atloldskin Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 It should be banned, plain and simple! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 Originally posted by atloldskin It should be banned, plain and simple! Well, nice to finally see an intelligent post on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballhenry Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 Originally posted by bearrock Well, nice to finally see an intelligent post on the subject. well i for one absolutely beleive the practice is entirely cruel and wrong. however, i misunderstood you earlier, I was under the impression that you were vying for its legalization though I dont think thats your goal. I do understand your point about the mothers health, and yes I do agree to an extent. However something more humane has to be done in those situations rather than caving a babies skull in. It has been proven that mothers have 'abused' the health procedure as a way to have partial birth abortion. IF, and only IF it has to be done (only in cases of risk to the mothers life) then it should be done SOME other way and the mother needs to be investigated and her health risk confirmed, too many abuse...I still stand by my original position though, it is an evil practice that many abuse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 didn't you start this thread before in a previous flame attempt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballhenry Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 Originally posted by Bufford didn't you start this thread before in a previous flame attempt? what???? first off no and secondly flame attempt? do you support partial birth abortion so much that this thread offends you? why post if you have nothing substantial to say?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 #1. Only in extreme situations where the mother's life is in danger and/or they are sure the unborn child is severely disabled. #2. This has become your M.O., start a thread where you already know what the responses of people are going to be based of other threads you started. The party line/ personal beliefs on this topic are out there if you use the search function. You didn't learn them from the Shiavo thread(s) you started? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballhenry Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 Originally posted by Bufford #1. Only in extreme situations where the mother's life is in danger and/or they are sure the unborn child is severely disabled. #2. This has become your M.O., start a thread where you already know what the responses of people are going to be based of other threads you started. The party line/ personal beliefs on this topic are out there if you use the search function. You didn't learn them from the Shiavo thread(s) you started? Firstly, wrong I dont know what the responses are (im not ms. cleo). Secondly, this is a FORUM, its to discuss topics that may interest others, if you dont find a thread interesting or necessary to type in then guess what? DONT POST. Lastly, why does everything have to be looked at through the search function, opinions and times change. Should I search for peoples opinions of Bush from a year ago for today?? dont think so. So I do agree with your #1 statment, but your #2 is extremely unnecessary, I dont go into threads you start and insult you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 This is how easy the search funcation is. Question about Michael Schiavo Where will President Bush rank? How long do people usually last without water and food.... Opinion of Jane Fonda, and John Kerry & Vietnam Opinion of Bill O'Reilly and Fox News Channel Any good ideas on how to earn alot of money?? Howard Dean!?!?! Are Kerry supporters insane? Partial Birth Abortion These the the calling cards of the message board flamer. Designed to get people pissed, more than start a discussing. If John McCain can forgive Jane Fonda......then you shouldn't have any more problems. A 1 sentence similar response could be given to all of those. Flame On! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 After looking at those pictures, it certainly looks like a person to me in every single one of them. AS a new father as of may 4th, I cant believe some one could even consider doing something like this to a child. I think if every one could see these pictures, the majority of them would conclude, the whole entire practice is screwed up. I remember watching his heart beat when he was only a couple of weeks old in the womb, he is by far the greatest gift I have ever been given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 I think there are a lot of Repbs that are for abortion, to a degree, but don't want to say it. Personally, I'm against the partial birth thing, and I'm against using abortion of rbirth control, but up unitl the end of the first trimester, I think you should have a choice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 Don't a certain percent of pregnancies misscarriage so early in the pregnancy that the woman doesn't even know it? If so, I guess god is for abortion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 Originally posted by NoCalMike Don't a certain percent of pregnancies misscarriage so early in the pregnancy that the woman doesn't even know it? If so, I guess god is for abortion. Cute :doh: I think the best way to reduce abortion is education and science proving viability at a early stage,combined with some type of support system for women who do not wish to raise a child. I think sarge is correct,most people are not against abortion when there is a real risk to the mother or a compelling need for it. However the way the laws are now promote extremism on both sides. The thought of someone using it as birth control should disgust anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballhenry Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 Originally posted by Bufford This is how easy the search funcation is. These the the calling cards of the message board flamer. Designed to get people pissed, more than start a discussing. If John McCain can forgive Jane Fonda......then you shouldn't have any more problems. A 1 sentence similar response could be given to all of those. Flame On! sorry if you feel that way but thats not my aim. my aim is to start discussion which I have done (whether u agree with my points or not) numerous times. again, if your not interested in a thread then WHY post?? When I see a thread that doesnt interest me for any reason, then guess what? i DONT post, its pretty simple really...and again my aim is not to offend anyone and i find it interesting that thread about partial birth abortion offended you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballhenry Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 Originally posted by GoSkins561 After looking at those pictures, it certainly looks like a person to me in every single one of them. AS a new father as of may 4th, I cant believe some one could even consider doing something like this to a child. I think if every one could see these pictures, the majority of them would conclude, the whole entire practice is screwed up. I remember watching his heart beat when he was only a couple of weeks old in the womb, he is by far the greatest gift I have ever been given. amen brother Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NY_Skinsfan Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 I never thought about partial birth abortion really until the situation came up with my sister...In her 4th month the placenta started to tear away from the uterin wall...this was causing bleeding and her body starting acting as if the baby was being born....well, after the doctor explained all of her options they decided to go ahead with the partial birth abortion....It was the best thing to do for both the baby and the mother.... I get so bothered by people who say it is absolutely wrong...no ifs, ands, or butts. I'll just say, if there ever does come a time when this situation happens to you you might think completely different to how you think now. My sister was completely devastated that she had to do what she did but she knows it was the best thing for both of them. Especially since my wife and my sister's other sister in law were all pregnant at the same time, my sister had to sit back and watch the other two women.... I just found out two days ago that my sister is pregnant again. She was able to move on with her life. I am very proud of her for making the tremendously difficult decisions and I will always support her. Before all this happened I would have agreed that partial birth abortion is just wrong...but once you have seen someone live through the horrible decision making...maybe we as a society should be a little more open-minded just in case it happens to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 Originally posted by NY_Skinsfan I never thought about partial birth abortion really until the situation came up with my sister...In her 4th month the placenta started to tear away from the uterin wall...this was causing bleeding and her body starting acting as if the baby was being born....well, after the doctor explained all of her options they decided to go ahead with the partial birth abortion....It was the best thing to do for both the baby and the mother.... I get so bothered by people who say it is absolutely wrong...no ifs, ands, or butts. I'll just say, if there ever does come a time when this situation happens to you you might think completely different to how you think now. My sister was completely devastated that she had to do what she did but she knows it was the best thing for both of them. Especially since my wife and my sister's other sister in law were all pregnant at the same time, my sister had to sit back and watch the other two women.... I just found out two days ago that my sister is pregnant again. She was able to move on with her life. I am very proud of her for making the tremendously difficult decisions and I will always support her. Before all this happened I would have agreed that partial birth abortion is just wrong...but once you have seen someone live through the horrible decision making...maybe we as a society should be a little more open-minded just in case it happens to us. well, after the doctor explained all of her options they decided to go ahead with the partial birth abortion....It was the best thing to do for both the baby and the mother.... Since you took the time to post this... might i ask what the other options were? At 4 months the only reason it was considered a partial birth sounds like it was because of the body making it so... otherwise its just an abortion for the well being of the mother... You always have to discount the 12% on this side and the 12% on that side and deal with the 76% in the middle... The health of the Mother always outweighs the health of the child during pregnancy... Then you go down the slippery slope of: What is considered the well being of the mother? 30% chance of death? hmmm 50%... 90%.. if you were told you have a 28% chance of death would the 30% cap seem fair... Theres always an (other) side.. but then again, if it was easy, there'd be no reason for debate... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NY_Skinsfan Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 I was not in the hospital room when the doctor was talking to my sister about the options...so no, I don't know the other options specifically, I just trust that my sister made the best decision. I do remember that at first before they went ahead with the procedure the doctor had said that the baby was going to have severe physical and mental disabilities without question. After the procedure the doctor did tell my sister he believed the baby was not going to live inside her past the 5 month anyway so what they did was the best thing. And by the way, out of respect for the human life that was lost my sister did give the little boy the name that they were planning to give him and had him cremated...We had a small service with just family to remember him and he will always be in the family room of my sister's house because that is where everyone is when they are at her house.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 Originally posted by footballhenry So your saying partial birth abortion SHOULDNT be banned?? could you explain more why you think this should be kept legal? To keep the mothers health before the fetus'. Lets save the person who is actually living, instead of a group of cells. I just don't get it, pro-death and anti-abortion. . . Pro-church and anti-welfare. Kind of sounds like a hypocritical platform if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbear Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 As I sit here about to lose a good friend to my wife from a similar complication, NY_Skinsfan, I can honestly say I've heard of similar situations. My friend is currently in a coma after giving birth on Friday night at about 6 months (6 days after earliest viability date, but I won't swear to the 6 months part). She gave birth to twins at just over a pound each. She is very religous, and wouldn't have considered the abortion...but don't think it never crossed my mind to wish it was an option for her. She and her doctors knew the birth would be dangerous, and suggested abortion as an option early on (and it came up again later on when they started to tear away from the wall). Right now, she has about a 1 in 5 chance of living. The father said to save the mother before the procedure. The mother said save the children. It never came down to a choice (thankfully). Who needs that kind of guilt? I stand by her right to chose, but I feel for all the families that would be forced down the road she is on if those one this board got to make the laws. That's a tough road with the father now potentialy raising 4 kids alone and two of them with all the likely health problems of premature kids. For those who would mandate the procedure as illegal, realize, you are making that decision for many families in the same situation as my friend. You may approve of her choice. You may even laud it, but do you have the right to expect all to make that choice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 Originally posted by Bufford This is how easy the search funcation is. These the the calling cards of the message board flamer. Designed to get people pissed, more than start a discussing. If John McCain can forgive Jane Fonda......then you shouldn't have any more problems. A 1 sentence similar response could be given to all of those. Flame On! i don't think "Flame On!" is a sentence, maybe a phrase... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 Originally posted by chomerics To keep the mothers health before the fetus'. Lets save the person who is actually living, instead of a group of cells. I just don't get it, pro-death and anti-abortion. . . Pro-church and anti-welfare. Kind of sounds like a hypocritical platform if you ask me. I think by taking a look at the developement of the fetus, inside the mother womb when we are talking about partial birth abortion, you would see there are nerve endings, a beating heart, arms, legs, feet, hands, and a face with eyes nose and mouth. The link that was provided certainly has some great illustrations of the developement of the fetus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 I always say that they need to have an exception for the life of the mother...but where it gets really tricky is the health of the mother...because that is a huge loophole. Even the first exception can be used a a loophole, but it is harder to do it for life than for health. (though it was done frequently back before Roe-Wade, for general abortions, since they were often allowed to safe the mother's life. And doctors and others often fudged the documents to make it look like the abortions were necessary, when the real reason for the abortion in fact did not fit the criteria for giving the procedure ). I still think it is probably necessary to have such an exception though, for thev Mother's life at least, but health is way too big a loophole. I'm not sure how much it matters though, but I think even a small difference in the number of partial birth abrotions done without them being truly neccessary is probably worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 Any time, for any reason. As long as the Govt doesnt pay for it. Let them be judged by a higher authority than me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 Originally posted by gbear As I sit here about to lose a good friend to my wife from a similar complication, NY_Skinsfan, I can honestly say I've heard of similar situations. My friend is currently in a coma after giving birth on Friday night at about 6 months (6 days after earliest viability date, but I won't swear to the 6 months part). She gave birth to twins at just over a pound each. She is very religous, and wouldn't have considered the abortion...but don't think it never crossed my mind to wish it was an option for her. She and her doctors knew the birth would be dangerous, and suggested abortion as an option early on (and it came up again later on when they started to tear away from the wall). Right now, she has about a 1 in 5 chance of living. The father said to save the mother before the procedure. The mother said save the children. It never came down to a choice (thankfully). Who needs that kind of guilt? I stand by her right to chose, but I feel for all the families that would be forced down the road she is on if those one this board got to make the laws. That's a tough road with the father now potentialy raising 4 kids alone and two of them with all the likely health problems of premature kids. For those who would mandate the procedure as illegal, realize, you are making that decision for many families in the same situation as my friend. You may approve of her choice. You may even laud it, but do you have the right to expect all to make that choice? gbear, that is a truly horrible story. I really hope she makes it through with no harm. Are the twins still alive? My thoughts are with your wifes friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 Originally posted by Kilmer17 Any time, for any reason. As long as the Govt doesnt pay for it. Oh, so you are only for abortion for the people who can AFFORD it, others need not apply. Do you realize this HURTS the economy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.