This is What's Wrong With Abortion

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
pookie wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

12 years of reasearch, 150 babies born at 22 weeks or earlier, 22 babies that didn’t survive.

Huh? Your referenced article states “In the 12 years to 2005, all 150 infants born alive at 22 weeks eventually died.”

Isn’t that 150 babies that didn’t survive?

Sorry, multitasking badly of course 150 babies that didn’t survive. I’m not sure but I think those were international stats.[/quote]

Get sure.
Those were English stats, the paper was English and they were referring to English locals. Do honestly think out of 6 billion people in the world, that there would only have been 150 live births in the early 20 week period?

[quote]pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
No she’s not normal, she has mucho problems but retardation is not one of them. Most of her issues are physical, poor lung development, all kinds of digestive disorders, etc. She needs a lot of care but it is not constant.

She’s had 17 surgeries so far and she is not out of the woods. But she is alive, she walks and talks, smiles and plays. Not surprisingly, she is behind developmentally, but shes there…I’ll probably see he today as a matter of fact.

Good for her. She wasn’t born at 21 weeks though, no matter what her mother says.

[/quote]

I will double check, perhaps I just remembered wrong. In the 20 week range definitely though.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
snipeout wrote:
http://www.buffalonews.com/260/story/570428.html

They threw a live baby away. This is what is wrong with abortion, these people have no respect for human life, living or dead. I know you will say it wasn’t the doctor. Does it really matter?

I would hope the mother(term used loosely)would receive nothing monetary from this lawsuit. Did the mother name this child? I don’t get how you name something you intended on KILLING. I totally understand naming a baby that dies, but not one that you kill. Thats pretty sick.

So you’re taking one incident from one half assed doctor and making that indicative of everyone who receives or performs an abortion?

Yea, that makes a lot of sense.

That’s like the doctor that carved his initials into that broad who had a c-section because he was so proud of his work. We should probably ban those too.

This is weak.[/quote]

So killing a baby born alive is ok with you?..Nice. I hope I am never in a foxhole with you.

This is why I place the cut off at the first trimester.

If you can’t decide in twelve weeks, you’re fuckin’ having the kid.

This story has some fabulous quotes:

" A fetus born alive cannot be put to death even if its mother intended to have an abortion, police said when the incident occurred in 2006."

"She alleges in her suit that “she witnessed the murder of her daughter”

“The staff began screaming and pandemonium ensued. Sycloria watched in horror and shock as her baby writhed with her chest rising and falling as she breathed.”

So, if she “witnessed the murder of her daughter” what was it before it exited her pussy?

Can anybody here say that that baby born alive and breathing on it’s own was not a human being? Can you?

If you think that baby was a person, then how can you with any sense of decency even conceive that an abortion preformed at this time in gestation, is not the willful murder of a person? That baby was the same in the mother as it was out.

That is of course if you consider the killing of people in general, wrong.

[quote]snipeout wrote:

No, this is something that happened. One incident of a baby being delivered alive and murdered is weak right?
[/quote]

Not the incident- that’s horrific. But the way you are trying to damn everyone in favor of abortion by pointing out one terrible incident done by a woman who shouldn’t have had an abortion in the first place.

I’ve said before that I’m against late term and partial birth abortions unless the mother’s life is threatened.

Not quite sure what you’re referring to. You have a link?

Most cases of police abuse have two sides, but I’m not going to make a call on what you’re talking about until I know the story.

[quote]pat wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
pookie wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

12 years of reasearch, 150 babies born at 22 weeks or earlier, 22 babies that didn’t survive.

Huh? Your referenced article states “In the 12 years to 2005, all 150 infants born alive at 22 weeks eventually died.”

Isn’t that 150 babies that didn’t survive?

Sorry, multitasking badly of course 150 babies that didn’t survive. I’m not sure but I think those were international stats.

Get sure.
Those were English stats, the paper was English and they were referring to English locals. Do honestly think out of 6 billion people in the world, that there would only have been 150 live births in the early 20 week period?[/quote]

OK I have reread the report and actually it is a study based on a region of the UK. That said, I doubt the kids would have had a better chance of survival anywhere else.

[quote]pat wrote:
pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
No she’s not normal, she has mucho problems but retardation is not one of them. Most of her issues are physical, poor lung development, all kinds of digestive disorders, etc. She needs a lot of care but it is not constant.

She’s had 17 surgeries so far and she is not out of the woods. But she is alive, she walks and talks, smiles and plays. Not surprisingly, she is behind developmentally, but shes there…I’ll probably see he today as a matter of fact.

Good for her. She wasn’t born at 21 weeks though, no matter what her mother says.

I will double check, perhaps I just remembered wrong. In the 20 week range definitely though.[/quote]

The 20 week range is pretty long, you have a plus or minus of 2 and a half months. After 23 weeks the chances of survival increase hugely. Which is why the UK abortion limit is 24 weeks. Also to bear in mind is that normally if a baby is likely to be premature they inject the mother with drugs that develop the lungs. In the case where they are planning an abortion this is not exactly going to happen so even comparing this embryo to a premature baby born at 21 weeks is not a fair comparison.

For anyone that thinks anything different would have happened in a normal hospital, here is the process that would have been followed

If they actually manage to increase the chances of a baby surviving at less than 23 weeks we will definintely see more debate about when the Abortion limit should be.

I know this is a bit off subject and I’m sorry. But I hunt, fish, and I’ve even spent a year behind a .50cal. in Iraq; but I personally feel that no matter how small and insignificant, the only time ending a human life should be justified is for self defense. If a baby has .01% chance for life then it lives in my book. Crack baby or not.

I have a buddy who got his girl pregnant and the egg attached in the fallopian tube. The doc. said mom would die without an abortion. She said no. Doc. said less than 5% chance that the baby would detach on its own, 1% chance that it would reattach, and if it did 100% chance that it would be retarded. He?s now 8 and in the top of his class. Anything is possible; Even a tiny speck living against all odds.

I know this is a bit off subject and I’m sorry. But I hunt, fish, and I’ve even spent a year behind a .50cal. in Iraq; but I personally feel that no matter how small and insignificant, the only time ending a human life should be justified is for self defense. If a baby has .01% chance for life then it lives in my book. Crack baby or not.

I have a buddy who got his girl pregnant and the egg attached in the fallopian tube. The doc. said mom would die without an abortion. She said no. Doc. said less than 5% chance that the baby would detach on its own, 1% chance that it would reattach, and if it did 100% chance that it would be retarded. He?s now 8 and in the top of his class. Anything is possible; Even a tiny speck living against all odds.

“and I’ve even spent a year behind a .50cal. in Iraq; but I personally feel that no matter how small and insignificant, the only time ending a human life should be justified is for self defense”

Irony?
You state an absolute which you preceed with a negation.

And while I respect your opinion nontheless, I hope you do the same with the mother, who’s the ultimate authority here.

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
“and I’ve even spent a year behind a .50cal. in Iraq; but I personally feel that no matter how small and insignificant, the only time ending a human life should be justified is for self defense”

Irony?
You state an absolute which you preceed with a negation.

And while I respect your opinion nontheless, I hope you do the same with the mother, who’s the ultimate authority here. [/quote]

I think he was prefacing his point buy stating that a lot of his life is centered around the concepts justifiable killing and survival. In order for it to be a negation you would first have to assume that he has killed someone and second that it was not in self defense.

Then again he is in the military, he MUST be a cold blooded baby killer.

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
pat wrote:
pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
No she’s not normal, she has mucho problems but retardation is not one of them. Most of her issues are physical, poor lung development, all kinds of digestive disorders, etc. She needs a lot of care but it is not constant.

She’s had 17 surgeries so far and she is not out of the woods. But she is alive, she walks and talks, smiles and plays. Not surprisingly, she is behind developmentally, but shes there…I’ll probably see he today as a matter of fact.

Good for her. She wasn’t born at 21 weeks though, no matter what her mother says.

I will double check, perhaps I just remembered wrong. In the 20 week range definitely though.

The 20 week range is pretty long, you have a plus or minus of 2 and a half months. After 23 weeks the chances of survival increase hugely. Which is why the UK abortion limit is 24 weeks. Also to bear in mind is that normally if a baby is likely to be premature they inject the mother with drugs that develop the lungs. In the case where they are planning an abortion this is not exactly going to happen so even comparing this embryo to a premature baby born at 21 weeks is not a fair comparison.[/quote]

I double check and she was born at 24 weeks. Still very early, people still kill these kids at this point of gestation.

[quote]tpovey wrote:
I know this is a bit off subject and I’m sorry. But I hunt, fish, and I’ve even spent a year behind a .50cal. in Iraq; but I personally feel that no matter how small and insignificant, the only time ending a human life should be justified is for self defense. If a baby has .01% chance for life then it lives in my book. Crack baby or not.

I have a buddy who got his girl pregnant and the egg attached in the fallopian tube. The doc. said mom would die without an abortion. She said no. Doc. said less than 5% chance that the baby would detach on its own, 1% chance that it would reattach, and if it did 100% chance that it would be retarded. He?s now 8 and in the top of his class. Anything is possible; Even a tiny speck living against all odds. [/quote]

An ectopic pregnancy is very dangerous for a woman and in the fallopian tube a growing baby will most certain kill the mother and baby. Unless they can relocate the embryo into the uterus surgically, I don?t see another option. Only in such cases would I support the abortion, because the mother?s life is in grave danger and the baby has almost zero chance of making it.

I know of no circumstances where an ectopic pregnancy is successful. I admire this mother?s commitment to life, but in this case, an ectopic pregnancy will only kill the mother and baby. She should have it removed as it is tantamount to being a miscarriage.

Thank you for your service to our country, by the way. I really appreciate it

…by outlawing abortion you’re denying half of your countries population the basic human right of self determination. Most of you would start an uprising to defend your right to bear arms, but actively seek the oppression of women. Why is that not hypocritical? If men were the ones giving birth, i’m sure you could get an abortion in any convenience store nationwide without any problem…

[quote]ephrem wrote:
…by outlawing abortion you’re denying half of your countries population the basic human right of self determination. Most of you would start an uprising to defend your right to bear arms, but actively seek the oppression of women. Why is that not hypocritical? If men were the ones giving birth, i’m sure you could get an abortion in any convenience store nationwide without any problem…[/quote]

Self determination is made when they get pregnant. Your rights end where another’s begin. The question is where do the rights of the infant begin. If you think the infant is a human being than the mother does not have the right oppress the child.

Even if you are pro-abortion, you have to agree, at least do it before the child can breath on it’s own.

[quote]pat wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
pat wrote:
pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
No she’s not normal, she has mucho problems but retardation is not one of them. Most of her issues are physical, poor lung development, all kinds of digestive disorders, etc. She needs a lot of care but it is not constant.

She’s had 17 surgeries so far and she is not out of the woods. But she is alive, she walks and talks, smiles and plays. Not surprisingly, she is behind developmentally, but shes there…I’ll probably see he today as a matter of fact.

Good for her. She wasn’t born at 21 weeks though, no matter what her mother says.

I will double check, perhaps I just remembered wrong. In the 20 week range definitely though.

The 20 week range is pretty long, you have a plus or minus of 2 and a half months. After 23 weeks the chances of survival increase hugely. Which is why the UK abortion limit is 24 weeks. Also to bear in mind is that normally if a baby is likely to be premature they inject the mother with drugs that develop the lungs. In the case where they are planning an abortion this is not exactly going to happen so even comparing this embryo to a premature baby born at 21 weeks is not a fair comparison.

I double check and she was born at 24 weeks. Still very early, people still kill these kids at this point of gestation.[/quote]

Not sure about the US but 24 weeks is the cut off for abortion in the UK exactly for the reason that the chances of survival leap up at 24 weeks.

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
ephrem wrote:
…by outlawing abortion you’re denying half of your countries population the basic human right of self determination. Most of you would start an uprising to defend your right to bear arms, but actively seek the oppression of women. Why is that not hypocritical? If men were the ones giving birth, i’m sure you could get an abortion in any convenience store nationwide without any problem…

Self determination is made when they get pregnant. Your rights end where another’s begin. The question is where do the rights of the infant begin. If you think the infant is a human being than the mother does not have the right oppress the child.

Even if you are pro-abortion, you have to agree, at least do it before the child can breath on it’s own.[/quote]

…who’s pro-abortion here? Abortion is limited by law already, and altough the law does not prevent excesses, it does the job just fine. If you want to limit the number of abortions performed you start by educating children and make contraception readily available, not by denying 150 million people basic human rights. Just think: if Roe vs Wade gets overturned, you can never say “Land of the Free!” anymore…

[quote]pat wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
From reading that piece it doesn’t state anywhere that the baby/embryo had any chance of surviving, the cause of death is listed as extreme prematurity.

The pregnancy was at 23 weeks and as far as I know there has only been 1 case where a baby born before 23 weeks has survived and in that case, they were specifically set up to try and save the baby, which of course would not be the case in an abortion clinic.

Seems like the Doctor (and others) totally fucked up and should be fully investigated and whatever punnishment should be applied.

If it can be argued that he was criminally negligent then he should be charged with that. You cannot charge him with Murder though because Abortion is legal.

The piece uses words like decomposing infant deliberately to pull on your heartstrings and it works.

It’s a pretty horrible case but if you accept abortion as right then you cannot call the guy a murderer. If you are anti abortion then go ahead and call the guy a murderer, but then again, even had he performed the procedure correctly that would still be the case.

If someone finds you wounded on the street is it justifiable to throw you in a dumpster rather than help because you don’t have good survival odds? Many gunshot victims are living beings, but at that point can’t survive on their own, so would they forfeit their human rights? I guess we should do away with ambulances and emergency services and load up the dumpsters.

Alive is alive, whether you need help to survive or not.

By that argument, part way through any abortion the surgeon would have to stop the abortion and attempt to save the baby even though he had inflicted the wounds.

If you want to argue the rights and wrongs of abortion, go ahead but that is not what this case is about (though plenty of anti-abortion people will try to use it to promote their cause.)

The doctor appears (from a report in a newspaper) to be at fault for negligently botching a medical procedure and for that he needs to be investigated.

If he is guilty of murder in your eyes then that should be for carrying out an abortion in the first place, not for the manner in which he carried out this one.

Scott Peterson is in prison for double murder…One of the murders was his unborn son.[/quote]

how does that work now? If you want it, it’s a life, but if you don’t, it’s not a life.