Abortion bans need mother safety net?

“Recently, there has been some talk of abortion in the news. And a recurring theme seems to be that it has to be allowed because the mother's life may be endangered and we have to be able to save her life.

Can't say as I disagree with this. It'd be a terrible choice to have to make, and I would not want to make it. I have nothing to say pro or con for those who have to make the choice of the mother or the baby. I feel this is a very sad situation, and am very saddened by it.

Now the thing that gets me is that safety net is such an open ended safety net. For example, a few years ago, there was discussion about partial birth abortions, commonly used in the third trimester.

Caution: Graphic: How a partial birth abortion works, as I have been informed, is that the "doctor" induces labor, but the baby is delivered breach, feet first. When the baby is almost completely out of the womb, except for the top half of the head, the birthing procedure is halted at that point. I am not so certain that this is any healthier for the mother than delivering the baby as quickly as possible, but it is stopped right there. Then, if you feel the back of your skull, just above your neck, there is a bit of a soft spot at the base of your skull. Yup, right there. The "doctor" then peirces the skin and sucks out the brain and collapses the skull and then pulls the babies lifeless body out of the womb. This is... er was, a viable baby. If the mother had sneezed, or the doctor had sneezed, the baby could have been born.

The abortion supporters who argue so vehomently for abortion rights can justify this???? In the above case, a mother could hav had labor induced and delivered a live baby with less trauma than this partial birth abortion. This kind of smacks of a convenience thing, imho.

A while back there was a movie available, called "The Silent Scream". It was passed around churches mostly. It showed a smuggled video of an actual abortion in the womb. It showed how the baby pulled back against the vacuum, in vain, trying to live. I did not view this movie, it was not available in my area when I could watch it, but I read a transcript of it. I wrote to either Dear Abby, or Dear Ann Landers, who was/is a proponent of abortion. I suggested that she watch this movie and reassess her stand on abortion. She actually replied to me that she had seen the movie, and verified what I had read about the movie. She continued on to say that in spite of what she saw, she still was a proponent of abortion, because of the very many lives (prospective parents and the childrens) that have been so bad that could have been prevented with an abortion. I gotta say that I respected her opinion and honesty. I'm not saying I agree with her, but she was honest.

I'd be really interested in hearing from some sort of authority as to just how many abortions have been performed when the mother's life was actually, truly realistically, verifiably held in the balance. What are the actual percentages???? I don't want to hear about the random case here or there, I am certain they have happened and are real. I am asking for hard statistics.

I know this is an emotional issue, and folks get pretty hot and bothered about it. I am asking for some real dialogue and honesty about this. If you must flame, please start up a competitive flame thread and lets see which gets more posts!!!

Makes me wonder what kind of a can of worms I have just opened..... Guess I'll find out.”

“flip

i did not realize that the infant was this far out before being killed. wasnt this outlawed? i was already against this, and am now even more shocked that anyone could be in favor of this”

“Unreal.

I just watched it.

Part 3 should be watched by all who believe abortion is ok.

http://www.silentscream.org/video1.htm

My heart is still racing. Very sad.”

“bumpity bump

please watch”

“How often do these late term abortions occurr?”

“It's tough to know for sure because of the way it's reported, but estimates range from 2,000-5,000 per year.

PS - The video above is not of a partial-birth abortion, yet note how tragic it is nonetheless.”

“The life of the mother wins hands down every time. I'm against abortion as birth control. Otherwise it is the woman's choice that she must make and live with. We can not make good decisions if there is no choice.”

“The wife of a one of my best friend's had a partial birth abortion.


While her experience is only one example, I do not wish on anyone here, not even sarge, what she and my friend went through in coming to terms with what they determined was a necessary and correct decision.”

“There are many many things about the abortion debate and pro-life advocates that offend me. One of the chief ones is the role the religiously zealous men play in the conversation.

What is their standing?

When did a male right wing Taliban of religous zealots get to determine what decisions a woman could make with her reproductive health?

There is no god. All religion is made up mythical garbage.

So don't stand on a street corner waving your picket sign shouting your religious crap regarding abortion. You may choose to live in your religous mythical fantasy world. But I choose not to. And this is about freedom of choice.

And no. I don't give a damn about the dead babies.

If they were wanted and going to be brought into a caring and loving envirnoment, then they wouldn't be being aborted. They are better off dead.”

“lee - Your whole argument ignores one important fact. This isn't just about reproductive health. It's also about murder.

I suppose you think killing rival street gangs is ok too, I mean ... if they were brought into a caring and loving environment, they wouldn't be being shot. Right? Better off dead.”

“I’m amazed at the supreme court case in New Hampshire (I think) where they are fighting over weather or not a doctor has to notify the parents of a minor before taking a fetus. In that state a minor can not even get their ears pierced without the parent actually been present, but they can get an abortion?”

“I suppose you think killing rival street gangs is ok too
Sarge
8:46:42 AM
12/01/05

yeah better they kill each other off than to kill innoncent people who just happen to get in the way.

As far as abortion, it is the women's decision. She is the one who has to live with it. If it is wrong she will answer later on.”

“It's also about murder.

Ugh, here we go again with this arbitrary presupp.”

“yeah better they kill each other off than to kill innoncent people who just happen to get in the way.

So you'd legalize murder between street gangs? Wow.

The woman does have to live with it. Her child cannot because it's murdered. If it is wrong, and she doesn't repent, she will answer later on. Same could be said of any immoral act. So, let's legalize murder. Let's legalize theft. Let's legalize rape. I mean, if they're wrong, the person will pay for it later, right?

Come on Ewker, I give you more credit than that. You must be kidding if that's your argument for legalizing anything.”

“Mutt - That is a fact. The discussion is about murder.

You might not believe it is murder, but the fact remains that the discussion is about murder.”

“If men had babys this wouldnt be an issue.”

“Mutt - That is a fact.

Love your "just so", like stating it over makes it true. It's NOT a universal fact - it's an arbitrary presupp that is as indefensible as any other starting point of pre-birth human life.”

“sarge, I have no problems with street gangs killing each other off...more power to them.

Abortion is legal already. The other things you mentioned are illegal.

Why should you have a say on some women's abortion. It isn't your concern.”

“Mutt - You are not listening to what I am saying.

I am not saying "it is a fact that abortion is murder".

I am saying "it is a fact that the discussion of abortion is about murder".”

“Ewker - Is it society's concern if your neighbor kills your other neighbor? How about if they do it again to another neighbor?”

“your mixing two things together. Abortion is legal, killing your neighbor is illegal, killing off street gangs is a positive”

“Well the discussion is about many things, really.”

“your mixing two things together. Abortion is legal, killing your neighbor is illegal, killing off street gangs is a positive - Ewker

Um, that's the reason for the discussion in the first place. Some people believe it should be illegal. Nobody is arguing that it's illegal.”

“It is about many things Mutt, but the reason anti-abortion people are in the discussion is because they think it's murder.

To try to have a debate about abortion, and to make one of the rules "we can't talk about the possibility of it being murder", is ludicrous.”

“Nigal - Against Rape? Don't do it. Let those who want to rape rape. Right?”

“I'm curious if any of you guys watched that video from above.”

“to make one of the rules "we can't talk about the possibility of it being murder", is ludicrous.

Who's doing that?”

““It's also about murder.

Ugh, here we go again with this arbitrary presupp.”
Mutt
9:53:38 AM
12/01/05”

“You are obviously saying that murder is not a valid argument. It is, whether or not you believe abortion is murder, it's a valid argument.”

“Mutt, have you watched that video? Please do and tell me if you think it's murder or not.”

“Then you weren't specific enough in your original statement. "It's also about murder" can obviously be taken to mean that abortion = murder, rather than your backpedal "the discussion is about..."

And no, I don't stream/download videos at work. Bandwidth issues! lol...”

“I posted two seperate notes deliberately.

1. While I understand the visceral reaction and revulsionthat Mokeyboy and others have towards the technical aspects of partial birth abortion . . .At least in the case of my friend and his wife, it was the only real choice.

Heartwrenching. Traumitizing. Something that will always be apart of them. A decision that . . .in spite of its necessity will remain with them forever. While the visceral reaction at the aspects of the surgery make good media play, and are good fodder for the anti-abortion folks . ..the underlying causes as to why the procedure might be necessary are more complex, not as media friendly.

I don't think a third party can stand in judgement of the procedure without understanding the facts behind each case.


And, as I said . ..I would not wish the set of facts tht I am familiar with on anyone.


It is for those reasons that it is incomphrehensible to me that anyone can attempt to take a "moral", third party position, devoid of facts and cirmscumstances, and simply declare such a procedure to be "murder" or that it should be made illegal.

It demonstrates a complete lack of understanding, or appreciation for the circumstances under which such a procedure might be necessary.



2. My other post is how I feel. I strongly believe that Sarge and others of his ilk simply have no place in the conversation.


3. I will now bow out of this conversation. I will not engage Sarge directly. I have no respect for him, the approach he takes to these discussions, the persona that he has projected on this board or any other aspect of his existence.”

“Lee Wrote:

While I understand the visceral reaction and revulsionthat Mokeyboy and others have towards the technical aspects of partial birth abortion . . .At least in the case of my friend and his wife, it was the only real choice.

Heartwrenching. Traumitizing. Something that will always be apart of them. A decision that . . .in spite of its necessity will remain with them forever.

Lee, I see that you are bowing out, having said all you want to and not wishing to engage in a lengthy go no where argument. When two people have different opinions, and they are not changing them, that's kinda where it leads....

As I said before: It'd be a terrible choice to have to make, and I would not want to make it. I have nothing to say pro or con for those who have to make the choice of the mother or the baby. I feel this is a very sad situation, and am very saddened by it.

The thing I notice about the pro abortion crowd is that they always say something along the lines of what you have presented, such as statements along these lines: "It was absolutely the right decision, had to happen, but we can't divulge the details, and won't be held up in judgement by you or anyone else." If I understand you correctly, this happened with a close friend of yours, so I will not ask you to shed light on their personal delima. That would be violating a friendship. But therein lies the delima. So many arguing that it has to be so, yet none of them justifying why.

This morning, on the way to work, I heard a lady, in some government office, speaking against abortion, exclaiming that the pro abortion crowd (planned parenthood and other agencies were mentioned by name) has yet to bring even one actual case that could justify their position.

This just begs the question: Is she uninformed? Or has the pro abortion group actually failed to provide actual cases that justify their position?

As I stated earlier, I had written to Dear Abby or Dear Ann Landers and I received a reply from her, stating that she had seen the Silent Scream and stood steadfast by her decision to support abortion rights and recommend it. No side stepping the issue with her. She was just honest and straightforward and even went on to explain why she felt so. I don't see things the way she did, but I understood her position. No mudslinging between us. I am sure she views me as unenlightened (given what she must read on a daily basis), while I view her as horrific in this one area. I still feel that she has handed out much useful and pragmatic advice.

Anyways, I would love for the pro abortion groups to bring more to the table than the emotional "for the life of the mother, it has to be so...." Please bring the hard facts and statistics.

One other thought, a friend miscarried years ago, and in her medical charts it was listed as an abortion. Not a spontaneous abortion, just an abortion. Not a miscarraige. So this loving mother who would never venture to an abortion clinic is forever listed as having an abortion. Nothing in her medical charts to indicate it was a miscarraige, as oppsoed to what is commonly referred to as an abortion. Makes one wonder why the "medical community" will not specifically label miscarriages and the various types of abortions and present this to the public...... Perhaps things are different now, I generally don't follow the abortion stuff too closely, it just seems to get ugly and go nowhere, counterproductive, really.

Just some observations....”

“that's weird about your friend's medical charts.”

“Politicians should not be trying to practice medicine.

Period.”

“Mutt - Are you home now? You can stream the video.

Mutt - My first post DID make it clear I was talking about the discussion. When you quoted me, you left out the other 2 sentences. Here is what I said: "Your whole argument ignores one important fact. This isn't just about reproductive health. It's also about murder."

I will not engage Sarge directly. I have no respect for him, the approach he takes to these discussions, the persona that he has projected on this board or any other aspect of his existence. - lee

lee - One of us is discussing this. One of us is making personal attacks on others. It's clear who is doing what.”

“Tilt said:

Politicians should not be trying to practice medicine.

Period.”

LOL!! I gotta agree with that. I'm not sure what politicians should be doing. But in all seriousness, they should be setting public policy according to their constituents wishes. And if that means adressing public opinion on how abortion is handled, then yes, they should address that.”

“My first post DID make it clear I was talking about the discussion.

No, the word "discussion" - which would have removed all ambiguity - wasn't present, leaving plenty of room for interpretation. Tell me, do you enjoy these kinds of semantic fights in particular?”

““Politicians should not be trying to practice medicine.

Period.”

Period? I believe it's the absence of a period that is the problem that leads some to choose abortion. Good pun dude. :)”

“Tell me, do you enjoy these kinds of semantic fights in particular?

No, which is why I don't start them, unlike you.”

“The idea that abortion is murder is a relatively new invention with very little precedent until the 19th century. It seems part of the fetus fetishism that has engulfed much of the reactionary religious right.

Being troubled by abortion makes sense. Obviously something has gone wrong if someone seeks an abortion. Some women have abortions reasons that seem to me to be trivial, stupid and selfish reasons. I'm not willing to have the state put people in jail for those choices - even if they seem superficial and stupid to me - as long as the fetus is in its early stages of development. Nor am I willing to have the State exercise other coercive powers (which are always backed up by threat of imprisonment) to prevent them.

Later on in a pregnancy, the picture shifts a little for me. The fetus is more developed, there are fewer months of pregnancy that lie ahead and the woman has had months of opportunity to get an abortion. There comes a point (maybe at 6 or 7 months) where I am comfortable with State regulations requiring medical necessity. I'm also comfrotable with laws requiring the most humane death possible for the fetus which does not increase the risk to the mother. If we can have laws on the humane death for lab animals and livestock, we can have them for human fetuses.


As for the New Hampshire Law - a lot of the struggle is about the slippery slope issue. Both sides see this as a step forward in increasing restrictions on abortions. Personally, I think if the process of appeal to a Judge can be done very swiftly in medical emergencies - then the parental notification law is OK. Maybe there could even be some rule about - if the Judge does not respon in X time in a medical emergeny the Doctor can use his/her own judgement.”

“Parents who don't like the parental notification law can do what a minister I know in St. Louis did. She told her family doctor, in her daughter's presence, that any medical procedure or prescription her daughter wanted she could have if he felt it was OK medidcally. She also signed a release to that effect and gave it to the doctor. The end result, she told me, was that he daughter trusted and confided in her (and didn't get pregnangt before marriage - she has been married about a year now, no news yet)”

“bump for anybody who didn't see the video - let's here some comments from you pro-abortionists ...

again, Part 3 if you don't want to watch it all:

http://www.silentscream.org/video1.htm

(interesting no pro-abortionist has claimed to watch it - I hope it's not the "out of sight, out of mind" syndrome)”

“Abortion is, by and large, an elective procedure. I still have not heard or read of even a single case where it was a medical neccesity, let alone seen any stats on the "great" need for it.

Recently, perhaps you have seen this guy, there has been a man in the media who is transforming himself into a lion with plastic surgey and tatoos. He even has whiskers and a tail. This is all elective surgery, and I believe he is paying for it all himself. That's fine so long as he is paying for it himself and he is hurting no one.

Now let's move over to elective abortion, which the vast majority are. Let's see now, who pays for the elective abortion? Is it causing harm to no one else?

Therein lies the crux of the matter to me. Abortion stops a beating heart, and I contribute to them thru taxes and medical insurance premiums that eventually pay for them.

Thus far, I have never seen the silent scream, and I am not so certain I will watch it. Just reading some transcripts have given as good a "picture" as I think I can handle. I watch violent action movies all the time, but I know they are fiction. I am not so certain I can handle this kind of real violence. A simple click of the mouse, and I can watch it. But I am not so sure I want to.....”

“I watched it.

Planned Parenthood has a rebuttal: http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/files/portal/medicalinfo/abortion/fact-abortion-silent-scream.xml”

“Nice! Right off the bat they claim that it's all reflexes, and that the baby is unaware.

Same thing that I was taught in science class about dogs.

Violin - So do you have an opinion other than a Violink?”

“monkeyboy - A friend of mine watched it who had never seen it before.

Or, I should say he watched some of it. He had to turn it off at "the" part. Something easily done on the computer.

My heart was racing watching it, as if I were witnessing a cold blooded murder. Something I'll never forget.”

“Has your research proven that it does not require a cerebral cortex to feel pain?

I seem to remember a similar argument earlier this year.



As far as medically necessary vs. elective, monkeyboy…

A neighbor of mine just had an abortion a few weeks ago. They have a two year old son and have been trying to have a second for some time. They are financially stable and eager to add to their family. Testing determined that the fetus was defective. I don’t know all of the details but I know that the doctors determined that the heart would never develop properly and the fetus wouldn’t make it to term. It wasn’t a question of dealing with a deformed child - it would never even make it that far. My neighbors, after conferring with their doctors and agonizing, chose to end the pregnancy. They were devastated, but decided that given the circumstances, it was the best choice. Call them murderers if you want.

I don’t have the statistics and I’m not a doctor, but I’d be willing to bet that a significant number of abortions are performed for similar reasons. Perhaps you could locate an unbiased source for the statistics you are looking for.”