posted on January 27, 2001 07:37:10 PM new
You guys might like to take a look at a novel called "The Handmaiden's Tale" for a hint on where the far right could take us, if allowed.
posted on January 27, 2001 07:45:52 PM new
This is in regards to 'late-term abortions' and whether there is ever a need for them.
A good friend of mine (married, both white-collar workers) had a child about three years ago now. Both were in their twenties and it was a perfectly normal pregnancy. Their daughter was born with severe chromosomal (sp?) problems. The child needs 24 hrs/day care by nurses, is fed through a tube and will never be much more than a vegetable.
In this particular case, they didn't have an amneocentesis (sp?). (This is not unusual (at least around here). I have two children and never had one.) The birth defects were totally out of the blue.
But what if the doctor had ordered the test when the mother was six months along or so? Should she have been allowed the choice to abort the baby? Would it have been justified in this case?
I happen to think so. You may not. But it's not our place to make this (difficult) decision for someone else. But I can see that having this child has really changed their life. They lost their house and are staggering under tremendous medical bills (over a million dollars so far - luckily mainly paid for by insurance). Now they are approaching their lifetime insurance limit. I have no idea what they will do.
So - Yes - I feel that there are times when a late-term abortion is appropriate.
posted on January 27, 2001 09:05:32 PM newshar9: To answer your question a page or 2 back.
If the mom is dying, I have only seen C Sections done. I have never seen this partial birth procedure, and I've participated in thousands of high risk deliveries. But, by that time, it's usually too late to save the baby. If they live, they're severely brain damaged.
Amnios are done at 18 - 20 weeks of gestation. There is a slight risk of miscarraige with an amnio. Will they also be outlawed? No more genetic counseling when we've just mapped the human genome? There's irony in there somewhere.
posted on January 29, 2001 04:31:03 PM new
Well, I did not read this whole thread, I read the first 6 or 7 pages, so, I don't know if my point has already been brought up. First, of all, abortion is a real big issue in my life. I was 8 weeks pregnant, and the doctor was looking for a heartbeat on the ultrasound. Unfortunately, there was not a heartbeat, and shortly thereafter, I miscarried. The irony of this is, I was never able to conceive again.
POINT 1 If we stop a heartbeat on an innocent human, have we not committed murder?
POINT 2 We tried to adopt, but were put on a waiting list, after two years of emotional agony, we said forget it. (Anybody ever been through a home study????)
POINT 3 I do not believe that my tax dollars should go to pay for something that I feel is morally wrong; that is against my religious beliefs. To me, it is the same principal as the government propogating religion, which, while it provides funds to parochial schools, those dollars are not used for any religious propogation. (I know, I worked in one..it was a nightmare, but it was do-able)
POINT 4 He didn't say they couldn't provide contraception or health & contraceptive counseling just not abortion and abortion counseling.
POINT 5 Anybody ever done any research on post abortion emotional trauma? It does exist.
POINT 6 "If I have sex, I might get pregnant" maybe I should JUST SAY NO
What is wrong with abstinence? I waited until I was 22 and I survived.
posted on January 29, 2001 05:35:23 PM newcin131 - I'm so sorry for your loss. And it is a loss, no matter what anyone tells you.
Point 1: In reality, if we stop a heartbeat on any human, we are committing murder. The problem with abortion is that there is no definition that is universal as to when that heartbeat defines a human being. To the mother who miscarries, it is a human being from the moment she allows it into her heart. In reality, if a pregnancy ends too soon, heartbeat or not, there is no guarantees to make that life viable. I miscarried at 11 weeks - that was a child to me, but to the medical community, and even to the more detached part of my mind, it was not. I saw it. It was not a child. Not a human. Not yet. By the same token, both of my children have been born premature - my daughter at 31 weeks. From what the doctors told me while I waited on bed rest - once you hit 24 weeks, most likely the child can be saved if you deliver. Prior to that, there is very, very little to be done.
There are some moral debates as to how much is too much to save these too small babies, and what price they will pay in the long run, as well, but that is another thread.
Point 2: Have you considered foster care? I have a friend who has done foster care for nearly five years, and while it is heartbreaking at times, it has also resulted in her being able to adopt a little girl who is now almost five, and she is in the process of adopting a little boy who is almost two. Both were placed with her as foster children as infants - she is their mommy. It's a tough job, and they do home studies for that as well, but it is one avenue to consider. So many children out there with so much pain in their short lives. If you have love to give, they need it!
Point 3: This quote from your post: "I do not believe that my tax dollars should go to pay for something that I feel is morally wrong; that is against my religious beliefs is in direct contrast to the next statement you make, about "the government propogating religion, but in either case - religion is not a factor in how our tax dollars are spent. Separation of Church and State. And just because it is against your religious beliefs does not mean that no tax dollars can/should be spent on it. The Jewish people are against the eating of non-Kosher foods, too, but their tax dollars are used by the government to provide food stamps for people who do not eat Kosher. That is against their religious beliefs, but there is no deciding where your tax dollars get spent.
Point 4: The word abortion cannot be uttered to these desparate women who may be infected with the HIV-virus, or already have children who are starving to death because of the famine in their country. Abortion is unfortunately a part of family planning. It may well be morally wrong (and anyone who feels it is should not have one), but it is legal in this country, and many others as well.
Point 5: It does exist, but many who suffer from it have other emotional problems as well, and that tends to muddy the waters a bit. Before moving to rural world, I lived in the big city and helped women cross the lines and helped with post abortion counselling. While rivers of tears were shed after terminating a pregnancy, I can't say I ever saw a case of this post-abortion trauma. Perhaps because the women were protected from the spitting pro-lifers as they went in and out of the clinic? They made a difficult decision, and they live with it. But it does not rule their lives.
Point 6: In a perfect world, abstinence would be the norm. This world is far from perfect, and telling our children to abstain is what we strive for, but the reality is that our children (and ourselves) think it won't happen to them. And then when it does, they are scared, and all too often alone with no adult they can trust. Best thing we can hope for is that if they get into trouble, they can trust their parents enough to come to them and the parents will be big enough to help and not condemn.
I was pro-life for many years. But when reality broadsided me upside the head with a series of catastrophes in the space of very little time, I came to realize that my choices were available to me, and if it was wrong for ME, so be it, but it is not up to me to decide what is right or wrong for anyone else. No, I'm not pro-abortion. I am pro-choice. And I am raising my family to respect the rights of others as well.
posted on January 29, 2001 06:03:21 PM new
I said I wouldn't, but I have too.
There is but two choices: you are pro abortion(BTW, to abort means to end prematurly), or you are not, which means you are pro life. There is no in-between here. So, how about this: there is no such thing as murder, all it is is an abortion, preformed after the third trimester. The newly aborted have the same rights as the unborn, ie; no voice in the action taken to prevent it, it just happened. Oh well, it is only a slightly larger cell mass then what is in the womb. Shouldn't matter. Now, as to my taxdollars, I would see them spent elsewhere then abortion clinics, mass funded murder inc. buildings (I worked in a "planned parenthood" for a long time before I came to Christ, as well as being a liberal demacrat). I tolerated a president who felt he could do whatever he wished with my $$, so now I have one that is using my $$ for things I believe in. And by the way, as you all complain about the Supream Court handing President Bush the election, how about mentioning the VERY LIBERAL INTERPITATION that gave us Roe v. Wade, hmmmm. Thats different, though, isn't it? Just like Teddy K killing Mary Jo, or the FBI files turning up suddenly, etc., etc., etc... Only when it is against liberal causes are we Christians and conservitives berated, scorned and ridiculed. Here's a thought for you pro-abortionist: name 5 important discoveries made by people who have been aborted. Give up? Me too. I would ask them, but they are no longer here.
In the begining, God created the heavens and the earth.
posted on January 29, 2001 06:09:49 PM new
I went back in time to get this, since this subject is brought up again...
It's been 27 years since the Roe vs. Wade decision. More than 38 million babies have died, 8 million more people than Hitler planned to exterminate. But, then again, I guess that is ok,I mean, it isn't like they are really important, like chads, or hanging chads, or romper room sex in the oval office. Just masses of cells, uncerimoniously removed from the female human body, or dissolved with acid, or ripped limb from limb from the womb, or skullk punctured as the almost entire body hangs from the womb, only the head inside, no one to hear the silent scream as the brain matter is removed with a vaccume hose. They don't even count, don't even vote, cannot voice thier own opinions, they are just there, an inconvienece to the preg...no, the woman cannot be pregnant, for that would mean that she was fertile, and carring a life. Lets us say that she is with ch....,no, can't be that, that is life too. Ah yes, I know: she is having cellectomy, that's what it is. Nothing to get upset over, like saving a patch of land for a mole, or a tree for an owl, or even a woman who took in another to help her....oops, she was unpopular, had to silence her voice. Not that she mattered anyhow, and maybe we can go back in time and abort the mass of cells that could've been her. But we must save all those monkey's, and dolphins and trees. After all, they have no voice of their own.
In the begining, God created the heavens and the earth.
posted on January 29, 2001 06:14:28 PM new
Is it so impossible to discuss this in a calm, rational, adult manner without name calling? I have tried very hard not to insult the intellegence and dignity of those who do not believe the same way I do. I have tried to speak civil.
Please, talk with me, not at me. I am not a stupid uneducated heathen. I am a woman with a different viewpoint from yours. Why is it necessary to be so rude to each other in discussing this? I'm willing to listen to your side, to understand why you believe and feel as you do. Am I not deserving of the same consideration?
posted on January 29, 2001 06:20:41 PM new
Don't want to edit - but forgot to add this:
We will likely never agree, but it really isn't necessary to berate those who believe differently from you. Christ did not win over his followers with demands. He brought them to Him by showing them, with love and compassion, the Way. I often wonder how many who really aren't sure about God read these heavy threads, and if the presentation may make a difference in some soul being saved or turning away and saying forget it. If you want to lead to Christ, you will be far more successful with offering an open hand than you will be by grabbing them by the ear and dragging them.
posted on January 29, 2001 06:32:22 PM new
maddie: Why is it when someone, not just myself, gives an answer that you and/or others do not agree with we are berating or name calling. Through out most of these types of threads, a liberal point can be slammed down our throats, but a conservitive, or Christian viewpoint has the effects mentioned before? That's not understandable, yet it must be the norm. I have called no one here a name, nor have I insulted anyone outright. I have stated my point of view, and I do believe that when Christ said He wanted the children to come to Him, he didn't mean to abort, or in my eyes,kill them so they meet Him quicker. Yet, posters that have a different viewpoint can say it any way, shape or form that they wish, and that is just dandy. Yes, I am in Christ, and He is in me as well. Yet I am also a human, prone to error and sin as well as the next person, but on this subject I will stand passionately beside my convictions. Maybe it is the Holy Spirit that is convicting others (I probably should not say that, people will say I am cramming religion down thier CPU throat) to understand what it really means to love thy neighbor as thyself. All I am saying is I will defend the unborn just as feverantly as I would defend a death row inmate. The only difference is a death row inmat, if they are really guilty, had a choice. The unborn do not.
In the begining, God created the heavens and the earth.
posted on January 29, 2001 06:38:40 PM new
Maddienicks, I am sorry for your loss too. I appreciate your intelligent, considerate expression of your views. That doesn't happen very often when abortion is the topic.
I am pro-life, as I'm sure you could tell, but, I am not a spitter, bomber, screamer, or name caller. I would like to see Roe V. Wade reversed, but I realize that will probably never happen. I would like to see an end to late term abortions. I would also like to see parental consent for girls under 18. I realize that there is a privacy issue here, but this is a medical procedure that can have serious complications; much more than ear-piercing.
ddicffe, I agree with most of what you said, I do think you could present your facts in a little less agressive manner. Attacking people usually doens't win them over.
As for the people who dont' like President Bush, whether you like him or not, he deserves a little more repect than I've seen displayed in this thread. I didn't like President Clinton, and thought he was a disgrace at times, BUT, I still respected him as the President.
posted on January 29, 2001 06:43:05 PM newinside - because I am pro-choice, I was called a baby killer early on in this thread. I didn't keep my cool and responded with woman killers, which was not the right thing for me to do, and a mistake I have tried very hard not to replicate. In the posts above, those of us who are not in agreement with the pro-life agenda are being called pro-abortion, which is ludicrious.
I do not think abortion is a wonderful thing.
I do believe it is a personal choice, and if it is indeed a mortal sin, we will be judged by God for it.
It is not me who has been called names so much as anyone who believes that a woman's body does not belong to the government.
To your credit, you have remained calm through most of this thread, even standing alone as you did. That took a lot of courage, and I commend you for that, even if I do not agree with your point of view, I can say I respect you for standing for what you believe.
ddicffe - thank you for a calmer post. It is quite possible that my perception is wrong. I cannot speak for everyone who has spoken up for pro-choice on this thread (or any other) but I have tried not to be demeaning to those who see it differently than I do. That is all I am asking. I am more than willing to hear you, and listen to your side of things, as long as you do not attempt to speak down to me.
Like I said, we may well never agree. This is a passionate issue - more powerful and devisive (sp?) than any other I can think of - but I'd like to think we can discuss it without falling back on propaganda.
I speak on it from my heart, without links to any pro-choice or pro-life site. I speak here from the knowledge I have from living my life, and from knowing my God. The same as you do. I think we can at least agree to treat each other with some respect. We may be able to learn something from each other.
posted on January 29, 2001 06:43:32 PM new
cin131: I have presented my facts less aggressivly, in krs last thread about this topic. I get heated up with this topic, as do many others. The fact remains, though: to abort means to end prematurly, weather it is a pregnancy or a job. The big difference is that a job you abort normally doesn't end a life....
In the begining, God created the heavens and the earth.
edited to add: MAddie, don't worry about spelling, if I had to still give a quarter for every error I made, I'd be in the poor house. As my wife often says, I am one of the worlds worst spellers, but one of it's best cooks.
posted on January 29, 2001 06:53:03 PM new
One last thing before I go to bed....
Calling anyone who believes abortion is all right a baby killer is about the lowest thing you can do. I do remember my family members comming home from Vietnam, and what they were called. If I have ever insulted anyone in that way, I do apoloigize now for it, as anyone else who has used that vulger statement should. We may not agree, but that term riles me up even worse then that wounderful word for an Aferican American does...
Night all, and I will try to get the FAVORITES thread done by this weekend.
In the begining, God created the heavens and the earth.
posted on January 29, 2001 06:54:58 PM newcin131 - You snuck in on me while I was typing!
We do see one thing the same way: I also would like to see an end to the late term abortions. As I've said elsewhere in this thread, I have a problem with that. My children were both high-risk and both premature - this very likely plays a large role in my feelings towards that.
To a large extent, I agree with the parental notification thing, too. The glitch with that is when the girl has been sexually abused by a family member...what then? If that is the case, doesn't notifying the parents simply increase her situation? See? No easy answers for me there, either.
I tend to fly by my own heart and gut. Sometimes, I'm wrong! And it may well be that when my time on this earth is ended, I will find out I was wrong about this. Thank goodness I know God loves me anyway, and won't toss me into the dungeons of hell for it.
I'm trying very hard to buck up under the spector of our new leader. It's not been easy, given all the gung-ho adventures of his first week! But I do realize I'm in it for the next four years, and will try to take some comfort in the fact that we can try again in 2004.
It was nice meeting you here - I don't think I've seen you before. I wish you well, and hope we will meet again in a lighter thread. In the meantime, thank you for stating your case as you did. I hear you.
Now, (barring a refresh, which I've been known to do), I'm off to bed with my little one, as 4:30 comes way too early up here in the frozen north.
posted on January 29, 2001 06:59:18 PM newddicffe - I was an executive secretary in my former life. Spelling mistakes by me drive me nuts! LOL It's a character flaw. heh
You cook? Hmmmmm....
I've been watching the "Favorites" thread, and expect that whatever you come up with will be amazing, given all the different things that are in there! I look forward to it.
posted on January 29, 2001 07:29:17 PM new
I haven't read the entire thread, but decided to edit my original post to remove some venomous remarks. George W. Bush (doesn't that have a lovely ring....) doing what he feels is honoring those who duly ELECTED him, an act that is done with integrity and good faith and in accordance with his moral character, which is more than I can say about anyting Bill Clinton ever did (although given his low moral character, I guess he did most things accordingly) Just look at all the frivolous partisan executive orders and pardons he signed while in office, not to even mention the most crooked administration in the history of our nation. I don't want my tax dollars paying for infantocide in other countries, and our government has NO RIGHT to use our money that way. He has done the right thing. I've got news for you-this is only the beginning, and contrary to what some believe, most Americans are in favor of the kind of "choice" that prevents unwanted pregnancy in the first place. It's called personal responsibility. I don't see us ever overturning Roe, and I'm not sure we should, since the problem of rape and incest along with the demand for abortion for pregnancies resulting from these situations. Besides, the frenzy created by overturning this wrongly decided law would only serve to frustrate civil unrest concerning this controversial subject. I will, however, be very glad to see President Bush (there it is again, music to my ears!)carry out his campaign promises and sign the BAN on partial birth abortion. Incidently, according the AMA, we already have a medically proven way of ending a perilous pregnancy-it's called birth by caesarean section,(even babies as preterm as 24 weeks gestational age have survived to live productive lives) and if I had a dime for every set of desperate people who want a baby but can't conceive or even find a baby for adoption, I could retire. Likewise if I had a penny for every dead aborted baby. It's high time people started taking responsibility for their behavior and stopped making their unborn children pay for it. Let's not forget that studies have consistently shown that abortion is not only an end to a baby's life, but it often has a devastating long-term emotional and sometimes physical effect on the women who endure it. Our children will value life as they see it valued in our society. There are better solutions to unwanted pregnancies than sucking them into a sink or delivering them feet first up to the neck, then piercing the backs of their precious little heads afterwhich their brains are suctioned out. Anyone supporting this procedure on any grounds is a barbarian. I support the right to choose alright-the right to choose not to make a baby if one won't take responsibility for it. I have three, none planned, all loved more than life itself.
[ edited by mylittlecottage on Jan 29, 2001 07:40 PM ]
posted on January 29, 2001 07:38:13 PM new
Blah blah blah...
Even ignoring the circumstances of his ascendency to the office, Bush doesn't have a mandate to govern anywhere but from the center. The majority in this country do not lean to the right nor do they lean to the left, and that includes people who voted for Bush. In only a week and a half Bush has showed that he is unconcerned with fulfilling the pillar of his campaign, that of national unity, by working on issues there is consensus for.
posted on January 29, 2001 09:10:04 PM new
mylittlecottage
You state,
"I've got news for you-this is only the beginning"
Unfortunately for the entire world, this is indeed the case. The
immorality of George Bush is really what we should be concerned about. He is immoral
on a large scale.
But he reads his Bible every day. And he runs around
the track every day while he proceeds to ruin every improvement
that Clinton and the Democratic Administration made for this country
and the world.
I should get back to the topic of this
thread which is the right for an individual
to choose to have an abortion. Bush will
ruin that also. His choice for Attorney
General, John Ashcroft believes that abortion is wrong
for any reason, even in cases of rape and
incest.
posted on January 29, 2001 11:50:33 PM newmylittlecottage - I hear what you're saying....I think we're all trying to understand your side of things, but we'd also like you to understand what we are saying.
Nobody that I know of is in favour of abortion being used as a means of birth control. Why do you (Pro-Life) keep keying on that?
I, myself, haven't heard of 3rd term abortions, unless there is a real emergency of some kind. Why do you key on that and show pictures of mutilated, last trimester babies? MOST abortions are performed in the first 3 - 4 months, and the "baby" is the size of a tea bag.
Pro-Choice means that YOU are responsible for your own actions, and I am responsible for mine, and hopefully, I won't be judged by others for my personal decisions. (As written in the bible...possibly the same one Bush reads.)
Pro-Choice doesn't mean Pro-Abortion. What if I said Pro-Life-ers were for abuse, starvation and neglect? I consider that term pretty immature.
If it boils down to "life at all costs" foresaking the Quality...as mentioned in Shosh's posts, then we indeed have a problem on our hands.
A big step would be being able to put aside our stereotypical thoughts about what the "other side" thinks, and at least try to discuss this without all the jabs.
posted on January 30, 2001 12:24:28 AM new
IMO, most woman who have an abortion make their decision based on one emotion... fear. The fear that she won't know how to care for, love, nourish this child, that she will be abandoned to raise the child alone, fear that she will be shamed, fear that her life will spiral out of control and that there will be no one to help her.
If we want to stop abortions we can't berate woman into making that choice. We have to find a way to eliminate the fear. The opposite of fear is love... and that is IMO,the only thing that will eliminate fear/erradicate abortions.
It's after 2 a.m. here. If my thoughts didn't make it correctly from the brain to the keyboard... I'll edit tomorrow.
g'night
posted on January 30, 2001 04:47:26 AM new
KRAFT...
we focus on abortion as means of birth control, because, IMHO, that is what it is used for. If I don't want a baby (which is far from true; I'd give my eye teeth for a child, as well as anything else I could that would get us a baby) I use contraception. If I get pregnant, and I don't want a baby, I (figuratively speaking) get an abortion. It's the same thing. I don't have the figures, but I know that it is a very low percentage that are actually done for rape or incest, or for physically health of the mother.
To me, it still boils down to one thing. PREVENTION. If you are not ready, emotionally or physically to have a child, then you should exercise EXTREME caution with your sex life. I feel that we should be teaching abstinence along with putting condoms on cucumbers in our schools.
As for the President; While many of you may not like President Bush's ideas, at least you can trust him with your wife & daughters.
posted on January 30, 2001 05:27:44 AM new
mylittlecottage:
we already have a medically proven way of ending a perilous pregnancy-it's called birth by caesarean section,(even babies as preterm as 24 weeks gestational age have survived to live productive lives)
Are you suggesting C Sections for gravely ill women at 8+ weeks gestation?
Somehow, I don't believe the AMA would endorse that form of treatment, LOL!!
Or the HMOs. C Sections are a fairly expensive surgical procedure.
24 weekers didn't even survive until quite recently, and in my experience in NICU, the outcome is unpleasant.
I'm also seeing a glaring medical error that I have to question in more than 1 poster's description of the partial birth procedural description. (Sorry, but I'm anal about medical misinformation)
delivering them feet first up to the neck, then piercing the backs of their precious little heads
Most babies have rotated and are delivered head first.
posted on January 30, 2001 07:54:04 AM new
Dam straight. She is pro choice.
In the cartoon that you posted, she is
faced with a child to raise without a father
because he's selfish, inhuman and a deadbeat
dad...in a country that will not even
provide health insurance for the child.
