Planned Par­ent­hood’s con­tin­u­ing folly

Caught in acts of in­de­cency, it re­veals stun­ning cal­lous­ness

The Washington Times Weekly - - Editorials -

Those won­der­ful folks at Planned Par­ent­hood are run­ning scared. The na­tion’s largest op­er­a­tor of abor­tion mills stands ex­posed as op­er­a­tors of slaugh­ter­houses, and sev­eral ex­ec­u­tives of the or­ga­ni­za­tion have shown them­selves in recorded con­ver­sa­tions as cold, heart­less and un­re­pen­tant for what they do, how they do it, and how they make a profit at it. The con­ver­sa­tions, once re­vealed to the public, have been a grow­ing public-re­la­tions dis­as­ter.

Congress has ex­panded an in­ves­ti­ga­tion into Planned Par­ent­hood, as calls grow louder for re­vok­ing fed­eral fund­ing for the or­ga­ni­za­tion. Twelve states have be­gun in­ves­ti­ga­tions into or­gan har­vest­ing in the thou­sands of abor­tions the or­ga­ni­za­tion per­forms in chap­ters across the coun­try.

The ev­i­dence of heart­less abuse of com­mon de­cency can hardly be de­nied, so Planned Par­ent­hood has fallen back on the fa­mil­iar de­fense of a politi­cian caught red-handed in mis­con­duct — “the ev­i­dence has been taken out of con­text.” Its de­fend­ers have adopted as a mantra that “the tapes were heav­ily edited.” This is a vari­a­tion of the ex­cuse of the way­ward hus­band caught in bed with a woman not his wife, sur­prised by his wife, and who can only de­mand: “Who are you go­ing to be­lieve, me or your eyes?”

Planned Par­ent­hood now de­mands “the full re­lease” of video­tapes of con­ver­sa­tions be­tween Planned Par­ent­hood ex­ec­u­tives and ac­tors pos­ing as buy­ers of aborted baby parts. They should re­mem­ber the ad­mo­ni­tion to be care­ful of what you wish for. The nine videos recorded by the Cen­ter for Med­i­cal Progress re­leased so far, each run­ning 5 to 11 min­utes, have grown pro­gres­sively more dam­ag­ing.

The first one, re­leased July 14, de­picts Dr. Deb­o­rah Nu­ca­tola in a lun­cheon in­ter­view de­scrib­ing her tech­nique for “crush­ing” the un­born child: “We’ve been very good at get­ting heart, lung, liver, be­cause we know that, so that I’m not gonna crush that part.” She pauses to nib­ble at a salad, and takes a del­i­cate sip of red wine. “So I’m not gonna crush that part. 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.”

In another video, one Dr. Mary Gat­ter, de­scribes how she ne­go­ti­ates the price of the baby parts sold to re­searchers, ea­ger to get the most money. “I want a Lam­borgh­ini,” she says. In a third video, an em­ployee of one clinic tells how she fainted when han­dling tiny sev­ered baby legs. In other videos Planned Par­ent­hood doc­tors tell of scorn­ing a flat fee for a fully formed baby be­cause selling the parts in­di­vid­u­ally is more prof­itable; an em­ployee tells how baby parts are some­times dis­posed of with­out the con­sent of the moth­ers: “There were times when [we] would just take what they wanted. And these moth­ers don’t know. And there’s no way they would know.”

But now they do, and Planned Par­ent­hood is scram­bling to ex­plain its cal­lous, bor­der­ing on ob­scene, at­ti­tudes to­ward liv­ing things. Vet­eri­nar­i­ans would hardly tol­er­ate such cal­lous­ness in the treat­ment of dogs and cats. Mor­ti­cians treat bod­ies pre­pared for burial with greater re­spect.

Planned Par­ent­hood boasts of the med­i­cal ser­vices it pro­vides for thou­sands of women, and for its good deeds Planned Par­ent­hood de­serves their thanks, and ours. But good deeds do not con­fer li­cense for evil. The abor­tion doc­tors of Planned Par­ent­hood have shown them­selves de­void of the de­cency that the rest of us try to cul­ti­vate in thought, deed and speech.

The ex­ec­u­tives at Planned Par­ent­hood could have min­i­mized the public-re­la­tions dam­age of this dis­as­ter by promptly sack­ing these cal­lous em­ploy­ees, as they would have been sacked in any other busi­ness or­ga­ni­za­tions as a les­son for oth­ers tempted to make light of God’s cre­ation. In­stead, they have stalled, equiv­o­cated and blamed the bear­ers of the bad news. This vi­o­lates the first rule of scan­dal man­ag­ing, and this time the scan­dal is both the crime and the cover-up.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.