Eydawn Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 Don't you dare narrow this topic down to "baby killers" vs "women haters" as so many do... yes, some of us may be weary of this topic, as it can seem futile to re-hash arguments... but it is an important facet of our medical ethical dilemma. I agree with Michael. Come on, folks... jump in. Say something (that you actually mean, not just parroting something. Take the risk... I did. And I've been arguing this topic since I was 13 years old.) Wendy CO EMT-B
spenac Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 OK you aked for it. As most know I am anti abortion. As such I think she and the doctor should both be arrested for conspiring to and for committing murder. This was preplanned murder. Yes the plan did not go off as they wanted but ultimatly they did what they set out to do. Sorry if I offend but you asked. I have seen fetus' only a few weeks old when women miscarry and they are obviously human so I can not agree that they are not living. Plus for the it's my body it's my choice arguement, unless raped the choice of how to use your body was made when you had sex, so the consequences are yours and the guys to live with. There that should start a crap storm. You asked I answered. I will fight about this no more. Have a great day.
cynical_as_hell Posted February 18, 2009 Author Posted February 18, 2009 Good points there spenec.....the arguement of "its my body" well if you're going to spread your legs for some man then you need to be prepared for the consequences. i think that if somebody gets pregnant, chooses to abort that child, then they should be sterilized right after because apearantly they arent capable of making mature decisions. I do however feel that if a woman is raped, or there are medical reasons for an abortion, then that's a different story. We live in a society that seems to think that sex has no consequences and more and more women have the attitude of "Well i can just get an abortion." I side with spenec on this one
Dustdevil Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 I do however feel that if a woman is raped, or there are medical reasons for an abortion, then that's a different story. I fail to see how it is different. Either life has sanctity, or it does not. Who the father is is irrelevant. How about we just start euthanising all babies without fathers? Maybe euthanise all homeless people too? See the problem there? Rape or not, the baby is still human life. Deal with it.
Mateo_1387 Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 I still have not totally made my mind up on this issue, but this is how I currently am viewing the practice of abortion... Abortion should only be done during the first trimester, except for cases of rape or significant risk to maternal health. The other exception I can see is if the child has a significant chance of death, or being still born, as in a mercy abortion/euthanasia. After 16 weeks, the fetus forms structures very essential for life, such as development of bone, then surfactant for the lungs. The heart and lungs develop, and start contracting to in essence 'practice'. By this point, it seems the fetus is truly a person. Before this point, the fetus seems like a cluster of cells, but definitely not a person, IMO, due to survivability. By the point the fetus is able to survive outside of the uterus, it should be considered a living being of its own accord. By this point, it should be a child, just one that is not outside of the uterus. The difference of the child in the uterus vs. out of the uterus is just a matter of location. The child can survive outside of the uterus with some of our great medical technology, but it is better for it to be in the uterus, to have natural development. So, by the time the child is definitely able to survive, I would consider an abortion murder. The child's survivability is not in question, just the location. Should you be able to abort a child in the later stages of development, then why not just murder your kids that are 1 year old or less? They can both survive. Do we not do it because we can then see the child? If the child can survive outside of the uterus, then the difference between the unborn child and born child is location. I would say that if a woman has not decided by the first trimester to abort a fetus, then by default, the decision is to house the child for the last six months of development. These are just my brief thoughts. I am welcome to some counter discussion, as it should help guide other, as myself, who have not totally made up their mind on the subject. (Also, if I did not make a point clear, just tell me and I can try and explain it better.) Mateo
cynical_as_hell Posted February 18, 2009 Author Posted February 18, 2009 I fail to see how it is different. Either life has sanctity, or it does not. Who the father is is irrelevant. How about we just start euthanising all babies without fathers? Maybe euthanise all homeless people too? See the problem there? Rape or not, the baby is still human life. Deal with it. would you want to go through all the things that pregnancy causes and give birth to a child that was only concieved due to an act of a violent crime??? you are better off staying out of this one unless you can understand fully what changes women endure and the aftermath of a pregnancy before you decide that even if a woman was raped that she should still have that child.
Happiness Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 Well first in a perfect world the dr would have told the girl that she was to far along and she would have to carry on with the pregnancy. Once again we are reminded that we do not live in a perfect world. The topic of Abortion is so explosive that people have been murdered over it. I would like to remind those that would just love to slam the pro life or pro abortion with comments like baby killers that we have all been taught respect for others and to please use it on this subject. We are all entittled to our opinion. Second is that the topic is that the doc lost his license for this proceedure. There are laws that govern this medical proceedure and they should be followed to the T. This clinic clearly knew the girl was 23 weeks pregnant and proceeded along, they then create false documentation, the baby has by way of autopsy inhaled air, and the baby is seen by the mother wiggling around. The mother then watches the nurse take that child and throw it in a garbage bag and taken away to be found later in a cardboard box in the closet. Everything about this case is just wrong and should be punished to the fullest. Last lets take a look at the girl. They really don't say alot about her good or bad so its hard to decide if this is a pot of gold as quoted in the artical. She is a young woman who may have been raped, have parents that literaly would kill her if they found out or any other asortment of answers. She wittness the death of her daughter and with the knowledge that she was the one that made that decision. Im sorry but I think that vision is going to be with her for the rest of her life, and that is a life time punishment, it will never go away. The other point that should be considered is that if we don't have licensed clinics then you are going to find that the girl will either try potions, use coathangers, or find other ways to terminate the pregnancy. Boys have been known to punch the girl in the stomach to terminate it. Or the other senerio is that the child survives the abortion and has disabilities or grow up abused because they were not wanted in the first place. This topic can go in so many ways.
Dustdevil Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 would you want to go through all the things that pregnancy causes and give birth to a child that was only concieved due to an act of a violent crime??? Nope. But they probably wouldn't be interested in a lot of the stuff I have endured in life either. Life sucks, then you die. Period. Shyte happens. The baby did not rape her, therefore the baby should not be punished with death. you are better off staying out of this one unless you can understand fully what changes women endure and the aftermath of a pregnancy before you decide that even if a woman was raped that she should still have that child. It's all irrelevant. A baby is a baby, whether the father was a rapist or not. Kill the rapist, not the baby. Perhaps YOU should stay out of this one until you grow some ethics. The topic of Abortion is so explosive that people have been murdered over it. Not enough of them, that's for sure.
chbare Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 The interest is there. I think we're all just battle weary from the topic, which has been hashed out here before. It's no secret who here is Pro Life and who is pro murder. And nobody's mind is changing over yet another tread to argue it. So many of us simply choose to save our energy for other, less emotional and less futile discussions. Interesting choice of words Dustdevil. However, I agree. When approaching this topic we need to realize, regardless of how, when, and where we perform an abortion, we are killing a human being. There really is no way around this fact IMHO. Take care, chbare.
Katiebug Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 I also agree that a life is a life no matter how much time has passed since conception. HOWEVER, if it was my wife or daughter that was raped and impregnated, I would not be okay with continuing with the pregnancy. Nor would I be okay with it if my wife's or daughter's life was on the line due to a pregnancy. I also have a problem if the fetus is seen to be seriously deformed or brain damaged. I suppose that makes me a hypocrite. That's just how I see it.
Recommended Posts