Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: rhode island
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
|Originally posted by 3boys4us
What worries me is the sanctamonious, condescending, tone that many of the posters take in regards to abortion - if you don't like D&X then don't have one - it is a choice that hopefully two persons will make together without the interference of others. It is someone else's decision - not yours.
|Originally posted by Potty Diva
Again, a 6 month old fetus is not a 6 month old child. If it were your child would be 9 months old or so, at birth.
|Originally posted by Greaseball Yet another thing I don't understand - if a baby has no brain, wouldn't it have no heartbeat and no movement as well? If there were no heartbeat late in the 1st trimester, a mother probably would have an ultrasound and would then be told there was no brain. She could then decide whether to continue with the pregnancy or have a 1st tri abortion. Why on earth would she have to carry the baby to the 3rd tri and then abort it?
|She was unable to absorb the amniotic fluid and it was puddling into my uterus. This poor precious child had a lethal neurological disorder and had been unable to move for almost two months. The movements I had been feeling over the last few months had been nothing more than bubbles and fluid. Her chest cavity was unable to rise and fall to stretch her lungs to prepare them for air. It was as if she had no lungs at all. Her vital organs were atrophying. Our darling little girl was going to die.|
|Lots of mothers have difficulty healing. Major surgery is not supposed to be easy. I'd still choose it if there were any chance at all the baby would live. Lots of diabetics do not have difficulty with childbirth.|
|This particular diabetic stated that her doctor feared her ability to heal from a cesarean. Don't you think her doctor is a better judge than you?|
|I guess with this attitued you would have to say that it was fine for a mother and doctor to stab a 6 month old baby in the back of the head because she has cancer (or other fatal disease) and won't live long anyway. It would be a hardship on the parents to have to endure the mental anguish, physical endurance and financial responsibility required to care for her in the next few months before she dies anyway. I guess we should not have laws prohibiting this type of thing because it is not the government or society's decision if this child should be treated humanely.|
|Originally posted by barbara
I guess it just comes down to the fact that some people don't want to think of an aborted baby as a human. I guess this makes it easier to make that choice, and I do understand that, I've been there. I just wish we lived in a more humane society.
|Originally posted by tara
I just believe that women deserve the sovreignty to make decisions regarding their bodies, and don't believe that potential children have more value than women.
|Originally posted by oatmeal
To this statement I have quoted I respond becasue it the core of my belief that every fetus has right to life and is a human being.
You say a woman has the sovreignty to make decisions regarding her body. Well killing a baby is not making a decision over her body - it is making a decision over someone else's who has no voice to speak for him or herself.
I see it as paramount to murdering a child who is alive outside of the womb. A little tissue and a little fluid spearating him or her from the air we breathe does not make them some disposable "Object".
Partial birth abortion is barbaric and very evil in my opinion. Yes I have read all your links.
|Originally posted by MotherNatrsSon
I guess this is another vote for "no rights for women as soon as the become pregnant".
The difference between a fetus and a child is that the child can survive outside of the mother. Up to a certain point in the process that is not even a possibility and for awhile longer only by playing god and a few million dollars in machinery and resources iis it possible.
With that attitude, women become nothing more than breeding stock....
|Originally posted by oatmeal
We right to lifers get chastised for having righteous indignation... well I find that pro-choice people - with this "breeding stock" and women's rights first and always" shpiel are no less guilty of self-righteousness... it's just another side of the coin.
|We right to lifers get chastised for having righteous indignation... well I find that pro-choice people - with this "breeding stock" and women's rights first and always" shpiel are no less guilty of self-righteousness... it's just another side of the coin.|
|I guess this is another vote for "no rights for women as soon as the become pregnant".|
|46 members and 9,276 guests|
|AlmostJenny , angie6282 , averysmomma05 , blessed#7 , bluefaery , briellemag02 , captain optimism , Deborah , elliha , emmy526 , Galatea , greenemami , gryphone64 , healthy momma , hillymum , incorrigible , Jewel5811 , katelove , kathymuggle , Linda on the move , lyra33 , menshealthlist , meowmix , Milk8shake , Mirzam , newmamalizzy , oaksie68 , pulcetti , RollerCoasterMama , sageowl , samaxtics , SandiMae , sarafl , SchoolmarmDE , sciencemum , shantimama , shweta321patil , siennaflower , snaxguru55 , Springshowers , thankful85 , Tracy , VsAngela , worthy|
|Most users ever online was 449,755, 06-25-2014 at 12:21 PM.|