House Passes 'Baby Body Parts' Resolution

By Jim Burns | July 7, 2008 | 8:25 PM EDT

( - By a voice vote, the House passed a non-binding resolution calling for committee hearings on the commercial trafficking of baby body parts.

Pushing the resolution was Representative Joseph Pitts (R-PA). The resolution was needed, according to Pitts, because "based on reliable reports, abortion clinics are selling dead, unborn babies. Or, I should say, parts of babies and the older, the better, to middlemen. These middlemen, in turn, sell them to researchers. This means, more money for the abortion clinic. Instead of the problem of disposing of dead bodies, now, abortion clinics have a lucrative means of getting out of the way 'unintended babies.'"

Pitts believes it means money for the middlemen. He pointed to an article from what Pitts said is a business that actually traffics in unborn baby body parts that showed a liver going for $150, but from a younger baby it would go for $125. A spleen that goes for $75, a pancreas for $100 and a brain for $999.

On the brain, Pitts said, "They even use marketing techniques in this gruesome business, selling it for one dollar less than a thousand dollars, to make it, I guess, a more attractive purchase."

"Again, if [the baby body part is] fragmented . . . you can get a 30 percent discount," said Pitts. "Almost like, stand right up, ladies and gentlemen, do you want a baby's ear? Seventy-five dollars. 50 dollars if a baby is less than eight weeks old. How about eyes? A pair of eyes, 75 dollars, 40 dollars for one eye."

Pitts went on to say, "I wish this gruesome price list were a cruel Halloween hoax, but it is not. It's the price list for human body parts from aborted babies. It's almost like the bureaucratization of the Nazis final solution hammered out in conferences and committed to legal documents. Except now it's in the form of a capitalistic price list, organized for commerce, sanitized for the grim reality, which it is."

Pitts concluded by saying, "It's time the Congress began oversight hearings on this death dealing business. We need to begin tracing this money trail. The bill before us today does nothing more than call for hearings. It doesn't call for the elimination of trafficking. Doesn't require women to sign a consent form before their babies are sold for parts. It doesn't even prohibit Planned Parenthood or commercial middlemen from profiting. All it does, it calls for [congressional] hearings."

One House member who opposed the resolution was Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY). "The proponents of this resolution are attempting to corrupt medical research with the politics of abortion. They are attempting to stall proper research to save lives to gain political advantage. I'm not surprised, but I am disappointed."

Nadler called the resolution "totally misleading and they may in fact be its real purpose. No one is going out selling baby parts, arms or legs for any purpose. Researchers do use stem cells and tissue samples from the earliest stages of fetal development to promote research for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease and Parkinson's Disease and diabetes and other serious medical conditions. This is potentially life saving research that can save thousands and thousands of lives. "

Nadler also said selling baby body parts just "doesn't happen. We talk about having abortions to generate body parts, which doesn't happen. This is backwards. If some foul stuff is going on and some foul needs are being committed, have an oversight hearing, look into it, find out the facts first. Don't declare the facts first and then investigate. "

The resolution, according to Nadler is a "prime example" of the House declaring facts before investigating. "I don't think those foul things are happening. I think it's a concoction. I think it is propaganda to inflame debate to stop medical research into lifesaving techniques. But, if they are happening, let's find out, let's have a hearing."

Nadler called for the resolution's rejection because it was "demagoguery" and ought to be rejected "for the demagoguery it is. Let's have the hearings and find out the facts. Facts first, action later, demagoguery not at all."