Log In Sign Up

Legal Penalties and the term Anti-Choice.


Abortion Debate

This forum is for Abortion debate only. If you are highly sensitive about this topic, read at your own discretion.

Welcome to the JustMommies Message Boards.

We pride ourselves on having the friendliest and most welcoming forums for moms and moms to be! Please take a moment and register for free so you can be a part of our growing community of mothers. If you have any problems registering please drop an email to boards@justmommies.com.

Our community is moderated by our moderation team so you won't see spam or offensive messages posted on our forums. Each of our message boards is hosted by JustMommies hosts, whose names are listed at the top each board. We hope you find our message boards friendly, helpful, and fun to be on!

Reply Post New Topic
  Subscribe To Abortion Debate LinkBack Topic Tools Search this Topic Display Modes
  #1  
March 21st, 2008, 09:40 AM
MissTorrieIfYou'reNasty's Avatar Co-Host of Heated Debates
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Green-Vegas South Carolina!
Posts: 4,805
First of all the term Anti-Choice is not intended to be insulting. I use that term because I believe calling the opposite side Pro-Life insinuates that I am Anti_life. Anti-Choice is only intended to say that when it comes to this particular issue, the opposite side is against allowing women to make this particular choice.

I posted a video in another thread that portrayed Anti-Choicers/Pro-Lifers vacillating and giving non-answers to questions such as "What should be the penalty for a woman who has an abortion, provided that abortions are illegal?" Now in my experience, the Anti-Choicers/Pro-Lifers that I know personally give the same non-answers when asked that same question by me. Therefore, my point is this. If a 6 week old fetus has the same rights and privileges as a newborn, wouldn't it follow that the legal penalties would be the same for killing a fetus as killing a newborn? Yet ask these people the question, "What should be the penalty for killing a newborn?", nobody vacillates. So what is the difference?


I believe that if you are going to make the assertion that a fetus is the same as a baby, you should have the courage to stand by your convictions and demand the same penalties for both. Feel free to correct me. That's what this thread is for.

the infamous video
__________________

"I love mankind, it's people I can't stand."
Reply With Quote
  #2  
March 21st, 2008, 10:07 AM
whatever
Guest
Posts: n/a
I don’t get how anti choice is insulting if you are a person who would vote against women having the right to choose?
Torrie is exactly right when people say pro-life, the only opposite term would be anti-life. I am not anti life, I am not even FOR abortion, but at the end of the day on a legal level, I am down for a woman’s right to choose.

I would guess that if you are for a woman’s right to choose legally then you are pro-choice, even if you don’t like that term. Maybe that is where the confusion lies. Maybe people who are “Pro-Life” take offense to that term because when push comes to shove they are not trying to force their ideas on anyone and do not vote against a woman’s right to choose….because ultimately they are really pro-choice. Just a guess though.

Reply With Quote
  #3  
March 21st, 2008, 11:23 AM
mommyKathyX3
Guest
Posts: n/a
http://humanlifematters.blogspot.com/2007/...m-this-may.html

Here is a fairly good blog about what I'M saying about why SOME of them probably said what they did. (oh, I'm sure there are some idoits in the batch though)

Specifically the things I'm pointing out is

Quote:
If the responder answered that the woman should be jailed for committing murder, it would give fodder for a newspaper column about those heartless pro-Lifers. If the responder answered that nothing should happen to the woman who has an abortion after abortion becomes illegal, … well then, some columnist has fodder for an article that pro-Lifers do not really see abortion as the equivalent to murder at all. It’s a set-up.[/b]
I said that before. Its is a loaded question. Both sides of the abortion issue make out the other side as the "bad guy" Pro-lifers are against women, and pro-choicers are murderers. Whatever. Neither side as a rule is right.

I think that any pro-lifer who thinks that abortion should be illegal is naive. Abortion in itself is NOT an bad thing, but the fact that it is used as a "back up plan" for many people is what makes it bad. When a womans life is in danger there is just cause to eliminate what is causeing that danger. If it is a fetus, so be it. She SHOULD have that choice.

Also many pro-lifers are naive to think that there are all these women who think its no big deal to get an abortion, or that every woman REALIZES what she is doing (either the sex or the abortion). While I thank GOD that the medical community is as advanced as it is, they are corrupt in many ways. Society is corrupt. Its about money. Instead of educating women to know really that sex is a russian rollette many times without the proper percautions, you WILL get unwanted pregnancies. Now they screwed up NUMBER ONE by cutting that kind of education. NUMBER TWO instead of educating the women on how to keep a baby and still be productive members of society, society has said "kids are a burden, get rid of it or your life will be ruined" NUMBER THREE society DOESNT help these women, so they DO think they have no other choice. NUMBER FOUR these women go into the doctors or clinics and they say, "oh, we're just going to take some tissue out of ya, its for the better" sure you dont give them a guilt trip, but they sugar coat the procedure many times. (not saying all but many) NUMBER FIVE If the woman keeps the child, she is looked down upon that she is some tramp who gets pregnant with every guy out there, and that all she's good for is to pop babies out and live off of welfare.

So, whats wrong with this picture? Pro-lifers are naive to think that MOST women feel they even HAVE a choice. Their choices are abort, or have a sucky life and never get ahead or hurt the family I do have now.

I was naive about it. I'll admit it. I was blind to the fact that pro-choicers dont feel that they even HAVE a choice.

There are ALWAYS those "other ones" though. The ones that many pro-lifers think ALL pro-choicers are like. I think you know who those ones are.

Many pro-choicers think all pro-lifers are those in your face "your a baby murder" types. That is naive too. As a pro-lifer, I see things as the way things SHOULD be in a perfect world. That pregnancy should be a precious thing that only under extreame circumstances should an abortion even be CONSIDERED. I know we dont live in a perfect world, so its a process. I'm not going to say AWE HELL with it, since theyre going to do it, let them do it. I'm going to say, lets try to make it so that even those UNWANTED pregnancies can be good. I know it wont happen overnight, or probably EVER, but I'm not going to change my beleifs cause society has screwed up.

That got off topic AGAIN, (sorry ) but I am NOT anti-choice. I am not anti-woman. I am not pro-fetus. I am pro-LIFE. That life MAY be the mothers, it MAY be the fetus. I dont think one outweighs the other. I dont think women should have ANY choice, but I also dont think they should have NO choice either.

And there are always idiots on both sides.

ETA, and IF abortion was illegal, which I dont think it could ever be completly illegal. That'd be condeming MANY women to death, then HYPOTHETICALLY the women should be charged as the courts seem fit to. I'm not going to say what that is, cause it may be (like I said before) from manditory counceling to murder charges.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
March 21st, 2008, 04:42 PM
AMDG's Avatar Margaret
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Denver metro area
Posts: 2,988

MommyKathyX3 you said:
"I think that any pro-lifer who thinks that abortion should be illegal is naive. Abortion in itself is NOT an bad thing, but the fact that it is used as a "back up plan" for many people is what makes it bad. When a womans life is in danger there is just cause to eliminate what is causeing that danger. If it is a fetus, so be it. She SHOULD have that choice."

Naive to what? I believe some things are objectively evil and wrong. Destroying inoccent human life is one of those things. I never understand when people use the "woman's life is in danger" arguement. Either you believe the unborn baby is a life or you don't. If you don't, then why value it? why would you think it is a big deal? If you do believe it is a life than if you are willing to kill the baby you must believe that life does not have as much value as your own. But, most don't follow this to the logical conclusion. When do all lives become equal? do they ever? If I am stuck on a life raft with my 2 year old child and the raft cannot handle both of our body weight am I justified to throw my child overboard? what if I give her sleeping pills so I know she won't feel pain? I think most would find the idea of throwing a 2 year old overboard to be horrible. Most would probably say they would do everything in their power to save themselves and the child. I cannot think of one example where a woman's life might be in danger where an abortion would be necessary. Why can't the pregnancy continue until the baby is viable and then preform a c-section? Please, what would be an example? But, even if you can give me one - and I'm not claiming you can't - I don't believe the woman's life has any more value than the baby's life.



"So, whats wrong with this picture? Pro-lifers are naive to think that MOST women feel they even HAVE a choice. Their choices are abort, or have a sucky life and never get ahead or hurt the family I do have now."

How is adoption not a choice? Also, does not feeling you have a choice justify the action? What if I have a 6 month old baby that has horrible medical issues and complications. I am so overwelmed. I have no family support and no boyfriend or husband. I feel so alone and honestly each day is such a struggle - how will I ever make it. I feel like I have no choice - no way to make it - my 6 month old needs so much - I will give her an overdose of sleeping pills - she will be better off right? what other choice do I have? How is that any worse? I honestly can't see it? if you say, well, there are resources to help her - exactly - there are resources to help pregnant people as well. I would never disagree that many pregnant woman feel overwelmed and feel like they don't have a choice but the fact is that THEY DO! They may just have to look for it like I would as the mother of the 6 month old.


I just put your comments in quotes because I can't figure out how to do the quote feature without including your entire post.
__________________


"Authentic love is not a vague sentiment or a blind passion. It is an inner attitude that involves the whole human person. It is looking to the other, not to use but to serve. It is rejoicing when the other rejoices and suffers when the other suffers. Love is the gift of self." JPII
Reply With Quote
  #5  
March 21st, 2008, 06:06 PM
MissTorrieIfYou'reNasty's Avatar Co-Host of Heated Debates
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Green-Vegas South Carolina!
Posts: 4,805
Of course a Fetus is a life. Scientifically speaking. But so are these. And everyone agrees that their lives are not as valuable as ours. So what makes a fetus's more valuable than ours?
__________________

"I love mankind, it's people I can't stand."
Reply With Quote
  #6  
March 21st, 2008, 06:28 PM
AMDG's Avatar Margaret
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Denver metro area
Posts: 2,988
Quote:
Of course a Fetus is a life. Scientifically speaking. But so are these. And everyone agrees that their lives are not as valuable as ours. So what makes a fetus's more valuable than ours?[/b]

A meant, and wrote, a human life. And I don't believe I ever said that an unborn baby is MORE valuable than an adult life - I believe they are equal. Just as a 6 month old is just as valuable as an adult or an elderly person or a person with mental challenges or a rich man etc etc. I don't believe a mother's life is any more valuable than the baby growing in her womb. Yes, the baby is easier to kill - that goes without saying.

That is what I am trying to get someone to tell me. What make a fetus less valuable? He/she is unwanted? He/she is legally disposable? He/she is not viable outside of the womb? I don't think any of these reasons hold water unless you also believe that a helpless baby depending on her parents is less valuable and a mentally challenged person is less valuable - then at least the argument would be consistant and logical even if it may be completely messed up.
__________________


"Authentic love is not a vague sentiment or a blind passion. It is an inner attitude that involves the whole human person. It is looking to the other, not to use but to serve. It is rejoicing when the other rejoices and suffers when the other suffers. Love is the gift of self." JPII
Reply With Quote
  #7  
March 21st, 2008, 06:53 PM
MissTorrieIfYou'reNasty's Avatar Co-Host of Heated Debates
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Green-Vegas South Carolina!
Posts: 4,805
First of all, Cognitive Development is the closest possible thing we have to determining consciousness. A 6-12 week old fetus has very little. Does that make them less valuable, morally? I don't know. Abortion is one of those few issues where I can totally see the other side, morally.

But there are two aspects to this debate, and the other is the legal aspect. According to the law's current boundries, we cannot make a woman carry a child she does not want to carry. The law has stated clearly that no one has the right to use our bodies to facilitate their survival without our consent. If you need my kidney, and I don't want to give it to you, you cannot take it from me. They will put you in jail. That's true no matter how much cognitive development a person has. We have rights to our bodies that the law cannot take away without starting on a slippery slope.

I know what I don't believe. I don't believe that what happens to this vs. this is morally identical.

I also believe that this is seriously creepy.
__________________

"I love mankind, it's people I can't stand."
Reply With Quote
  #9  
March 21st, 2008, 08:04 PM
AMDG's Avatar Margaret
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Denver metro area
Posts: 2,988
Quote:
First of all, Cognitive Development is the closest possible thing we have to determining consciousness. A 6-12 week old fetus has very little. Does that make them less valuable, morally? I don't know. Abortion is one of those few issues where I can totally see the other side, morally.

But there are two aspects to this debate, and the other is the legal aspect. According to the law's current boundries, we cannot make a woman carry a child she does not want to carry. The law has stated clearly that no one has the right to use our bodies to facilitate their survival without our consent. If you need my kidney, and I don't want to give it to you, you cannot take it from me. They will put you in jail. That's true no matter how much cognitive development a person has. We have rights to our bodies that the law cannot take away without starting on a slippery slope.

I know what I don't believe. I don't believe that what happens to this vs. this is morally identical.

I also believe that this is seriously creepy.[/b]

I understand what you are saying, and we can agree to disagree.
I do want to respond to what you said about the law though. It is true that currently we cannot make a woman carry a child she does not want to carry but I see the legalization of abortion as being the start of a slippery slope rather than the other way around. Abortion was illegal for years and years and don't think it lead to any slippery slope. I do believe that the legalization of abortion has led to people putting less value on human life - actually, I think the slippery slope started with birth control which led to abortion which has led to euthanasia, partial birth abortion, cloning etc.
I think there are different ways to look at the legal aspect. Would making abortion illegal take away rights to our bodies or would it be protecting the innocent life of the unborn? You see it as the former and I see it as the latter
__________________


"Authentic love is not a vague sentiment or a blind passion. It is an inner attitude that involves the whole human person. It is looking to the other, not to use but to serve. It is rejoicing when the other rejoices and suffers when the other suffers. Love is the gift of self." JPII
Reply With Quote
  #10  
March 21st, 2008, 08:10 PM
AMDG's Avatar Margaret
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Denver metro area
Posts: 2,988
Quote:
I agree that those against abortion should have the conviction to say that having an abortion should hold the same penalties as murdering an infant. I am pro-choice.

Margaret, you did not answer the question, what do you believe should be the punishment for a woman who has an abortion if it were illegal?

And I also agree that the life of a fetus does not equal the life of an infant. If by some freak accident I were to become pregnant, I would probably abort because I have a disease that can't handle a pregnancy. The fetus would kill me and my present children need me. I would picket at the white house for days if abortion ever became illegal.[/b]

That question cannot have a specific answer. I view as the same as if you asked me - "What should be the punishment for a woman who committed murder?" - There are varies degrees and levels of murder in the legal system - murder 1, murder 2, manslaughter, neglegence resulting in a death etc etc.
And of course the "doctor" is also guilty of murder - maybe even more so than the woman depending on the circumstances. As with any crime you have to look at intent, knowledge etc etc.

Okay, now will you answer my question? do all lives have different values or just fetus vs. other humans? at what point does the life become equal?
__________________


"Authentic love is not a vague sentiment or a blind passion. It is an inner attitude that involves the whole human person. It is looking to the other, not to use but to serve. It is rejoicing when the other rejoices and suffers when the other suffers. Love is the gift of self." JPII
Reply With Quote
  #12  
March 21st, 2008, 08:43 PM
AMDG's Avatar Margaret
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Denver metro area
Posts: 2,988
Quote:
Quote:
I understand what you are saying, and we can agree to disagree.
I do want to respond to what you said about the law though. It is true that currently we cannot make a woman carry a child she does not want to carry but I see the legalization of abortion as being the start of a slippery slope rather than the other way around. Abortion was illegal for years and years and don't think it lead to any slippery slope. I do believe that the legalization of abortion has led to people putting less value on human life - actually, I think the slippery slope started with birth control which led to abortion which has led to euthanasia, partial birth abortion, cloning etc.
I think there are different ways to look at the legal aspect. Would making abortion illegal take away rights to our bodies or would it be protecting the innocent life of the unborn? You see it as the former and I see it as the latter[/b]
Actually, I believe the legalization of abortion has put more value on human life. A lot less women are getting killed having back alley abortions. If it were so inhumane and murder, then it would have never became legal in the first place. Euthanasia and cloning of humans are still illegal in the United States. FTR, I do not see Euthanasia as inhumane if it were performed on the terminally ill. Also, do you know how many abortions were not performed because of birth control?

So you agree with your statements even if the mother's life were in danger due to the fetus, she were raped, the fetus was going to die after birth, etc? Slippery slopes all around.

Quote:
Okay, now will you answer my question? do all lives have different values or just fetus vs. other humans? at what point does the life become equal?[/b]
A fetus becomes equal when it is born. After birth, there are no different "levels" of life.
[/b]

I don't see how my statement has anything to do with a slippery slope. A life is a life is a life! Nothing slippery there - actually it is, in my opinion, the most consistant and unhypocritical view there is.
Please give me a concrete example of how a mother's life would be in danger due to an unborn baby and the baby and mother could not both live until the baby would be viable outside of the womb - which is around 23-24 weeks these days. Also, we all die after birth, it is just a matter of how soon!!

And finally - "If it were so inhumane and murder, then it would have never became legal in the first place" are you kidding me? okay, if slavery was so wrong then "it would have never became legal in the first place." If segregation was so wrong then "it would have never become legal in the first place. I could go on and on. I'm sorry, but I don't see how this logic makes any sense unless you believe our government and our supreme court are the end all be all of morality. I certainly don't.
__________________


"Authentic love is not a vague sentiment or a blind passion. It is an inner attitude that involves the whole human person. It is looking to the other, not to use but to serve. It is rejoicing when the other rejoices and suffers when the other suffers. Love is the gift of self." JPII
Reply With Quote
  #13  
March 21st, 2008, 09:38 PM
mommyKathyX3
Guest
Posts: n/a
I think that the life of the mother outweighs the life of a fetus when the mothers life is in danger. Until that fetus is viable to survive on its own, it is dependant on the mother, and in that sense, not as valuable in the MEDICAL sense. THAT mother may feel differently, but medically speaking, if the mother is going to die before the fetus is of viable age, why would she carry it? Its either one dies, or both dies? Sure some people may decide that they'd trust God or whatever to fix it, and it DOES happen, but not for the majority of the time.

Quote:
I cannot think of one example where a woman's life might be in danger where an abortion would be necessary. Why can't the pregnancy continue until the baby is viable and then preform a c-section? Please, what would be an example? But, even if you can give me one - and I'm not claiming you can't - I don't believe the woman's life has any more value than the baby's life.[/b]
Well, for one, ever heard of an ectopic pregnancy? Sometimes they arent even detected until the 8-10th week, and the fetus is still ALIVE. Stay pregnant, and good chance YOU DIE. There is NO CHANCE of that baby surviving. Either you abort and stay alive, or not abort and very possibly dying from massive hemmorage. (of course some people claim an ectopic pregnancy "isnt an abortion" ) thats JUST technicalities. It is an abortion. A medically necessary abortion but still an abortion.

Cancer patients are another. If you continue with the treatments you WILL either kill your unborn child anyway, or you will harm them. There is very VERY little chance of things being "ok". If you discontinue treatment, well, good chance you'll die. Espeically with faster moving cancers.

Severe Eclampsia is another. Some women have problems with high blood pressure to the point they are on VERY VERY high levels of medication, and with those medications the insidence of birth defects are STAGGERINGLY high, but without those medications, the women die.

In general heart issues. Some can be avoided BY c-cections by avoiding labor, but some conditions just the pregnancy itself, even in its EARLY stages have a good chance of killing them.

Now, the women should have the choice in those situations of weather or not to carry that baby. Thier life is in EMMINENT danger, and there is a darn good chance that not only will that baby die, but they will to. If YOU want to carry the baby, that is your choice, but sometimes its not in the best interest of you to carry that child.

Also
Quote:
I know what I don't believe. I don't believe that what happens to this vs. this is morally identical.[/b]
I agree that some people can think that, but how about
?
the second is a 22 week old fetus. Not yet considered late term in most states and thus legal to abort for pretty much any reason someone wants.

That I dont agree with. There HAS been 22 week fetus' that have servived One story its uncommon, but not impossible.

also it IS naive to think that all women getting an abortion are option to things such as adoption. You have a young women (say 14-15 yrs old) who is in a home where her father is abusive. Lets say he is even the father of the baby she gets pregnant with. She KNOWS if she says she is pregnant she will probably be beaten to the point where she will probably end up in the hospital. She is scared to the fact that if she leaves everyone will tell her she is lying about what happened to her cause her father is "such an upstanding guy" She thinks her options are to live on the street constantly running away from the ridicule of her family and the state cause her father is such an "upstanding person" but stay pregnant, or have an abortion. Now, idealistically there ARE other options, but does that 14 yr old KNOW THEM? NO!!! She is scared and frustrated. She feels she doesnt HAVE a choice. Scenario TWO. Young mother of 3 kids already. She is struggling already but working at a job she can move up in. She works in the type of job that being pregnant would make it nearly impossible to be pregnant in. (Say a heavy labor job like even construction) She also has a tendancy to suffer from Hypermesis Gravadium bad. She knows if that happens again there is NO WAY she can keep that job. Her choices are (to her) have ANOTHER baby (because her boyfriend's condom didnt work) and end up living off her boyfriend (who she feels will probably drop her anyway from the situation) until the baby is born or live off of govt funds but loose the job she really likes and has worked her butt to get, or get an abortion. She feels she has no choice.

Do I need to go on? Sure these women have other choices, but they dont feel like they do.

I gravitate away from the point though.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
March 21st, 2008, 10:03 PM
MissTorrieIfYou'reNasty's Avatar Co-Host of Heated Debates
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Green-Vegas South Carolina!
Posts: 4,805
I personally would never have an abortion beyond the 12th week. Even that is a bit of a stretch for me. Should abortion be limited legally, beyond the 12th week? Possibly. It's hard to say. I do know that we have to draw a line somewhere. Obviously it would not be ok to abort a 30 week fetus because I changed my mind and it would be really nice to go skiing next weekend.
__________________

"I love mankind, it's people I can't stand."
Reply With Quote
  #15  
March 22nd, 2008, 04:55 AM
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 210
cannot think of one example where a woman's life might be in danger where an abortion would be necessary. Why can't the pregnancy continue until the baby is viable and then preform a c-section? Please, what would be an example? But, even if you can give me one - and I'm not claiming you can't - I don't believe the woman's life has any more value than the baby's life.

Just because YOU can not think of them does not mean they do not exist. What about ectopic pregnancy's which REQUIRE abortion to save a womans life. The fetus is NOT viable and will NEVER be viable. It is growing in a falopian tube - instead of in the womb. When big enough it will burst the tube - causing the woman to bleed to death internially - in a tremendous amount of suffering and pain - until she and the fetus die. That fetus CAN NOT be birted alive, gestated for any lenght of time, and the ONLY treatment to save the life of the woman is abortion. There is nothing wrong with the fetus it is just in the wrong spot. With about abotion the fetus WILL STILL DIE...it will just take the mother with it. 2 for the price of one eh? The baby WILL NOT live even if the mother dies. What about hydrocephelus - a condition known as "water on the brain" in which the head of the baby is totally deformed and blown up so big that it will kill a woman coming through the birth canal - and put her at GRAVE risk if she gets a C-Section due to the size, risk of death, infection, internal hemorage, and loss of reproductive organs that causes infertility. This case REQUIRES abortion to give the doctors the best chance at saving the womans life - and a D and X is the BEST and safest way to do it. Do you think this woman should die - to bring a brain dead fetus who has a condition that is incompatable with life (fetus will never be viable and will die once outside of the womb in most cases) into the world only to die as well?

These situations exist. Ectopic pregnancy's are VERY COMMON and many women experience them. Hydorcephelus is just one of MANY fetal abnormalities inconsistant with life - which may not kill a woman - but which IMO require abortion to be humane to the fetus.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
March 22nd, 2008, 07:36 AM
AMDG's Avatar Margaret
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Denver metro area
Posts: 2,988
Quote:
cannot think of one example where a woman's life might be in danger where an abortion would be necessary. Why can't the pregnancy continue until the baby is viable and then preform a c-section? Please, what would be an example? But, even if you can give me one - and I'm not claiming you can't - I don't believe the woman's life has any more value than the baby's life.

Just because YOU can not think of them does not mean they do not exist. What about ectopic pregnancy's which REQUIRE abortion to save a womans life. The fetus is NOT viable and will NEVER be viable. It is growing in a falopian tube - instead of in the womb. When big enough it will burst the tube - causing the woman to bleed to death internially - in a tremendous amount of suffering and pain - until she and the fetus die. That fetus CAN NOT be birted alive, gestated for any lenght of time, and the ONLY treatment to save the life of the woman is abortion. There is nothing wrong with the fetus it is just in the wrong spot. With about abotion the fetus WILL STILL DIE...it will just take the mother with it. 2 for the price of one eh? The baby WILL NOT live even if the mother dies. What about hydrocephelus - a condition known as "water on the brain" in which the head of the baby is totally deformed and blown up so big that it will kill a woman coming through the birth canal - and put her at GRAVE risk if she gets a C-Section due to the size, risk of death, infection, internal hemorage, and loss of reproductive organs that causes infertility. This case REQUIRES abortion to give the doctors the best chance at saving the womans life - and a D and X is the BEST and safest way to do it. Do you think this woman should die - to bring a brain dead fetus who has a condition that is incompatable with life (fetus will never be viable and will die once outside of the womb in most cases) into the world only to die as well?

These situations exist. Ectopic pregnancy's are VERY COMMON and many women experience them. Hydorcephelus is just one of MANY fetal abnormalities inconsistant with life - which may not kill a woman - but which IMO require abortion to be humane to the fetus.[/b]

First off I never said cases doesn't exist. I asked someone to give me specific examples. I did forget about ectopic pregnancy and I know they are common. I personally know women who have dealt with all of the examples. Ectopic pregnancy, late stage cancer and discovered she was pregnant and hydorcephelus. None of the women I know had an abortion and so far all of the women have lived. Yes, the babies died but they WERE NOT ABORTED, they died naturally. I will take the time to answer each example at a later time - don't have the time right now but I do not believe an abortion is ever justifiable and it is not necessary.
__________________


"Authentic love is not a vague sentiment or a blind passion. It is an inner attitude that involves the whole human person. It is looking to the other, not to use but to serve. It is rejoicing when the other rejoices and suffers when the other suffers. Love is the gift of self." JPII
Reply With Quote
  #17  
March 22nd, 2008, 10:38 AM
mommyKathyX3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well, margaret, I hope to God you are never faced with that decision of either abort and live or not abort and 95% chance die, and leave your present children with no mother.

I know there ARE situations where things work out, but its not normal.

You are allowed that belief for you personally, but I just do NOT understand how you can say that the fact your 100% non viable 8 week fetus is more important to than someones own life and the life of their present children. Or even a 4-5 week old embryo (in the case of a cancer patient maybe finding out they are pregnant right away and deciding to terminate)

If in the case of an ectopic pregnancy, if you let the child keep growing that increases GREATLY the chances of a bursted fallopian tube.

I wouldnt critisise YOUR choice to keep that pregnancy going, but you shouldnt critisize someone else for not.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
March 22nd, 2008, 11:03 AM
Tammyjh's Avatar Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: North
Posts: 7,824
Quote:
. What about hydrocephelus - a condition known as "water on the brain" in which the head of the baby is totally deformed and blown up so big that it will kill a woman coming through the birth canal - and put her at GRAVE risk if she gets a C-Section due to the size, risk of death, infection, internal hemorage, and loss of reproductive organs that causes infertility. This case REQUIRES abortion to give the doctors the best chance at saving the womans life - and a D and X is the BEST and safest way to do it. Do you think this woman should die - to bring a brain dead fetus who has a condition that is incompatable with life (fetus will never be viable and will die once outside of the womb in most cases) into the world only to die as well?[/b]
You must mean severe hydrocephalus. Hydrocephalus can be mild to severe and lots of people who have it lead normal lives.
__________________
Tammy, Mom to
Abby (19), Kacie (13), Chase (11), & Jacob (7)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"...They're supposed to make you miserable! That's why they're family!" ~ Bobby ~ Supernatural
Reply With Quote
  #19  
March 22nd, 2008, 11:06 AM
AMDG's Avatar Margaret
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Denver metro area
Posts: 2,988
Quote:
Well, margaret, I hope to God you are never faced with that decision of either abort and live or not abort and 95% chance die, and leave your present children with no mother.

I know there ARE situations where things work out, but its not normal.

You are allowed that belief for you personally, but I just do NOT understand how you can say that the fact your 100% non viable 8 week fetus is more important to than someones own life and the life of their present children. Or even a 4-5 week old embryo (in the case of a cancer patient maybe finding out they are pregnant right away and deciding to terminate)

If in the case of an ectopic pregnancy, if you let the child keep growing that increases GREATLY the chances of a bursted fallopian tube.

I wouldnt critisise YOUR choice to keep that pregnancy going, but you shouldnt critisize someone else for not.[/b]

An abortion is NOT required in the case of an ectopic pregnancy. I know that mlynn claimed that an abortion is required but it is not. I do understand that the baby will not live in those cases and the danger to the mother is great. In those cases I believe the moral thing to do is to remove the fallopian tube. Yes, the baby dies but you are not killing the baby. I can hear it now - some of you will say it is the same thing as an abortion, but it is not. It is not the same thing in a legal sense, it is not the same thing morally and it is not the same thing in actuality.
The definition of abortion is: any of various surgical methods for terminating a pregnancy, esp. during the first six months. (I know miscarriages are also known as involuntary abortions but that is the kind any of us are refering to here)
Removing the fallopian tube is not by definition an abortion. The baby is what is causing the threat, it is the fallopian tube and thus by removing the fallopian tube you remove the threat to the mother. Yes, the baby does die, but you are not KILLING the baby - you are allowing the baby to die. The intent is not for the baby to die. In an abortion, the whole purpose and intent of the proceedure is to end a life. It is not considered euthanasia to remove life support and allow a person to die naturally because you are not KILLING the person, you are allowing them to die naturally. Same thing here. I think it is ignorant to say an abortion is NECESSARY. I know the vast majority of people choose to just kill the baby - they don't want to loose one of their fallopian tubs and if the baby is going to die anyway - why not just kill it? well, that is my point. I'm never going to convince any of you that all human life has equal value no matter what size, race, age, intelligence level, mental or physical capabilities etc just as you are never going to convince me that all life is not equal.
I guess I jumped into this discussion because early on it was mentioned that most pro-lifers are not consistant in their stance on life and/or abortion and I for one, am consistant.
__________________


"Authentic love is not a vague sentiment or a blind passion. It is an inner attitude that involves the whole human person. It is looking to the other, not to use but to serve. It is rejoicing when the other rejoices and suffers when the other suffers. Love is the gift of self." JPII
Reply With Quote
  #20  
March 22nd, 2008, 11:25 AM
mommyKathyX3
Guest
Posts: n/a
^^^ kind of like if you stopped feeding an infant. You didnt kill it, it died naturally. You just facilitated the means of it. Schematics hon. Its all the same thing. You did the thing that caused the baby to die, hense it is an abortion. If you dont want to call it that, then that is fine. But it is. Its is morally, and legally.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Topic Tools Search this Topic
Search this Topic:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:34 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0