Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Facebook removes fact check from anti-abortion video after criticism
The Hill ^ | 09/12/19 | Harper Neidig

Posted on 09/12/2019 9:35:55 AM PDT by yesthatjallen

Facebook has removed a fact check from a video posted by an anti-abortion group after Republican senators accused the platform of censorship.

The moves comes after the group, Live Action, as well as Republican lawmakers, complained after Facebook’s third-party fact-checkers deemed that a video in which the group’s president, Lila Rose, claims that “abortion is never medically necessary” was inaccurate.

They argued that the fact check was not impartial because two of the physicians involved in reviewing the claim are pro-choice.

SNIP


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; facebook

1 posted on 09/12/2019 9:35:55 AM PDT by yesthatjallen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: yesthatjallen
Impartial or not, the fact checker is correct. There are medical reasons to perform an abortion in a small number of cases.

Truth should rise above bias.

2 posted on 09/12/2019 9:43:04 AM PDT by asinclair (Political hot air is a renewable energy resource)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: asinclair
Impartial or not, the fact checker is correct. There are medical reasons to perform an abortion in a small number of cases.

But it could be such a small number of the abortions that the person making the statement never encountered that situation.

3 posted on 09/12/2019 9:47:29 AM PDT by Fido969 (In!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: yesthatjallen

I’m glad Facebook has removed what amounted to censorship of an anti-abortion speaker, but I think what she stated really is incorrect. ‘Abortion is never medically necessary”.
Really? I’ve always heard that there are such times when the mother’s life could be in jeopardy due to a continued pregnancy. For instance, if a stillborn fetus is not quickly removed. This may lead to sepsis. Am I wrong?


4 posted on 09/12/2019 9:49:36 AM PDT by lee martell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: asinclair

Any reasons they don’t provide the details of that medical problem?


5 posted on 09/12/2019 9:52:39 AM PDT by fruser1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fruser1

“Any reasons they don’t provide the details of that medical problem?”

Yeah, because it never happens.


6 posted on 09/12/2019 10:01:15 AM PDT by Beagle8U (It's not whether you win or lose, it's how you place the blame.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: lee martell

Birthing a still-born is not abortion.


7 posted on 09/12/2019 10:01:48 AM PDT by frogjerk (We are conservatives. Not libertarians, not "fiscal conservatives", not moderates)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lee martell
Could be semantics
"Stillborn" may not be considered the same as abortion
It would fall under "mis-carry" wouldn't it?
8 posted on 09/12/2019 10:02:00 AM PDT by Karma_Sherab
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: yesthatjallen
Information (mind) control...

Spin as if your life depended on it FarceBook.

9 posted on 09/12/2019 10:07:40 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (This space for rent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yesthatjallen

I thought a tubal pregnancy had to be aborted, for the life of the mother.


10 posted on 09/12/2019 10:13:40 AM PDT by married21 ( As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yesthatjallen

Fascistbook strikes again.


11 posted on 09/12/2019 10:22:10 AM PDT by chris37 (Monday, March 25 2019 is Maga Day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lee martell

Also if the baby attaches in the Fallopian tube. Can the baby be then placed in the uterus? Asking for a friend.


12 posted on 09/12/2019 10:32:15 AM PDT by Mercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mercat

I would need to refer you to Freeper Morganna for that question. Think she is or was a Baby Nurse.


13 posted on 09/12/2019 10:39:53 AM PDT by lee martell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mercat

I’m not a Dr (although I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night)but I do not believe that is possible. An embryo that implants in the fallopian tube would not be able to be “reimplanted” in the uterus. And for those who say those pregnancies must be removed for the life of the mother, that is true although I don’t consider that procedure to be an abortion. Nor do I think delivering a stillborn is abortion- you are simply put into artificial labor and deliver normally. I have friends who had to do this (incredibly sad and painful).


14 posted on 09/12/2019 10:40:48 AM PDT by luv2ski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: fruser1

DuckDuckGo as an exercise to the reader.


15 posted on 09/12/2019 11:10:39 AM PDT by asinclair (Political hot air is a renewable energy resource)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: asinclair

Lila Rose explains on her website why doctors do not have to kill the child to save the mother.

https://www.liveaction.org/learn/the-problem/hard-cases/


16 posted on 09/12/2019 1:51:03 PM PDT by victim soul (victim soul)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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