sickening. That being said, I admire your courage in answering the question, you're the first to do so.

I must have missed the part about the gun to the 12 year old's head. I will join the other poster, and say that rape victims, even 12 yo ones, can give the baby up for adoption if they are impregnated.

Were I ever to have been impregnated by a rape, I would not want to kill the child--the OTHER innocent party in a rape.

And you speak about "forcing" a rape victim to carry the child. What if she is a pro-life rape victim? Would you "put a gun to her head" and FORCE her to have an abortion?

[LongElegantLegs]

Why do you keep blithering on about "putting a gun to a 12-year old's head" ?
Her body would naturally continue the pregnancy, no coercion required.

[RavenATB]

"No, the 'human child' is not fully developed after 2 weeks. Therefore, it's not a human child, it's a fetus."

Stages of development is nothing but an arbitrary standard, manufactured to relieve baby-killing advocates from guilt.

The fact is that if the abortion didn't happen that whatever you call it in the womb...at whatever the stage of development...would come out as a human.

As terrible as it is to ask a 12 year-old rape victim to endure the trauma of giving birth, added to all the trauma that child has already endured, it's one hell of a sight less evil than manufacturing an arbitrary standard of legitimacy to encourage the killing of unborn babies.

Don't give me a bunch of b"llsh't about your sympathies for the 12 year-old. You don't give a crap about kids if you can cut them up just because they don't measure up to your manufactured development standard. A child--12 days old or 12 years old--is just as deserving of protection. If you care about innocent children, you care about all innocent children.

[LtdGovt]

Were I ever to have been impregnated by a rape, I would not want to kill the child--the OTHER innocent party in a rape.

That's your choice, as it should be, and I respect that.

And you speak about "forcing" a rape victim to carry the child. What if she is a pro-life rape victim? Would you "put a gun to her head" and FORCE her to have an abortion?

What do you think I am, a psychopath? I'm arguing that it should be the girl's choice, not mine. If the girl wants to keep the fetus, that's fine with me. But too many seem willing to sacrifice the girl on the altar of ideology.

[MEGoody]

Even then, extreme pro-lifers keep talking about it as if the number is negligable.

It is negligable - 0.1% of abortions.

I assume that if it's repetetive, it is more likely to be planned. If you have abused a child three times, you'll know that it's likely that you'll do it for a fourth time. Thus, I would submit that condom usage is more likely, if the pedophile has any brains.

If pedophiles truly had brains they wouldn't be pedophiles. That aside, yes, some of them probably use condoms.

But not in the way that your hero Phil Kline has done, namely, by violating the privacy of women who have abortions.

So you don't believe that law-enforcement ever obtains medical information during an investigation? If that's what you think, you are in error. It happens all the time.

Why should records on abortions be treated any differently than any other medical records? They shouldn't, and that's why the records were provided to Kline after a judge forced the abortionists to provide them.

And by the way, since you wouldn't use medical records to find evidence against pedophiles, your claim that you would 'certainly' use all information available to catch pedophiles is a lie.

As I have already said: this position sickens me.

I see. So you are in favor of exactly revenge on whoever happens to be handy and least able to defend themselves. Disgusting.

[LtdGovt]

Why do you keep blithering on about "putting a gun to a 12-year old's head" ? Her body would naturally continue the pregnancy, no coercion required.

LOL. You would need to use coercion to prevent her from getting an abortion. Apparently, you're perfectly comfortable with that.

[LtdGovt]

Stages of development is nothing but an arbitrary standard, manufactured to relieve baby-killing advocates from guilt.

No. Wrong. Conception is the most arbitrary standard of all. Look at a fertilized egg, if you can see it. You think that's a human life? Yet you value the fertilized egg over a 12-year old girl.

As terrible as it is to ask a 12 year-old rape victim to endure the trauma of giving birth,

Asking? Yeah, that's what you're doing, ASKING. By putting a gun to a 12-year old's head. "You wanna make a deal?"

[LtdGovt]

If pedophiles truly had brains they wouldn't be pedophiles. That aside, yes, some of them probably use condoms.

Don't be deceived. Pedophiles are extremely dangerous and manipulative. They are in the business of winning children's trust.

So you don't believe that law-enforcement ever obtains medical information during an investigation? If that's what you think, you are in error. It happens all the time.

Phil Kline was criticized by privacy advocates for making abortion records public, in order to embarrass women into not having abortions. That's disturbing to me.

And by the way, since you wouldn't use medical records to find evidence against pedophiles, your claim that you would 'certainly' use all information available to catch pedophiles is a lie.

I would want to use them, just not in the way that Phil Kline did.

I see. So you are in favor of exactly revenge on whoever happens to be handy and least able to defend themselves. Disgusting.

Who was talking about revenge? You know it's not about revenge (really moral of you to lie here), just as I don't accuse you of plotting revenge against the 12-year old girl.