And I love it when posters who post more often than other posters get full of themselves. Quantity of posts does not equal quality of posts. I’m just as much a member of this board as you are.
Well, it matters if the baby died because the doctor killed it, for one. I was just confused because tracer said that the baby in the procedure was already dead, implying that all “partial-birth abortions” are performed on mothers whose babies are already dead.
I’m just trying to get some information on the subject from someone who might be more knowledgeable than me? Got a problem with that? If so, take it to the pit.
Okay, I didn’t read the post to imply that the procedure was performed only on mothers whose babies are already dead. I can appreciate you wanting to learn more, I always want to learn more as well. However, asking, “How did the baby die?” is not the same as asking, “are you implying that this procedure performed only on women whose babies are already dead?”. I trust that you can see that distinction.
The idea that the baby is already dead and that is why they’re doing a partial birth abortion is ridiculous! Now you may have a doctor telling you “the baby WILL NOT LIVE” but this is not the same as dead. Plenty of comatose patient’s families have been told the person “would not live”, yet they didn’t choose to have their loved ones brains sucked out. And some of those people have, in fact, recovered fully so doctors are NOT ALWAYS RIGHT! I know PERSONALLY of women who have been told because of various tests done that their “fetus” would not survive and that they should have this procedure or even a regular abortion, only to deliver a perfectly healthy baby because they refused to undergo this procedure. Once the babies brains were sucked out, I’m quite sure there would have been little way to determine whether the child would have otherwise been healthy. What’s more, there is no reason as far as the mother’s health, why the baby could not be delivered including the head vaginally and THEN decide whether it could make it or not. The only possible exception might be a hydrocephalic baby, which could be delivered c-section.
The only reason this horror continues is because there is a market for their tissue so that people like Christopher Reeves can hope to walk again. Fetal Brain tissue is the only tissue they’ve found that can regenerate and so they are quite excited that this may provide a cure for paraplegics. I love Christopher Reeves and I truly hope he will walk again, but I don’t think babies should have to die so that he can. Talk to people in the industry and learn the truth. They sell the various parts of these babies for research into all kinds of things, it’s big business.
My cousin was told that she would never be able to have children. She has three.
She was told the first pregnancy was a tumor.
She was told the third pregnancy had no heartbeat for over six months and that not having a D&C was risking her very life. That little girl is now 13 years old and my cousin is quite healthy as well…
“Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding.” Prov. 3:5
AFAIK, all birth control pills simply prevent ovulation. Now they are providing packs of the same type of pills, to be taken in high doses as emergency contraception, but in general, birth control pills do not cause abortions/prevent implantation.
How did you come to the conclusion that life begins at the meeting of the sperm and egg rather than implantation, differentiation of cells, heartbeat, viability, or birth? There is no information on this in the Bible, to my knowledge, so how do you know what God thinks? I don’t mean this to sound sarcastic - I actually am interested in how you got this idea.
Saruman, I loved your post. I couldn’t agree more. I took the risk of getting pregnant out of wedlock (a less than 1% risk in my case), and decided that should I have an accident, I would do the most difficult thing: have the baby and put it up for adoption. I think a little personal responsibilty (and EDUCATION) regarding sex is what we really need.
The “what if it’s unwanted” and “if it has a bad life, it could turn out to be a criminal” arguments are ridiculous. My mother had me when she was 16 (“dad” was not a good guy & not around for very long), and was advised by doctors to have an abortion. (Aside from her age, she was told that I was going to have severe medical problems.) Well, I’m in my mid-20s, never had any medical problems, and am a college grad with a good job and happy life.
No one has the right to take someone else’s life because of something they think might happen. I’m thankful everyday that my mom didn’t listen to the doctors.
If you don’t want to have children, abstain or protect yourself. If protection fails and you still get pregnant, take responsibilty for your actions and at least let the unborn child have a chance at a future. You never know what could happen.
That’s an unfair generalization. Not all pro-lifers are against contraception. I’m pro-life (and a Christian) and I see nothing wrong with contraception.
Psalm 139:13-16 (New International Version)
“(13)For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. (14)I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. (15)My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, (16)your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.”
I know you were probably specifically asking the person whose post you had quoted, but I thought I’d post this passage just to help answer your question.
I’d like to say that I immediately knew the scripture and verse to quote, but I didn’t so I’m thankful that God used you to reply so quickly to this question!
Back to the pill not preventing implantation, I do beg to differ. It depends on which hormones are in the variety you take as to what it actually does. However, if you read the enclosed leaflet, you’ll find a LOT of nasty side effects that are possible. Meanwhile, my doctor (not a Christian, btw) informed me that the risk for all forms of female cancer (ovarian, uterine, cervical, and breast) are reduced by having at least 3 children, having the first one by age 25, and by breastfeeding. It seems a woman’s body was “designed” to need a break from the menstrual cycle and pregnancy and breastfeeding provide that. God KNOWS what He’s doing!
The Dilation & Evacuation procedure used for the so-called “partial birth abortion” kills the fetus before any part of it is poking out of the birth canal. Thus, by the time the physician is at the point where he sucks the brains out of the fetus, the fetus is already dead. The brains are removed from the fetus’s head not to kill it (since it’s already dead by then), but to allow its head to pass through the birth canal more easily.
This is what I’ve picked up from the sparse information I’ve been able to find about the procedure. If you can provide a link to reputable information showing otherwise, I’d like to see it.
Definitely pro-abortion. I’ve had my tubes tied since age 21, and if I still had an accident, would run right to a clinic and get it corrected.
This is one of those matters that is neither right or wrong.
Mistakes happen. Birth control can fail, and there is NO reason to carry through an unwanted pregnancy.
I’ve heard people say that the woman should be forced to go through with it in order to punish her for having sex without being married. Funny, that doesn’t seem to punish the guy.
Isn’t this a personal choice that only the woman can make? Abortions have been done since the 1940s and 1950s, even then an early version of Vacuum Aspiration was available. It was done by what would be considered mid-wifes, and the abortion rate was just about as high then as in the busiest days after Roe v Wade.
No one is going to tell me I am going to have a pregnancy against my will.
At the same time if a woman wants to go through with the pregnancy that is her choice.
ahh, Abortion. One of only a few topics that is guarenteed to spill into other threads, create life-long enemies…
a slight hijack will ensue…
why is Birth control= abortion? Sperm dont have intellegence. neither do ova.
oh, and by the way, it wasnt until the Papal encyclia “Humanae Vitae” in 1963 (?) that birth control was not allowed. When a group of people got together and decided that they saw contraception as a threat to the growth of the church, particularly in Africa where the “Godless Heathens” lived. of course, now the fruits of that are being bore with the STD rate.
on point,
It is not my place to enforce a pregnancy upon a woman.
If I’m ever in the situation where I do get a woman pregnant, I will stand by her decision. After all, we do have free will.
Birth control pills do not “Abort” a pregnancy, it stops it from occuring at all(except in the rarest of occasions).
No ovulation=no egg=no baby, not an abortion.
So much for that reproductive system lesson…
A few questions.
1- is a miscarriage the same as an “early abortion”?
2- Ectopic pregnancy, if there has to be a surgery to remove an ectopic zygote, is it abortion?
3-If a woman gets pregnant on or near her period, and the lining schluffs off, is that also abortion?
I’ll start with the last one. I have never heard anyone opposed to abortion advocating telling or forcing a woman to become pregnant. “Pro-lifers” don’t have anything to say until a woman is already pregnant against her will. And then it’s a question of the moral standing of the fetus.
Judging from the other 2 quotes I list, it seems you have an unstated premise: a fetus has no moral standing. Since anti-abortion starts with the premise that the fetus has at least partial moral standing, it really is necessary to address the different assumptions from the beginning. You have failed to do this by not even stating your premise, let alone substantiating it. On what basis do you feel that the fetus has no moral standing? When does a fetus gain moral standing, and why that point and not one second earlier? Does your view on lack of moral standing extend to infants and if not, why not? This is not a spurious question, some pro-abortion advocates, Dr. Peter Singer for one, logically extend their arguments in favor of abortion to include infanticide.
So, instead of sounding like a fundie who says “it’s wrong because God says it is” by saying “it’s not wrong because I say it isn’t,” please make a real argument.
I now have a couple of comments. Does your doctor being Christian or non-Christian affect his medical abilities? Also, can you please explain you God knows what he is doing comment. My sister has 4 children and breastfed them all yet she still developed breast cancer, even though no other women in our family had ever had it. Thankfully we found an excellent Oncologist, I however, will make no claim as to his relgious affiliation.
Noggins and Felicia:
Please explain exactly why atheists, agnostics, Buddhists, Taoists, Hindus, Wiccans, neo-Pagans, etc, should find Biblical arguments against abortion persuasive. And, although the cynic in me doubts it, do you have a purely secular argument against abortion, to include why you consider life to begin at conception? This really is important, since the anti-abortion movement wishes to make abortion illegal for all, a secular argument is necessary for any kind of justification.
I didn’t say that those people should find the Biblical argument persuasive. The poster that I was responding to (AerynSun) asked Felicia, “There is no information on this in the Bible, to my knowledge, so how do you know what God thinks?” From Felicia’s earlier posts, I assumed that she was a Christian and had somewhat similar views to mine, so I answered AerynSun’s question with a Biblical reference.
As for secular views that I have against abortion… In an earlier post, I told about what happened with my mom. Regardless of anyone’s religious affiliation, I would say that if you decide to have sex, then you need to take the responsibility that comes with it. I know firsthand that things can be extremely tough for people (especially the women and children) who live with the consequences of unplanned pregnancies. But coming from the perspective of one who was the unplanned child, I don’t think anyone has the right to say that it’s ok to kill someone because they’re unwanted. I know my mom was scared when she was in her situation, and she lived with shame for a long time (she’s told me this), but she still took responsibility for her actions and gave me a chance at a future. I’m happy to be alive, and I want all children to have the same chance, no matter what religion (or non-religion) they’re from.
Ok, so that leads to your other question about where life begins. From the moment of conception, the process of the baby growing has started. Even at that early stage, the baby has a unique DNA from its parents. It may not be able to live on its own yet, but the fact is that it’s still growing. To pick some other point in time during pregnancy to say that life begins makes me ask this question: what is the difference between that moment and the one before? You said kind of the same thing when you asked Lindsay, “When does a fetus gain moral standing, and why that point and not one second earlier?” The unique difference between the moment of conception and any other moment during the course of pregnancy is that before the moment of conception, the baby was not growing. The line has to be drawn somewhere.
