I learned this morning that YouTube yanked an expose' video offline, claiming that the video violated their terms of use. Having viewed the four-minute clip, I can't say I saw anything at all that could have provoked such an action. What the video did, however, was expose the link between various aggressively pro-abortion organizations (including megalith Planned Parenthood) and an allegedly neutral documentary on abortion.
I'm not saying that the interview was handled in the best possible way. The gentleman couldn't wait to play his hand he missed the opportunity for a rejoinder when the woman from "The Decency Gap" insisted that the website he was quoting was old. (It had a 2008 copyright notice.) But, gracefully or not, the points were made and they are valid. And it is hard to imagine the excuse that was made for yanking the video.
So where are the voices decrying this unofficial censorship of unwelcome revelations? Sure, it's not government censorship, but when other private entities exclude ideological input, there are plenty of protests. It seems that Planned Parenthood & Co. has a lot of pull over at YouTube.
In case you are willing to brave it, here is the video that YouTube so heroically pulled in protection of... what? (GoogleVideo has so far been willing to face the consequences of keeping it available, which is odd, since Google owns YouTube; maybe because it is on Google.es?)
Thursday, July 03, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
It is disheartening to view the video.
My experience with Planned Parenthood is that it sends out lots of (must-be expensive), slick ads during state elections, citing any issue that limits access to abortion of any form (in the recent state elections there were ads using the controversy about pharmacists being able to morally not dispense abortifacients, and inciting mayhem by stating that pharmacists were now 'limiting womens' choice'). Instead of throwing them away, which I imagine most voters would do, I kept quite a few of the flyers because it seemed relevant to compare the message and observe the groups supporting the ad, among them notably some clearly Christians, as well as the local branch of Hadassah. When inquiring as to why a Jewish group might contribute funds to support PP, it was made very clear to me that in the Jewish religion, the womans' life is valued above that of the baby, and that it is not considered a baby until the biblical interpretation of the fetal heartbeat which if of course some time after the actual physiological heart beat occurs. On the one hand, we all know that partial birth, late-term abortion, etc. are also advocated by PP. On the other hand, then, one has to consider that there should be some disclaimer, i.e. if Jews support abortion of the baby because of the priority of the mother, are we talking medical emergency, maternal convenience, or some other definition of 'necessity', that's another discussion, altogether. If there is emergency, I don't think any civilized society would NOT consider the abortion a miscarriage, nor medical emergency of risk to the mother, so why would PP have to have Jewish support for this commonsense? I'm not ragging on Jewish support of PP, but I think that PP is attempting to pull wool over other's eyes, if they think that they can consider themselves a viable resource for 'Planned Parenthood' without simply being the public access for abortions. The most common visual 'bite' that PP wants the public to see is a mental picture of a woman with a metal clothing hanger in a dirty scoundrels backroom 'medical clinic' or the squalor of 'products' of repeated incest.
But, as NPR recently pointed out in its series on slavery. People that sell their children into slavery are from countries where there is a low standard of living and widespread poverty, brought on by inequitable distribution of wealth. Killing babies is not fair to the babies, nor is it an alternative to education and efforts at raising a standard of living. It seems that abortion-on-demand supports a self-perpetuation of a lifestyle of rapists, criminals, and meaningless demoralization of women.
People do not contact PP for education--they want citizens to have easy abortion access, and they want the government to pay for it. And, there is no reason to support PP in the US, nor is there need to bring the US and this judgmental attitude to other countries.
Post a Comment