A recent New York Times article on the investigation into fetal parts research by the House Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives includes many pro-abortion comments which try to paint the committee as witch hunters rather than as legislators doing their jobs.

The paper’s bias continues as it liberally quotes pro-abortion propaganda and implies that if the committee were to subpoena medical research companies and obtain names of fetal tissue researchers that it might spark violence in the industry.  Ilyse Hogue, president of the pro-abortion group NARAL, said:

If heaven forbid an act of violence does occur as a result of this list being compiled, the chair of this committee and her G.O.P. colleagues will be complicit in that violence.

And one of the committee’s Democrats, Jerrold Nadler (NY), actually implied it was the committee threatening lives, rather than those who cut up babies. He said:

It’s one step further than McCarthyism, because McCarthy just threatened people’s jobs. They’re threatening people’s lives.

But the committee chair, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (TN) said:

We all are concerned for individual safety. It’s important to note that we have to have the names of some of the individuals who are carrying out these practices in order to investigate the practice.

The abortion industry is notorious for justifying its secret-keeping ways, always claiming they would be in danger if people knew the names of those working in these facilities. Citing fringe instances of those who claim to be against abortion violence but inflict violence, such as the Colorado Springs shooting last year, the abortion industry falsely portrays peaceful pro-lifers as a danger to them.

And if pro-lifers are not portrayed as violent, then they are portrayed as hindering medical research that may help others live. Lawrence Goldstein, who has received funding from Planned Parenthood for research and also has obtained fetal parts from the abortion organization, testified in the hearing this month, and is known for his work experimenting on baby brains. He insists that cures for diseases and vaccines to prevent them cannot exist without his experiments on dead babies.

The Times reports:

Larry Goldstein, scientific director of the Sanford Consortium for Regenerative Medicine in La Jolla, Calif., told the committee at its first hearing on March 2 that a project to cure multiple sclerosis had been halted because it had “basically seen supply of fetal material dry up completely.”

While Goldstein may infer pro-lifers have potentially prevented multiple sclerosis from being cured, the fact is that no actual cures have come, which is okay with him as long as he gets to keep researching. As Live Action reported:

Stunningly, Goldstein defended the “exploration” of baby brains. He said that because researchers don’t know the area of the brain that is affected by certain diseases, it is therefore vital to “explore the landscape.” And while there have been no answers for medicine from this research, Goldstein insisted it was worth exploring, saying, “We’re going to give it a good solid try.”

Goldstein also asserted that his work was necessary for important work such as a vaccine for the Zika virus. While he was in the lab giving it a “good solid try,” news came out that a 100% efficacious vaccine for the Dengue virus (related to the Zika virus) had been created–without the use of fetal tissue. He also said in the March 2 hearing that he was “uncomfortable with the law of the land” that prevents the buying and selling of fetal parts.

He’s not the only one uncomfortable with the law of the land, obviously, since committee Democrats and pro-abortion workers all think they should be above investigation. The subpoenas needed to be issued, the committee noted, because when the committee requested information from them, the paper reports, “[m]any of the universities and organizations blacked out names and other identifying information before submitting hundreds of pages of research documents in response to the committee’s earlier requests for information.”

When a federal committee requests information to conduct an investigation and organizations refuse to provide it, it’s not out of line for the committee to then issue subpoenas in response to their refusal. This is not “McCarthyism” or any other ploy to harm or expose fetal tissue researchers. It’s a federal committee doing its job, which is what the public elected them to do.  The committee has unanswered questions about practices that might violate federal law. Those members of Congress should be under fire if they did not investigate.

The New York Times comments, “Tissue and organ harvesting can seem a gruesome business to laymen.” The truth is, it is terribly gruesome to extract a baby and cut him or her in pieces, identifying parts and sending them to research labs. There isn’t much more gruesome.  The paper also says, in a standalone paragraph, without comment:

In the March 2 hearing, Ms. Blackburn cited Nazi medical experiments, the killing of Chinese prisoners for organs and the Tuskegee syphilis experiment as presenting similar ethical issues.

And that’s exactly why this committee is doing its job–so a practice couched with medical terminology doesn’t become the next Nazi medical experiment. If, as abortion advocates claim, they are innocent of all wrongdoing and following the law, then it should be of no consequence for them to cooperate and answer questions. Their reluctance is indicting, whether a federal indictment follows or not.

A recent New York Times article on the investigation into fetal parts research by the House Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives includes many pro-abortion comments which try to paint the committee as witch hunters rather than as legislators doing their jobs.

The paper’s bias continues as it liberally quotes pro-abortion propaganda and implies that if the committee were to subpoena medical research companies and obtain names of fetal tissue researchers that it might spark violence in the industry.  Ilyse Hogue, president of the pro-abortion group NARAL, said:

If heaven forbid an act of violence does occur as a result of this list being compiled, the chair of this committee and her G.O.P. colleagues will be complicit in that violence.

And one of the committee’s Democrats, Jerrold Nadler (NY), actually implied it was the committee threatening lives, rather than those who cut up babies. He said:

It’s one step further than McCarthyism, because McCarthy just threatened people’s jobs. They’re threatening people’s lives.

But the committee chair, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (TN) said:

We all are concerned for individual safety. It’s important to note that we have to have the names of some of the individuals who are carrying out these practices in order to investigate the practice.

The abortion industry is notorious for justifying its secret-keeping ways, always claiming they would be in danger if people knew the names of those working in these facilities. Citing fringe instances of those who claim to be against abortion violence but inflict violence, such as the Colorado Springs shooting last year, the abortion industry falsely portrays peaceful pro-lifers as a danger to them.

And if pro-lifers are not portrayed as violent, then they are portrayed as hindering medical research that may help others live. Lawrence Goldstein, who has received funding from Planned Parenthood for research and also has obtained fetal parts from the abortion organization, testified in the hearing this month, and is known for his work experimenting on baby brains. He insists that cures for diseases and vaccines to prevent them cannot exist without his experiments on dead babies.

The Times reports:

Larry Goldstein, scientific director of the Sanford Consortium for Regenerative Medicine in La Jolla, Calif., told the committee at its first hearing on March 2 that a project to cure multiple sclerosis had been halted because it had “basically seen supply of fetal material dry up completely.”

While Goldstein may infer pro-lifers have potentially prevented multiple sclerosis from being cured, the fact is that no actual cures have come, which is okay with him as long as he gets to keep researching. As Live Action reported:

Stunningly, Goldstein defended the “exploration” of baby brains. He said that because researchers don’t know the area of the brain that is affected by certain diseases, it is therefore vital to “explore the landscape.” And while there have been no answers for medicine from this research, Goldstein insisted it was worth exploring, saying, “We’re going to give it a good solid try.”

Goldstein also asserted that his work was necessary for important work such as a vaccine for the Zika virus. While he was in the lab giving it a “good solid try,” news came out that a 100% efficacious vaccine for the Dengue virus (related to the Zika virus) had been created–without the use of fetal tissue. He also said in the March 2 hearing that he was “uncomfortable with the law of the land” that prevents the buying and selling of fetal parts.

He’s not the only one uncomfortable with the law of the land, obviously, since committee Democrats and pro-abortion workers all think they should be above investigation. The subpoenas needed to be issued, the committee noted, because when the committee requested information from them, the paper reports, “[m]any of the universities and organizations blacked out names and other identifying information before submitting hundreds of pages of research documents in response to the committee’s earlier requests for information.”

When a federal committee requests information to conduct an investigation and organizations refuse to provide it, it’s not out of line for the committee to then issue subpoenas in response to their refusal. This is not “McCarthyism” or any other ploy to harm or expose fetal tissue researchers. It’s a federal committee doing its job, which is what the public elected them to do.  The committee has unanswered questions about practices that might violate federal law. Those members of Congress should be under fire if they did not investigate.

The New York Times comments, “Tissue and organ harvesting can seem a gruesome business to laymen.” The truth is, it is terribly gruesome to extract a baby and cut him or her in pieces, identifying parts and sending them to research labs. There isn’t much more gruesome.  The paper also says, in a standalone paragraph, without comment:

In the March 2 hearing, Ms. Blackburn cited Nazi medical experiments, the killing of Chinese prisoners for organs and the Tuskegee syphilis experiment as presenting similar ethical issues.

And that’s exactly why this committee is doing its job–so a practice couched with medical terminology doesn’t become the next Nazi medical experiment. If, as abortion advocates claim, they are innocent of all wrongdoing and following the law, then it should be of no consequence for them to cooperate and answer questions. Their reluctance is indicting, whether a federal indictment follows or not.