Gruesome !

[Anand Manohar]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Dear All

Here's something that made me wonder as to what the world is coming to !

Human fetuses - cooked and served on a plate ! - Initially I too doubted the authenticity and would
like to believe that it is a hoax.

But I just read that the Oklahoma State passed a bill banning the usage of human
fetuses in food !

Decided against uploading the picture - too disturbing and disgusting .

Just what's happening ?????!!!!!???????

AM









​

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Anand Manohar Ji,

Don't know what you are talking about? To my knowledge, human fetuses are not a dinner fare in the U.S. Are you sure it is in Oklahoma, USA? I live in the neighbouring state of Texas and has not heard anything remotely like it.

What you have read must be a hoax. Where did you read it from?

Regards,
KRS

Dear All

Here's something that made me wonder as to what the world is coming to !

Human fetuses - cooked and served on a plate ! - Initially I too doubted the authenticity and would
like to believe that it is a hoax.

But I just read that the Oklahoma State passed a bill banning the usage of human
fetuses in food !

Decided against uploading the picture - too disturbing and disgusting .

Just what's happening ?????!!!!!???????

AM









​

 

[C RAVI]

Dear Sri Anand Manohar Ji,

Don't know what you are talking about? To my knowledge, human fetuses are not a dinner fare in the U.S. Are you sure it is in Oklahoma, USA? I live in the neighbouring state of Texas and has not heard anything remotely like it.

What you have read must be a hoax. Where did you read it from?

Regards,
KRS

Shri KRS,

After reading the OP, I tried googling out such news article, and I got this one -

Bill Would Ban Aborted Fetuses in Food | ABC News - Yahoo! News

 

[talwan]

very disturbing.Still Aadhivasi culture on food continues?
Alwan

 

[KRS]

Okay folks. After reading what Sri Ravi Ji posted, this is not about food at all. This is about the fight between the Pro life and Pro Choice factions in the USA. The bill is about supporting the Pro life group.

It is complicated, but let me explain. Stem cell research uses unborn fetus tissues and the Pro life folks object to it as they fear that abortions will be performed to cater to this research. Oklahoma being a conservative state, by passing such a law they want to stop the private food companies to stop such a research - if they do not, they can not sell their food products in the State. Nothing to do with human fetuses being served up in food.

Regards,
KRS

 

[C RAVI]

Okay folks. After reading what Sri Ravi Ji posted, this is not about food at all. This is about the fight between the Pro life and Pro Choice factions in the USA. The bill is about supporting the Pro life group.

It is complicated, but let me explain. Stem cell research uses unborn fetus tissues and the Pro life folks object to it as they fear that abortions will be performed to cater to this research. Oklahoma being a conservative state, by passing such a law they want to stop the private food companies to stop such a research - if they do not, they can not sell their food products in the State. Nothing to do with human fetuses being served up in food.

Regards,
KRS

Shri KRS,

Thank you for your explanation. After reading the article, I could also have an impression that, indulging in sex purly to get conceived and aborting fetus may become a money making business, catering to the needs of Stem Cell Research. And to enhance the business any level of unethical practices may be performed within the family and outside the family. Sometimes scientific advancements though paves the ways for human betterment, they alongside bring about some or other sort of complicated issues.

The article also says this -

"There is a potential that there are companies that are using aborted human babies in their research and development of basically enhancing flavor for artificial flavors," he told KRMG Radio. "I don't know if it is happening in Oklahoma, it may be, it may not be. What I am saying is that if it does happen then we are not going to allow it to manufacture here."

 

[Yamaka]

Dear All

Here's something that made me wonder as to what the world is coming to !

Human fetuses - cooked and served on a plate ! - Initially I too doubted the authenticity and would
like to believe that it is a hoax.

But I just read that the Oklahoma State passed a bill banning the usage of human
fetuses in food !

Decided against uploading the picture - too disturbing and disgusting .

Just what's happening ?????!!!!!???????

AM

​

Dear AM:

Please give your source of information.

If what you know is from what cited by dear Ravi here, then you are into some local politics of the issue.

HEK 239 (Human Embryonic Kidney Cells numbered 239, as an "immortalized" cell line) has been in research labs for more than 40 years in the whole world, including India and US.

This cell line can be used in large scale to produce human proteins which can be used in all sorts of Food & Processing Industries in India, US and other places.

This cell line was derived from human fetuses long long time ago.

Now, the Pro-Life Republican politicians want to curb research into Embryonic Stem Cell Research - this is the most exciting part of biological research going on in the world for the sake of advanced Medicine.

There is a lot of politics in this issue...

Let's not go there, for now.

Cheers.



​

 

[Nara]

.... the Pro-Life Republican politicians want to curb research into Embryonic Stem Cell Research - this is the most exciting part of biological research going on in the world for the sake of advanced Medicine.

Dear Y, here is the text of the entire bill:

===================
An Act relating to food; prohibiting the manufacture or sale of food or products which use aborted human fetuses; providing for codification; and providing an effective date.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA:
SECTION 1. NEW LAW
A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 1-1150 of Title 63, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:
No person or entity shall manufacture or knowingly sell food or any other product intended for human consumption which contains aborted human fetuses in the ingredients or which used aborted human fetuses in the research or development of any of the ingredients.

SECTION 2. This act shall become effective November 1, 2012.
===================

Cheers!

 

[Anand Manohar]

Dear Yamaka, KRS

"Nara" has just quoted the text of Bill that I was referring to. Sorry, if you think that I am into "politics" of any type.

It was never in my nature to sensationalize / dramatize anything for the sake of cheap publicity. When it's all
available on the internet, I don't understand what I would ever stand to gain by such gimmicks, that too in this
austere forum !

I am glad that I didn't upload pictures - not that I hold any sole propriety to these .

AM

 

[Yamaka]

Dear Yamaka, KRS

"Nara" has just quoted the text of Bill that I was referring to. Sorry, if you think that I am into "politics" of any type.

It was never in my nature to sensationalize / dramatize anything for the sake of cheap publicity. When it's all
available on the internet, I don't understand what I would ever stand to gain by such gimmicks, that too in this
austere forum !

I am glad that I didn't upload pictures - not that I hold any sole propriety to these .

AM

Dear AM:

There is a cultural war going on in the US between the Pro-Life People and the Rest.

Pro-Lifers (in some Red States) want to eliminate abortion, contraception etc at all costs... they take pictures of live fetus, dead and damaged etc to "sensationalize" their political views.

The fact is Abortion is legal in the US. Using contraceptives is legal and nearly 90% of women in the US use it..

Abortion should be a matter between the woman, her family and the doctor.

Others should not have any say at all.

That's what nearly 75% of American electorate feels.. and a small minority is making too much noise on this matter.

That's all.

Cheers.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri AM Ji,

No sir, I was not questioning your motive at all. Because you did not cite the source and posted in a way that implied that fetuses are being used for 'dinner' I questioned the source of information.

I apologize if I offended you in any way.

Regards,
KRS

Dear Yamaka, KRS

"Nara" has just quoted the text of Bill that I was referring to. Sorry, if you think that I am into "politics" of any type.

It was never in my nature to sensationalize / dramatize anything for the sake of cheap publicity. When it's all
available on the internet, I don't understand what I would ever stand to gain by such gimmicks, that too in this
austere forum !

I am glad that I didn't upload pictures - not that I hold any sole propriety to these .

AM

 

[KRS]

Sri Yamaka,

You said:

Abortion should be a matter between the woman, her family and the doctor.

Others should not have any say at all.

That's what nearly 75% of American electorate feels.. and a small minority is making too much noise on this matter.

I would hope, you don't keep on posting unsubstantiated statistics that are quoted from thin air and assertions as though they are true to back up your opinions. I would hope that from the source of poverty to abortion you post well researched data to back up your bold assertions, so that our members can weigh what you say appropriately?

Here is a recent Gallup poll:

Since 1994, Gallup has also asked those who think abortion should be legal under certain circumstances to say whether it should be legal in "most" or "only a few" circumstances. On this basis, Americans are rather conservative in their stance on abortion, with 61% now preferring that abortion be legal in only a few circumstances or no circumstances. By contrast, 37% want abortion legal in all or most circumstances.

Americans are closely divided between those calling themselves "pro-choice" and those who are "pro-life," now 49% and 45%, respectively, in Gallup's 2011 update on U.S. abortion attitudes. This is similar to a year ago, when 45% were "pro-choice" and 47% "pro-life." However, it is the first time since 2008 that the "pro-choice" position has had the numerical advantage on this Gallup trend.​

Majority Says Abortion Is Morally WrongGallup's 2011 Values and Beliefs survey, conducted May 5-8, finds a bit more public agreement about the morality of abortion. Just over half of Americans, 51%, believe abortion is "morally wrong," while 39% say it is "morally acceptable." Americans' views on this have been fairly steady since 2002, except for 2006, when they were evenly divided.​

Americans Still Split Along "Pro-Choice," "Pro-Life" Lines

Regards,
KRS

 

[KRS]

Folks,

In my opinion, abortion can not and should not be between a woman, her family and her doctor. Not if a fetus can live outside of the womb independently (even with medical support), when it becomes a baby. The life of a baby then is the affair of the society.

Like the society has every right to prosecute a close family member killing a kin for justice, abortion of a fetus/baby that can live outside the womb independently should be considered to have all the rights afforded to a human being, that is right to life. If such an entity is aborted, society has every right to prosecute whoever is involved in that infanticide caused by abortion.

I however support the pro-choice position of letting the woman decide on abortion, if it is before the time that the fetus depends solely on the womb to survive and would hope those abortions are only done with all due deliberations and thought.

Regards,
KRS

 

[Nara]

....I however support the pro-choice position of letting the woman decide on abortion, if it is before the time that the fetus depends solely on the womb to survive and would hope those abortions are only done with all due deliberations and thought.

Brother KRS has given his view on abortion rights of women. What he states above is quite reasonable, but the devil is in the detail, how is viability out of the womb going to be ascertained? Is the state going to arbitrarily decide this?

This is the critical question and the US Supreme Court, one that was an all male bench at that time, gave a ruling, way back in 1973, in a much reviled or celebrated case called Roe Vs. Wade, that essentially affirmed a right to privacy of women to make this decision in consultation with their doctors. Now, how have they made this decision, did these "sex crazed" women go on an abortion spree?

Let us look at the report produced by the much respected Centers for Decease Control (CDC). Their 2008 report shows the majority of abortions take place before 8 weeks. Here is a summary:

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 301"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 64"]Gestation (Weeks)[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]% of abortions[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 64"]≤8[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]62.8[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]9–13[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]28.6[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]14–15[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]3.5[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]16–17[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]18–20[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1.9[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]≥21[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1.3[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

As can be seen, more than 90% of the abortions take palce within 13 weeks, of which more than 60% within 8 weeks. For more reports from CDC please visit this link.

There are at least couple of other angles to this question. The so called Pro-Life groups are religious fanatics who resort to deadly violence against abortion providers for nothing more than providing a legal service, so much for their Pro-Life ideology!!

Further, it is the same so called Pro-Lifers, who assert that even a pregnancy that results from a rape is God's gift (what kind of God is this god?), and therefore, the victims must be forced to carry it to term, somehow turn callously anti-life once the baby is born and are totally against any federal spending on a variety of programs designed to help babies of poor mothers.

The Republicans in general would like to hide behind reasonable rhetoric, but the fact of the matter is, motivated by their religious beliefs, they want the government to ban all abortions, to them even the "pill" is sin against god and must be banned.

I am sure my dear brother KRS does not share many of these extreme positions, but then, it is not about what Shri KRS thinks, or for that matter what I think, about abortion. It is about trusting women to make this difficult and heart-wrenching decision by themselves, in consultation with her family and her doctor, without getting molested by religious nut-cases shouting at her or forcing her to undergo medically unnecessary procedures just to make her feel guilty.

Cheers!

 

[KRS]

Dear Brother Nara Ji,

You are correct. I don't hold the same view as the Pro Life extremists you portray.

What troubles me is the last 2 numbers; about 3.2% of all abortions are fetuses/babies, majority of them probably can live out of the womb at the time of the abortion.

Obviously the physician would determine whether the fetus indeed can live outside the womb. SCOTUS has defined that fetal viability starts in week 28. However, fetuses that are as young as 20 weeks have a chance of survival.

There is no sharp limit of development, age, or weight at which a fetus automatically becomes viable.[SUP][1][/SUP] According to data years 2003-2005, 20 to 35 percent of babies born at 23 weeks of gestation survive, while 50 to 70 percent of babies born at 24 to 25 weeks, and more than 90 percent born at 26 to 27 weeks, survive.[SUP][2][/SUP] It is rare for a baby weighing less than 500g (17.6 ounces) to survive.[SUP][1][/SUP]

Stages in ​

prenatal development

, showing ​

viability and point of 50% chance of survival (limit of viability) at bottom. Weeks and months numbered by gestation.

Fetal viability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We live in a country that values life. We spend a huge amount employing life saving medical techniques from transplants to complex therapies, in cases where the chance of survival even seem to be minimal. We do not tell those folks, well, why don't you silently go away! The same standard should be applied to a life in it's beginning. I think that even if there is a chance that a fetus can survive, it should be saved, perhaps outside the woman's womb, instead of abortion. Frankly, I don't know when and whether such a procedure can be performed to take out the fetus and give it a chance to survive. It can always be given up for adoption.

Just my 2 cents.

Regards,
KRS

 

[prasad1]

Folks,

In my opinion, abortion can not and should not be between a woman, her family and her doctor. Not if a fetus can live outside of the womb independently (even with medical support), when it becomes a baby. The life of a baby then is the affair of the society.

Like the society has every right to prosecute a close family member killing a kin for justice, abortion of a fetus/baby that can live outside the womb independently should be considered to have all the rights afforded to a human being, that is right to life. If such an entity is aborted, society has every right to prosecute whoever is involved in that infanticide caused by abortion.

I however support the pro-choice position of letting the woman decide on abortion, if it is before the time that the fetus depends solely on the womb to survive and would hope those abortions are only done with all due deliberations and thought.

Regards,
KRS

Mr. KRS,
Who pays for the medical support? Why should the tax payer be forced to support an unwanted and now prone to be sick baby for a miserable life.

Republican do not want to pay for healthy peoples health care but are ready to squander scares resources on some body with very poor quality of life. Preemie babies cost a fortune.

"Factor in the cost of treating all of the possible lifelong disabilities and the years of lost productivity for the caregivers, and the real tab may top $50 billion, Waitzman says."

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_25/b4089046084131.htm

http://www.livestrong.com/article/153428-preemie-baby-health-issues/
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/premature-baby/FL00108

Baby's are not a widget, that once made can survive on their own, they need to be nurtured for very long time, and in case of preemie baby it is a lifelong job.

Black children are not easily adopted.

Children who are abandoned, become ward of the state, either foster care, life of crime, prison or mental health.

Famous song by Elvis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWcW1or6Q-w

 

[Nara]

....What troubles me is the last 2 numbers; about 3.2% of all abortions are fetuses/babies, majority of them probably can live out of the womb at the time of the abortion.

Brother, here is my 1/2 a cent -- I will actually expand to the last three numbers and look at 5.2% of the abortions that take place after 15 weeks. In most of these cases, if not all, the decision to abort must have been a harrowing one for these women and their families. I won't presume to be more moral than these women and tell her she is killing a baby.

The society has made a decision through a lawful process that she has the right to make this decision on her own without the society interfering. In other words, if a woman decides to end her pregnancy within the gestation period allowed by law, for whatever reason, the society has no right to prosecute her as though she killed a close family member.

Cheers!

 

[prasad1]

The problem with allowing society to make that determination is wrong. It should be a fundamental right of an woman to make that decision. And should be sacrosanct and should be allowed to changed by the whims of each elected official or the court systems.
Every republican who toys with women's health issue must pay at the poling booth.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Prasad1 Ji,

Are you saying then, because of the cost involved and the possible prospect of a bleak future (which by the way no one has quantified), we kill off these lives? Why don't we jettison the born babies with severe disabilities then? Most of them won't produce profit for the society after all! While we are at it, how about putting a mandatory limit to life? Say, 65 years of age - that will save us lots of money in terms of taking care of the old, will it not?

This is a slippery road. There may come a time when people can select to have babies or not by testing them for genetic characteristics in the womb during the last trimester. Is this okay with you?

By the way, many American families adopt babies internationally because of the cost and red tape they encounter in adopting American babies. In fact with the growing acceptance of same sex Unions, adoption needs will only increase, not decrease. I don't agree that most of these babies will suffer in their lives.

About black babies - there are no difficulties in their adoptions today. In fact more white families are willing to adopt black babies than what the black activists want to allow on the basis of preserving their 'culture'. In fact it has been shown that the interracial adoptions work to integrate cultures in a very positive way. Please read this:

Adoption Statistics: Placing Children

Regards,
KRS

Mr. KRS,
Who pays for the medical support? Why should the tax payer be forced to support an unwanted and now prone to be sick baby for a miserable life.

Republican do not want to pay for healthy peoples health care but are ready to squander scares resources on some body with very poor quality of life. Preemie babies cost a fortune.

"Factor in the cost of treating all of the possible lifelong disabilities and the years of lost productivity for the caregivers, and the real tab may top $50 billion, Waitzman says."

Million-Dollar Babies

Preemie Baby Health Issues | LIVESTRONG.COM
Premature baby? Understand your preemie's special needs - MayoClinic.com

Baby's are not a widget, that once made can survive on their own, they need to be nurtured for very long time, and in case of preemie baby it is a lifelong job.

Black children are not easily adopted.

Children who are abandoned, become ward of the state, either foster care, life of crime, prison or mental health.

Famous song by Elvis
Elvis Presley - In The Ghetto ( That's The Way It Is 1970).avi - YouTube

 

[prasad1]

Dear Sri Prasad1 Ji,

Are you saying then, because of the cost involved and the possible prospect of a bleak future (which by the way no one has quantified), we kill off these lives? Why don't we jettison the born babies with severe disabilities then? Most of them won't produce profit for the society after all! While we are at it, how about putting a mandatory limit to life? Say, 65 years of age - that will save us lots of money in terms of taking care of the old, will it not?
KRS

I am firm believer in God, would not suggest killing a born baby. At the same time I am not against aborting a baby with known defects. Science has advanced and given us choice. I believe that this choice is in Brahman too.

When you are talking about others as to what they should do, it should be their choice. I do not believe that any women makes this decision to abort without thinking about it. So state, clergy, politicians, and other people should butt out of it (it will not happen).


In life most of our decisions are based on money ultimately. Health care is always rationed by the individual's wealth, state, or the insurance company. Let us not kid ourselves.

 

[sarang]

A few years back, in a tv programme, adult thalidomide 'survivors' said how happy they were to survive despite defects and thanked their parents for not 'aborting'.

To go for abortion is an ethical decision, not a religious one; ganga and kamsa killed the newborns immediately for different reasons.

 

[KRS]

Dear Brother Nara Ji,

You said:

The society has made a decision through a lawful process that she has the right to make this decision on her own without the society interfering. In other words, if a woman decides to end her pregnancy within the gestation period allowed by law, for whatever reason, the society has no right to prosecute her as though she killed a close family member.

The operative word you have said above is 'legal'. I hope the courts or the legislature would reassess the time that life can be sustained outside the womb.

I used to think like you do, that the decision on abortion must be heart wrenching for all mothers. But then, I have come across instances where 'special' babies (if a fetus can live outside the womb, I call it a baby), are routinely aborted. In addition, I see routinely the unthinkable. that is mothers wantonly murdering their young children. This has given me a pause. We don't allow assisted suicide even out of mercy legally, why would we allow these murders? I think the society has a clear stake in this admittedly a very few cases.

Regards,
KRS

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Prasad1 Ji,

You said:

I am firm believer in God, would not suggest killing a born baby. At the same time I am not against aborting a baby with known defects. Science has advanced and given us choice. I believe that this choice is in Brahman too.

Gosh, you and I are so fundamentally in opposite sides, I am afraid there is no use in me saying more than what I already have. So, I stop here.

By the way. just FYI, I am not a Republican. I am an independent, conservative on most fiscal issues. I am almost a libertarian in terms of Government involvement. I do not agree with them on forign policy, but tend to agree with almost all of their social positions.

Regards,
KRS

 

[Anand Manohar]

Dear KRS

Just to steer back on course a topic that has meandered a bit, I thought legal enactments are needed
to ban only those things that are in vogue and not acceptable to society - eg. banning of dowry, banning
of sex determination tests and female infanticide etc etc.

If the Sate of Oklahoma deemed it fit to pass an enactment banning human fetuses in food .................. !
[ better left unsaid ]

Cheers
AM

 

[Nara]

...If the Sate of Oklahoma deemed it fit to pass an enactment banning human fetuses in food .................. ![ better left unsaid ]

Dear AM, perhaps you are unaware of the shenanigans of lawmakers, outrageous stunt bills are often introduced to draw attention to some issue they are passionate about. For example,a Democratic state senator from Oklahoma introduced an amendment that would define life as beginning not at conception, but at "ejaculation". Another example, lawmakers in Virginia voted down two measures that would have required men to undergo a rectal exam and a cardiac stress test before they could be prescribed drugs for erectile dysfunction. More details of these are here.

About the OK fetus in food bill, read more about it here. This article ends with the following:

"Holding a coveted Senate seat is a position of responsibility. Making baseless claims without providing a shred of evidence as the foundation from which to launch legislation is not only flagrantly irresponsible, it makes a mockery of those who participate in the entire lawmaking process."


​

Hope this clarifies.