| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Papa Jack" |
| Date: |
04 May 2004 11:44:57 AM |
| Object: |
Reasons for Abortions |
_ABOUT_, Women's Issues, Abortion Statistics from Nikki Katz
http://womensissues.about.com/cs/abortionstats/a/aaabortionstats.htm
_________________________________________________________________________
Excerpts:
* 47% of abortions are performed on women who have
already had one or more abortions
Abortion Statistics - Decision to Have an Abortion (U.S.)
* 25.5% of women deciding to have an abortion want
to postpone childbearing
* 21.3% of women cannot afford a baby<
* 14.1% of women have a relationship issue or their
partner does not want a child
* 12.2% of women are too young (their parents or
others object to the pregnancy)
* 10.8% of women feel a child will disrupt their
education or career
* 7.9% of women want no (more) children
* 3.3% of women have an abortion due to a risk to
fetal health
* 2.8% of women have an abortion due to a risk to
maternal health
_________________________________________________________________________
Papa Jack comments:
At times, Pro-Aborts criticize my statement that many
abortions are done for the convenience of the pregnant
woman's lifestyle -- rather, than for reasons related
to actual emergencies.
That doesn't mean I am not sympathetic to how upsetting
an unwanted pregnancy can be to a woman. I do emphatize
with couples who have reasons not to get pregnant, but
we are talking about homicide and inconvenience is
simply not adequate defense.
Another related point is the fact that almost half of
the women having abortions have previously had one or
more abortions. That reduces my sympathy factor a
great deal.
Thanks for considering my point of view.
.
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
08 May 2004 06:11:24 PM |
|
|
"Flower Power" <Liberation@spamless.net> wrote in message
news:3uqdnfzeZ56b9QDdRVn-ug@heartoftn.net...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:eO2dnQLuOtjhjwDd4p2dnA@comcast.com...
"Flower Power" <Liberation@spamless.net> wrote in message
news:eOudneU8UvHflwDd4p2dnA@heartoftn.net...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:vtmdnVey1-dGRAHdRVn-ig@comcast.com...
"Flower Power" <Petunias@spamless.net> wrote in message
news:p4idnQfJacydogHdRVn-uw@heartoftn.net...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:LoydnU6VeoCeYgbdRVn-hw@comcast.com...
"Flower Power" <Petunias@spamless.net> wrote in message
news:gZGdnVg__a9RYAbdRVn-gQ@heartoftn.net...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:YbadncpZDbQKdAbdRVn-gw@comcast.com...
"Flower Power" <Petunias@spamless.net> wrote in message
No one want's to shut you up. What we want to do is KEEP
people
like
you
out of women's private lives where you don't belong.
=========================================
Can you name any woman that I personally entered into their
private
lives
where I didn't belong?
Evidence will be required for any lies you try to pass
=====================================
ALL the women who you would remove their CHOICE from - every
women
of
child
baring age!
Again, you lie
** Again YOU lie.
I wouldn't remove anyone's right to choice, I never tried too,
and
I
never
would.
** Then why are you here? To SUPPORT a women's CHOICE to abort?
To discuss the issue of abortion and share my view points on it.
For
some
reason you got
discussing issues confussed with forcing and trying to remove
rights....what
a pity
======================
Oh, I see - so now you're supporting a woman's RIGHT to a safe
abortion.
Good. :-)
======================================
Unlike you I don't discriminate. I don't single out my support of a
persons
right to choose based on their sex
$$ Any pregnant men you know of? ;-)
As I said I don't discriminate and single out choice for one sex only like
you do.
I do not support the choice of abortion
$$ Then don't say you support women's rights to a safe abortion.
So in other words you must support the choice in order to support choice
Is that what you are saying?
Do you know what the difference is?
Probably not
$$ Do you?
Oh yea I certainly do.
Answer this.
Are you saying that in order to support a persons right to choose, you have
to support the choice?
.
|
|
|
| User: "MyTwoAngels" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
09 May 2004 06:38:01 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 8 May 2004 19:11:24 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Flower Power" <Liberation@spamless.net> wrote in message
news:3uqdnfzeZ56b9QDdRVn-ug@heartoftn.net...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:eO2dnQLuOtjhjwDd4p2dnA@comcast.com...
"Flower Power" <Liberation@spamless.net> wrote in message
news:eOudneU8UvHflwDd4p2dnA@heartoftn.net...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:vtmdnVey1-dGRAHdRVn-ig@comcast.com...
"Flower Power" <Petunias@spamless.net> wrote in message
news:p4idnQfJacydogHdRVn-uw@heartoftn.net...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:LoydnU6VeoCeYgbdRVn-hw@comcast.com...
"Flower Power" <Petunias@spamless.net> wrote in message
news:gZGdnVg__a9RYAbdRVn-gQ@heartoftn.net...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:YbadncpZDbQKdAbdRVn-gw@comcast.com...
"Flower Power" <Petunias@spamless.net> wrote in message
No one want's to shut you up. What we want to do is KEEP
people
like
you
out of women's private lives where you don't belong.
=========================================
Can you name any woman that I personally entered into their
private
lives
where I didn't belong?
Evidence will be required for any lies you try to pass
=====================================
ALL the women who you would remove their CHOICE from - every
women
of
child
baring age!
Again, you lie
** Again YOU lie.
I wouldn't remove anyone's right to choice, I never tried too,
and
I
never
would.
** Then why are you here? To SUPPORT a women's CHOICE to abort?
To discuss the issue of abortion and share my view points on it.
For
some
reason you got
discussing issues confussed with forcing and trying to remove
rights....what
a pity
======================
Oh, I see - so now you're supporting a woman's RIGHT to a safe
abortion.
Good. :-)
======================================
Unlike you I don't discriminate. I don't single out my support of a
persons
right to choose based on their sex
$$ Any pregnant men you know of? ;-)
As I said I don't discriminate and single out choice for one sex only like
you do.
Yes you do, you malcontent misogynistic *****. You constantly do by
degrading them by lying to them about the abortion issue. You
give them ***** when they do not conform to your immoral standards.
I do not support the choice of abortion
$$ Then don't say you support women's rights to a safe abortion.
So in other words you must support the choice in order to support choice
Is that what you are saying?
Do you know what the difference is?
Probably not
$$ Do you?
Oh yea I certainly do.
Answer this.
Are you saying that in order to support a persons right to choose, you have
to support the choice?
Are you saying that in order for somebody to be Pro-Choice, they must
have a preferred choice over what the pregnant woman wants?
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Pro-Choice
pro-choice (pr-chois)
adj.
Favoring or supporting the legal right of women and girls to
choose whether or not to continue a pregnancy to term.
(No support for any particular choice there.)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lawrence E. McKnight" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
07 May 2004 07:42:35 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 7 May 2004 09:14:57 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Flower Power" <FlowersAreFree@womans.net> wrote in message
news:l9SdnQONOsBlawfdRVn-sw@heartoftn.net...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:YYidnWnxxe7AQAfdRVn-sA@comcast.com...
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:uuml90dta8p6t5luhvoc8n0h6khb2o4bsl@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 20:42:36 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
...
That isn't pretending to know a position any better, it is expressing
an
opinion on a issue.
No, it is pretending to know what is "better" or "right" for another
person.
No, it is a matter of right and wrong.
* IN YOUR OPINION ONLY. Who died and left you boss? Just because YOU
believe it's wrong doesn't make it wrong.
That is correct in my opinion...too bad you want to shut peoples opinion out
by lying about them
It doesn't work, at least not with me it doesn't
It is WRONG to abort at a late stage.
Actually it is wrong PERIOD to abort at all
It isn't about what is better or right for her, it is about what is
right
and what is wrong.
* IN YOUR OPINION ONLY.
Am I not allowed to have an opinion????
Yes, you are entitled to an opinion. However, you tendancy to present
your opionions a objective truth make you look like a foolish control
freak.
Or do we need to ask you.
-
Larry
(this space unintentionally left blank .....
make obvious deletion for email
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Galen Hekhuis" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
07 May 2004 08:33:18 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 7 May 2004 09:14:57 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
...
Am I not allowed to have an opinion????
...
You can have an opinion all you want. When you try to enforce those
opinions by law, legislation, government influence, whatever, it is
important that you be able to back up those opinions with something else
that your personal conception of "right" and "wrong."
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
We are the CroMagnon of the future
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Galen Hekhuis" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
06 May 2004 07:53:32 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 6 May 2004 20:51:31 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
No, it is a matter of right and wrong.
It is WRONG to abort at a late stage.
Actually it is wrong PERIOD to abort at all
It isn't about what is better or right for her, it is about what is right
and what is wrong.
More correctly it would be your perception of what is right and wrong. Why
not let the person involved decide what is right or wrong on a case by case
basis?
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
We are the CroMagnon of the future
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
06 May 2004 08:16:35 PM |
|
|
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ednl90l9204vb8oq9q620sjgre25boh1e0@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 20:51:31 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
No, it is a matter of right and wrong.
It is WRONG to abort at a late stage.
Actually it is wrong PERIOD to abort at all
It isn't about what is better or right for her, it is about what is right
and what is wrong.
More correctly it would be your perception of what is right and wrong.
Correct, it is my position.
Why
not let the person involved decide what is right or wrong on a case by
case
basis?
I am not intefering with any woman making that decision
I will however vote for any politician that is willing to ban late term
abortions
WITH the exception that a late term abortion can happen if and ONLY if the
woman's life
is in danger and there is absolutely no other possible method that can be
used that can save
both her life and the unborn childs
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lawrence E. McKnight" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
07 May 2004 07:34:37 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 6 May 2004 21:16:35 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ednl90l9204vb8oq9q620sjgre25boh1e0@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 20:51:31 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
No, it is a matter of right and wrong.
It is WRONG to abort at a late stage.
Actually it is wrong PERIOD to abort at all
It isn't about what is better or right for her, it is about what is right
and what is wrong.
More correctly it would be your perception of what is right and wrong.
Correct, it is my position.
Why
not let the person involved decide what is right or wrong on a case by
case
basis?
I am not intefering with any woman making that decision
I will however vote for any politician that is willing to ban late term
abortions
WITH the exception that a late term abortion can happen if and ONLY if the
woman's life
is in danger and there is absolutely no other possible method that can be
used that can save
both her life and the unborn childs
Ah, you inadvertanly answered the question you dodged someplace else,
when you were blathering about you supporting the right of a woman to
make a legal choice. You DO want to take away that right.
-
Larry
(this space unintentionally left blank .....
make obvious deletion for email
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Galen Hekhuis" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
06 May 2004 08:23:53 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 6 May 2004 21:16:35 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
I am not intefering with any woman making that decision
I will however vote for any politician that is willing to ban late term
abortions
...
Do you really think voting for politicians that propose legislation
enforcing your opinion on this is not interfering with women's decisions?
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
We are the CroMagnon of the future
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
06 May 2004 08:35:46 PM |
|
|
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:g0pl90pomfrt83o4557rr5gemgqb3ngb4s@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 21:16:35 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
I am not intefering with any woman making that decision
I will however vote for any politician that is willing to ban late term
abortions
...
Do you really think voting for politicians that propose legislation
enforcing your opinion on this is not interfering with women's decisions?
I think voting for politicians that I like is my right.
And I agree with the more than 50% of Americans who view late term abortions
as being wrong
and support it being stopped.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Galen Hekhuis" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
06 May 2004 08:44:41 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 6 May 2004 21:35:46 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Galen Hekhuis" < > wrote in message
news:g0pl90pomfrt83o4557rr5gemgqb3ngb4s@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 21:16:35 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
I am not intefering with any woman making that decision
I will however vote for any politician that is willing to ban late term
abortions
...
Do you really think voting for politicians that propose legislation
enforcing your opinion on this is not interfering with women's decisions?
I think voting for politicians that I like is my right.
I can see voting on budget stuff and national defense and all that, and I
can see voting for politicians who support my opinion on that, but I can't
see voting for someone who would want to enact legislation forcing my moral
opinions on others.
And I agree with the more than 50% of Americans who view late term abortions
as being wrong
and support it being stopped.
I thought you considered it a matter of right or wrong, so why do you
appeal to its (supposed) popularity?
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
We are the CroMagnon of the future
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
06 May 2004 09:06:14 PM |
|
|
"Galen Hekhuis" <> wrote in message
news:j6ql90hjig5pavnhotpjbtcusmlndmstqf@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 21:35:46 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Galen Hekhuis" < > wrote in message
news:g0pl90pomfrt83o4557rr5gemgqb3ngb4s@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 21:16:35 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
I am not intefering with any woman making that decision
I will however vote for any politician that is willing to ban late
term
abortions
...
Do you really think voting for politicians that propose legislation
enforcing your opinion on this is not interfering with women's
decisions?
I think voting for politicians that I like is my right.
I can see voting on budget stuff and national defense and all that, and I
can see voting for politicians who support my opinion on that, but I can't
see voting for someone who would want to enact legislation forcing my
moral
opinions on others.
We all have issues that we find important. What can I say?
If you had a politician that was going to ban abortion entirely, would you
vote against him or her simply based on that position?
And I agree with the more than 50% of Americans who view late term
abortions
as being wrong
and support it being stopped.
I thought you considered it a matter of right or wrong, so why do you
appeal to its (supposed) popularity?
Just showing you I am not the only American who feels that way
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
We are the CroMagnon of the future
.
|
|
|
| User: "Galen Hekhuis" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
06 May 2004 09:17:16 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 6 May 2004 22:06:14 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
We all have issues that we find important. What can I say?
The person involved knows best. That's what you can say. In fact, you did
say that.
If you had a politician that was going to ban abortion entirely, would you
vote against him or her simply based on that position?
Yes. I think the people involved know better than any politician. I would
not vote for any politician who, with respect to abortion, was unable to
accept the notion that those involved know best.
Just showing you I am not the only American who feels that way
Have I suggested that I am unaware that you are American and not alone in
your ideas?
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
We are the CroMagnon of the future
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
07 May 2004 08:07:11 AM |
|
|
"Galen Hekhuis" <> wrote in message
news:ntrl90prccjqp6t09u3qvlp87jtng1a3l5@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 22:06:14 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
We all have issues that we find important. What can I say?
The person involved knows best. That's what you can say. In fact, you
did
say that.
If you had a politician that was going to ban abortion entirely, would
you
vote against him or her simply based on that position?
Yes.
o.k. then, we both agree it is an issue that is important.
I think the people involved know better than any politician. I would
not vote for any politician who, with respect to abortion, was unable to
accept the notion that those involved know best.
Just showing you I am not the only American who feels that way
Have I suggested that I am unaware that you are American and not alone in
your ideas?
I didn't say that
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
We are the CroMagnon of the future
.
|
|
|
| User: "Galen Hekhuis" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
07 May 2004 08:28:20 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 7 May 2004 09:07:11 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Galen Hekhuis" < > wrote in message
news:ntrl90prccjqp6t09u3qvlp87jtng1a3l5@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 22:06:14 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
We all have issues that we find important. What can I say?
The person involved knows best. That's what you can say. In fact, you
did
say that.
If you had a politician that was going to ban abortion entirely, would
you
vote against him or her simply based on that position?
Yes.
o.k. then, we both agree it is an issue that is important.
I guess. If you proposed a law that would require people to be of a
specific religion, I would oppose that. You might remark (correctly) that
both of us agree that it is an important issue, but then you wouldn't be
saying much.
I think the people involved know better than any politician. I would
not vote for any politician who, with respect to abortion, was unable to
accept the notion that those involved know best.
Just showing you I am not the only American who feels that way
Have I suggested that I am unaware that you are American and not alone in
your ideas?
I didn't say that
"Just showing you I am not the only American who feels that way."
You seemed to assume either that I was unaware that you were American or
that I thought you might be alone in your beliefs. You are now denying
what you said in a post previously?
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
We are the CroMagnon of the future
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
07 May 2004 08:43:26 AM |
|
|
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:g83n909601oliqq766cg9bggskibi76ree@4ax.com...
On Fri, 7 May 2004 09:07:11 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ntrl90prccjqp6t09u3qvlp87jtng1a3l5@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 22:06:14 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
We all have issues that we find important. What can I say?
The person involved knows best. That's what you can say. In fact, you
did
say that.
If you had a politician that was going to ban abortion entirely, would
you
vote against him or her simply based on that position?
Yes.
o.k. then, we both agree it is an issue that is important.
I guess. If you proposed a law that would require people to be of a
specific religion, I would oppose that.
So would I, I would never think of supporting a law like that.
You might remark (correctly) that
both of us agree that it is an important issue, but then you wouldn't be
saying much.
I think the people involved know better than any politician. I would
not vote for any politician who, with respect to abortion, was unable
to
accept the notion that those involved know best.
Just showing you I am not the only American who feels that way
Have I suggested that I am unaware that you are American and not alone
in
your ideas?
I didn't say that
"Just showing you I am not the only American who feels that way."
Yea and?
You seemed to assume either that I was unaware that you were American or
that I thought you might be alone in your beliefs. You are now denying
what you said in a post previously?
I think you read too much into things just to look for something to *****
about.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
06 May 2004 08:24:08 PM |
|
|
Osprey wrote:
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ednl90l9204vb8oq9q620sjgre25boh1e0@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 20:51:31 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
No, it is a matter of right and wrong.
It is WRONG to abort at a late stage.
Actually it is wrong PERIOD to abort at all
It isn't about what is better or right for her, it is about what is right
and what is wrong.
More correctly it would be your perception of what is right and wrong.
Correct, it is my position.
Why
not let the person involved decide what is right or wrong on a case by
case
basis?
I am not intefering with any woman making that decision
I will however vote for any politician that is willing to ban late term
abortions
WITH the exception that a late term abortion can happen if and ONLY if the
woman's life
is in danger and there is absolutely no other possible method that can be
used that can save
both her life and the unborn childs
Two questions:
What about cases of severe fetal deformity like the photos Mizzy's been
posting: IOW totally unable to survive after birth? They would pose risk
of moderate to severe injury and psychological damage to the woman but
not put her life at risk.
And who is going to decide if the life- saving abortion is necessary and
legal? Remember there is a time frame involved, so a state board would
not be an acceptable option: by the time they got around to answering
she'd be dead.
--
--sexkitten--They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
06 May 2004 08:46:19 PM |
|
|
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_two_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2g06teF34hnvU1@uni-berlin.de...
Osprey wrote:
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ednl90l9204vb8oq9q620sjgre25boh1e0@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 20:51:31 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
No, it is a matter of right and wrong.
It is WRONG to abort at a late stage.
Actually it is wrong PERIOD to abort at all
It isn't about what is better or right for her, it is about what is
right
and what is wrong.
More correctly it would be your perception of what is right and wrong.
Correct, it is my position.
Why
not let the person involved decide what is right or wrong on a case by
case
basis?
I am not intefering with any woman making that decision
I will however vote for any politician that is willing to ban late term
abortions
WITH the exception that a late term abortion can happen if and ONLY if
the
woman's life
is in danger and there is absolutely no other possible method that can
be
used that can save
both her life and the unborn childs
Two questions:
What about cases of severe fetal deformity like the photos Mizzy's been
posting: IOW totally unable to survive after birth?
As sad and unfortunate as that is, I still think the child deserves to live.
Even if the child can only get 1 year of love, that is better than killing
the child.
Just because a child is deformed, doesn't mean the child doesn't deserve to
be loved.
Would it be easy? Of course not. But nothing in life worth going after is
every easy.
And there could always be a chance the child could survive. There have been
such cases.
They would pose risk
of moderate to severe injury and psychological damage to the woman but
not put her life at risk.
And who is going to decide if the life- saving abortion is necessary and
legal? Remember there is a time frame involved, so a state board would
not be an acceptable option: by the time they got around to answering
she'd be dead.
If the woman's life is truly in danger and there is absolutely no possible
way that it is guarenteed she would
survive, then I could understand the abortion. As tragic as it would be, I
could understand.
She can live and possibly give life to another child later.
--
--sexkitten--They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin
.
|
|
|
| User: "EvilZak" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
07 May 2004 07:09:18 AM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message news:<wcKdnSEg_pC2dwfdRVn-uw@comcast.com>...
If the woman's life is truly in danger and there is absolutely no possible
way that it is guarenteed she would
survive, then I could understand the abortion. As tragic as it would be, I
could understand.
She can live and possibly give life to another child later.
Classic reveal of the true face of the anti-choicer. WOmen are not
people, merely baby machines: the woman doesn't matter, all that
matters is that she gives birth at some point.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Flower Power" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
07 May 2004 12:31:09 PM |
|
|
"EvilZak" <zak@missdemeanour.idps.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1e57ec88.0405070409.7b464119@posting.google.com...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:<wcKdnSEg_pC2dwfdRVn-uw@comcast.com>...
If the woman's life is truly in danger and there is absolutely no
possible
way that it is guarenteed she would
survive, then I could understand the abortion. As tragic as it would
be, I
could understand.
She can live and possibly give life to another child later.
Classic reveal of the true face of the anti-choicer. WOmen are not
people, merely baby machines: the woman doesn't matter, all that
matters is that she gives birth at some point.
=============================
And it's so OBVIOUS in their posts. This was the same thinking in biblical
times. That's all women were valued for, to be serfs, servants and baby
machines to fill the men's tents and hovels with children. If the women
died in the process, and many did, it was little different than a goat
dying. In fact I remember seeing on TV that they valued their livestock
more than their concubines and wives. Love was seldom involved in these
"marriages." They could get another "baby machine" anywhere, but a good,
healthy swift horse was hard to find. These guys here have the same
mentality.
--
FPower.......
But look what your Jehovah god said in his bible:
Psalm 137:9
"Happy shall he be that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the
stones." (Infanticide approved by god)
======================================
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
07 May 2004 08:15:41 AM |
|
|
"EvilZak" <zak@missdemeanour.idps.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1e57ec88.0405070409.7b464119@posting.google.com...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:<wcKdnSEg_pC2dwfdRVn-uw@comcast.com>...
If the woman's life is truly in danger and there is absolutely no
possible
way that it is guarenteed she would
survive, then I could understand the abortion. As tragic as it would
be, I
could understand.
She can live and possibly give life to another child later.
Snipping out the *****
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lawrence E. McKnight" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
07 May 2004 07:39:12 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 6 May 2004 21:46:19 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_two_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2g06teF34hnvU1@uni-berlin.de...
Osprey wrote:
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ednl90l9204vb8oq9q620sjgre25boh1e0@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 20:51:31 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
No, it is a matter of right and wrong.
It is WRONG to abort at a late stage.
Actually it is wrong PERIOD to abort at all
It isn't about what is better or right for her, it is about what is
right
and what is wrong.
More correctly it would be your perception of what is right and wrong.
Correct, it is my position.
Why
not let the person involved decide what is right or wrong on a case by
case
basis?
I am not intefering with any woman making that decision
I will however vote for any politician that is willing to ban late term
abortions
WITH the exception that a late term abortion can happen if and ONLY if
the
woman's life
is in danger and there is absolutely no other possible method that can
be
used that can save
both her life and the unborn childs
Two questions:
What about cases of severe fetal deformity like the photos Mizzy's been
posting: IOW totally unable to survive after birth?
As sad and unfortunate as that is, I still think the child deserves to live.
Even if the child can only get 1 year of love, that is better than killing
the child.
Just because a child is deformed, doesn't mean the child doesn't deserve to
be loved.
Would it be easy? Of course not. But nothing in life worth going after is
every easy.
And there could always be a chance the child could survive. There have been
such cases.
Are you volunteering to provide the necessary care for that child? Or
are you wanting to impose that on the woman involved?
They would pose risk
of moderate to severe injury and psychological damage to the woman but
not put her life at risk.
And who is going to decide if the life- saving abortion is necessary and
legal? Remember there is a time frame involved, so a state board would
not be an acceptable option: by the time they got around to answering
she'd be dead.
If the woman's life is truly in danger and there is absolutely no possible
way that it is guarenteed she would
survive, then I could understand the abortion. As tragic as it would be, I
could understand.
She can live and possibly give life to another child later.
But, as usual, you pretend to have a reading disability, and didn't
answer the question. Who decides? The question is still up there.
--
--sexkitten--They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin
-
Larry
(this space unintentionally left blank .....
make obvious deletion for email
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
06 May 2004 08:48:08 PM |
|
|
Osprey wrote:
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_two_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2g06teF34hnvU1@uni-berlin.de...
Osprey wrote:
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ednl90l9204vb8oq9q620sjgre25boh1e0@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 20:51:31 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
No, it is a matter of right and wrong.
It is WRONG to abort at a late stage.
Actually it is wrong PERIOD to abort at all
It isn't about what is better or right for her, it is about what is
right
and what is wrong.
More correctly it would be your perception of what is right and wrong.
Correct, it is my position.
Why
not let the person involved decide what is right or wrong on a case by
case
basis?
I am not intefering with any woman making that decision
I will however vote for any politician that is willing to ban late term
abortions
WITH the exception that a late term abortion can happen if and ONLY if
the
woman's life
is in danger and there is absolutely no other possible method that can
be
used that can save
both her life and the unborn childs
Two questions:
What about cases of severe fetal deformity like the photos Mizzy's been
posting: IOW totally unable to survive after birth?
As sad and unfortunate as that is, I still think the child deserves to live.
Even if the child can only get 1 year of love, that is better than killing
the child.
Just because a child is deformed, doesn't mean the child doesn't deserve to
be loved.
Would it be easy? Of course not. But nothing in life worth going after is
every easy.
And there could always be a chance the child could survive. There have been
such cases.
I'm not referring to cosmetic deformity- have you seen the specimen
photos that Mizzy posted?
They would pose risk
of moderate to severe injury and psychological damage to the woman but
not put her life at risk.
And who is going to decide if the life- saving abortion is necessary and
legal? Remember there is a time frame involved, so a state board would
not be an acceptable option: by the time they got around to answering
she'd be dead.
If the woman's life is truly in danger and there is absolutely no possible
way that it is guarenteed she would
survive, then I could understand the abortion. As tragic as it would be, I
could understand.
She can live and possibly give life to another child later.
I understand that, and I agree, but who is going to be overseeing this?
You'll have to forgive me if I put no trust in bureaurocracy. Will there
be some protection for the doctors against Monday-morning quarterbacking?
--
--sexkitten--They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin
--
--sexkitten--Lead me not into temptation -- I can find the way myself.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
06 May 2004 09:08:36 PM |
|
|
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_two_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2g08afF30tluU1@uni-berlin.de...
Osprey wrote:
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_two_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2g06teF34hnvU1@uni-berlin.de...
Osprey wrote:
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ednl90l9204vb8oq9q620sjgre25boh1e0@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 20:51:31 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
No, it is a matter of right and wrong.
It is WRONG to abort at a late stage.
Actually it is wrong PERIOD to abort at all
It isn't about what is better or right for her, it is about what is
right
and what is wrong.
More correctly it would be your perception of what is right and wrong.
Correct, it is my position.
Why
not let the person involved decide what is right or wrong on a case by
case
basis?
I am not intefering with any woman making that decision
I will however vote for any politician that is willing to ban late term
abortions
WITH the exception that a late term abortion can happen if and ONLY if
the
woman's life
is in danger and there is absolutely no other possible method that can
be
used that can save
both her life and the unborn childs
Two questions:
What about cases of severe fetal deformity like the photos Mizzy's been
posting: IOW totally unable to survive after birth?
As sad and unfortunate as that is, I still think the child deserves to
live.
Even if the child can only get 1 year of love, that is better than
killing
the child.
Just because a child is deformed, doesn't mean the child doesn't deserve
to
be loved.
Would it be easy? Of course not. But nothing in life worth going after
is
every easy.
And there could always be a chance the child could survive. There have
been
such cases.
I'm not referring to cosmetic deformity- have you seen the specimen
photos that Mizzy posted?
No, I have mizzy on killfile
I know what you are talking about though, and I am referring to any
abnormality.
By the way, interesting enough this happens to be one of the issues we are
discussing in one
of my courses right now. About cell division, genes.
The class is overwelming, but very interesting.
They would pose risk
of moderate to severe injury and psychological damage to the woman but
not put her life at risk.
And who is going to decide if the life- saving abortion is necessary and
legal? Remember there is a time frame involved, so a state board would
not be an acceptable option: by the time they got around to answering
she'd be dead.
If the woman's life is truly in danger and there is absolutely no
possible
way that it is guarenteed she would
survive, then I could understand the abortion. As tragic as it would
be, I
could understand.
She can live and possibly give life to another child later.
I understand that, and I agree, but who is going to be overseeing this?
You'll have to forgive me if I put no trust in bureaurocracy. Will there
be some protection for the doctors against Monday-morning quarterbacking?
I don't know...but I am marking this because I have to go now and I will
want to get back to this.
--
--sexkitten--They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin
--
--sexkitten--Lead me not into temptation -- I can find the way myself.
.
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
06 May 2004 10:42:48 PM |
|
|
Osprey wrote:
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_two_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2g08afF30tluU1@uni-berlin.de...
Osprey wrote:
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_two_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2g06teF34hnvU1@uni-berlin.de...
Osprey wrote:
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ednl90l9204vb8oq9q620sjgre25boh1e0@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 20:51:31 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
No, it is a matter of right and wrong.
It is WRONG to abort at a late stage.
Actually it is wrong PERIOD to abort at all
It isn't about what is better or right for her, it is about what is
right
and what is wrong.
More correctly it would be your perception of what is right and wrong.
Correct, it is my position.
Why
not let the person involved decide what is right or wrong on a case by
case
basis?
I am not intefering with any woman making that decision
I will however vote for any politician that is willing to ban late term
abortions
WITH the exception that a late term abortion can happen if and ONLY if
the
woman's life
is in danger and there is absolutely no other possible method that can
be
used that can save
both her life and the unborn childs
Two questions:
What about cases of severe fetal deformity like the photos Mizzy's been
posting: IOW totally unable to survive after birth?
As sad and unfortunate as that is, I still think the child deserves to
live.
Even if the child can only get 1 year of love, that is better than
killing
the child.
Just because a child is deformed, doesn't mean the child doesn't deserve
to
be loved.
Would it be easy? Of course not. But nothing in life worth going after
is
every easy.
And there could always be a chance the child could survive. There have
been
such cases.
I'm not referring to cosmetic deformity- have you seen the specimen
photos that Mizzy posted?
No, I have mizzy on killfile
It was these:
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN013.html
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN014.html
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN019.html
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN052.html
I know what you are talking about though, and I am referring to any
abnormality.
By the way, interesting enough this happens to be one of the issues we are
discussing in one
of my courses right now. About cell division, genes.
The class is overwelming, but very interesting.
They would pose risk
of moderate to severe injury and psychological damage to the woman but
not put her life at risk.
And who is going to decide if the life- saving abortion is necessary and
legal? Remember there is a time frame involved, so a state board would
not be an acceptable option: by the time they got around to answering
she'd be dead.
If the woman's life is truly in danger and there is absolutely no
possible
way that it is guarenteed she would
survive, then I could understand the abortion. As tragic as it would
be, I
could understand.
She can live and possibly give life to another child later.
I understand that, and I agree, but who is going to be overseeing this?
You'll have to forgive me if I put no trust in bureaurocracy. Will there
be some protection for the doctors against Monday-morning quarterbacking?
I don't know...but I am marking this because I have to go now and I will
want to get back to this.
OK. If I don't answer, holler: it's because I missed your response. My
time is a bit more limited than it has been and I tend to skim, but this
interests me.
--
--sexkitten--They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin
--
--sexkitten--Lead me not into temptation -- I can find the way myself.
--
--sexkitten--
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
07 May 2004 08:10:20 AM |
|
|
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_two_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2g0f1dF31c6lU4@uni-berlin.de...
Osprey wrote:
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_two_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2g08afF30tluU1@uni-berlin.de...
Osprey wrote:
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_two_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2g06teF34hnvU1@uni-berlin.de...
Osprey wrote:
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ednl90l9204vb8oq9q620sjgre25boh1e0@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 20:51:31 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
No, it is a matter of right and wrong.
It is WRONG to abort at a late stage.
Actually it is wrong PERIOD to abort at all
It isn't about what is better or right for her, it is about what is
right
and what is wrong.
More correctly it would be your perception of what is right and
wrong.
Correct, it is my position.
Why
not let the person involved decide what is right or wrong on a case
by
case
basis?
I am not intefering with any woman making that decision
I will however vote for any politician that is willing to ban late
term
abortions
WITH the exception that a late term abortion can happen if and ONLY
if
the
woman's life
is in danger and there is absolutely no other possible method that
can
be
used that can save
both her life and the unborn childs
Two questions:
What about cases of severe fetal deformity like the photos Mizzy's
been
posting: IOW totally unable to survive after birth?
As sad and unfortunate as that is, I still think the child deserves to
live.
Even if the child can only get 1 year of love, that is better than
killing
the child.
Just because a child is deformed, doesn't mean the child doesn't
deserve
to
be loved.
Would it be easy? Of course not. But nothing in life worth going
after
is
every easy.
And there could always be a chance the child could survive. There have
been
such cases.
I'm not referring to cosmetic deformity- have you seen the specimen
photos that Mizzy posted?
No, I have mizzy on killfile
It was these:
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN013.html
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN014.html
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN019.html
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN052.html
I seen the pictures. All I can say is that is a decision between the mother
and the doctor.
Personally I don't know what I would say.
It would be a very difficult situation to have to deal with
I know what you are talking about though, and I am referring to any
abnormality.
By the way, interesting enough this happens to be one of the issues we
are
discussing in one
of my courses right now. About cell division, genes.
The class is overwelming, but very interesting.
They would pose risk
of moderate to severe injury and psychological damage to the woman but
not put her life at risk.
And who is going to decide if the life- saving abortion is necessary
and
legal? Remember there is a time frame involved, so a state board would
not be an acceptable option: by the time they got around to answering
she'd be dead.
If the woman's life is truly in danger and there is absolutely no
possible
way that it is guarenteed she would
survive, then I could understand the abortion. As tragic as it would
be, I
could understand.
She can live and possibly give life to another child later.
I understand that, and I agree, but who is going to be overseeing this?
You'll have to forgive me if I put no trust in bureaurocracy. Will there
be some protection for the doctors against Monday-morning
quarterbacking?
I don't know...but I am marking this because I have to go now and I will
want to get back to this.
OK. If I don't answer, holler: it's because I missed your response. My
time is a bit more limited than it has been and I tend to skim, but this
interests me.
O.k., back..:o)
I understand your point about asking who would oversee this.
I don't know, I guess there would have to be guidelines in place like
having more than one opinion on record that states that a late term abortion
is
the only option...I really don't know. That is a interesting question,
something that
needs to be discussed and looked into.
--
--sexkitten--They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin
--
--sexkitten--Lead me not into temptation -- I can find the way myself.
--
--sexkitten--
.
|
|
|
| User: "--sexkitten--" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
07 May 2004 08:17:09 AM |
|
|
Osprey wrote:
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_two_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2g0f1dF31c6lU4@uni-berlin.de...
Osprey wrote:
No, I have mizzy on killfile
It was these:
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN013.html
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN014.html
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN019.html
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN052.html
I seen the pictures. All I can say is that is a decision between the mother
and the doctor.
Personally I don't know what I would say.
It would be a very difficult situation to have to deal with
Amen to that.
I know what you are talking about though, and I am referring to any
abnormality.
By the way, interesting enough this happens to be one of the issues we
are
discussing in one
of my courses right now. About cell division, genes.
The class is overwelming, but very interesting.
They would pose risk
of moderate to severe injury and psychological damage to the woman but
not put her life at risk.
And who is going to decide if the life- saving abortion is necessary
and
legal? Remember there is a time frame involved, so a state board would
not be an acceptable option: by the time they got around to answering
she'd be dead.
If the woman's life is truly in danger and there is absolutely no
possible
way that it is guarenteed she would
survive, then I could understand the abortion. As tragic as it would
be, I
could understand.
She can live and possibly give life to another child later.
I understand that, and I agree, but who is going to be overseeing this?
You'll have to forgive me if I put no trust in bureaurocracy. Will there
be some protection for the doctors against Monday-morning
quarterbacking?
I don't know...but I am marking this because I have to go now and I will
want to get back to this.
OK. If I don't answer, holler: it's because I missed your response. My
time is a bit more limited than it has been and I tend to skim, but this
interests me.
O.k., back..:o)
I understand your point about asking who would oversee this.
I don't know, I guess there would have to be guidelines in place like
having more than one opinion on record that states that a late term abortion
is
the only option...I really don't know. That is a interesting question,
something that
needs to be discussed and looked into.
Amen again. That is something that would worry me greatly: I can already
foresee either women dying while they wait for an answer or doctors
being unnecessarily prosecuted for what they thought was the right decision.
--
--sexkitten--They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin
--
--sexkitten--Lead me not into temptation -- I can find the way myself.
--
--sexkitten--
--
--sexkitten--Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
07 May 2004 08:21:27 AM |
|
|
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_two_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2g1gmbF38dm9U1@uni-berlin.de...
Osprey wrote:
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_two_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2g0f1dF31c6lU4@uni-berlin.de...
Osprey wrote:
No, I have mizzy on killfile
It was these:
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN013.html
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN014.html
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN019.html
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN052.html
I seen the pictures. All I can say is that is a decision between the
mother
and the doctor.
Personally I don't know what I would say.
It would be a very difficult situation to have to deal with
Amen to that.
I know what you are talking about though, and I am referring to any
abnormality.
By the way, interesting enough this happens to be one of the issues we
are
discussing in one
of my courses right now. About cell division, genes.
The class is overwelming, but very interesting.
They would pose risk
of moderate to severe injury and psychological damage to the woman
but
not put her life at risk.
And who is going to decide if the life- saving abortion is necessary
and
legal? Remember there is a time frame involved, so a state board
would
not be an acceptable option: by the time they got around to
answering
she'd be dead.
If the woman's life is truly in danger and there is absolutely no
possible
way that it is guarenteed she would
survive, then I could understand the abortion. As tragic as it would
be, I
could understand.
She can live and possibly give life to another child later.
I understand that, and I agree, but who is going to be overseeing
this?
You'll have to forgive me if I put no trust in bureaurocracy. Will
there
be some protection for the doctors against Monday-morning
quarterbacking?
I don't know...but I am marking this because I have to go now and I
will
want to get back to this.
OK. If I don't answer, holler: it's because I missed your response. My
time is a bit more limited than it has been and I tend to skim, but this
interests me.
O.k., back..:o)
I understand your point about asking who would oversee this.
I don't know, I guess there would have to be guidelines in place like
having more than one opinion on record that states that a late term
abortion
is
the only option...I really don't know. That is a interesting question,
something that
needs to be discussed and looked into.
Amen again. That is something that would worry me greatly: I can already
foresee either women dying while they wait for an answer or doctors
being unnecessarily prosecuted for what they thought was the right
decision.
I never really considered that problem until you brought it up.
I sure sounds easy to say we want to ban this or ban that, but sometimes we
always forget
about those little things that could throw a wrench into things.
--
--sexkitten--They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin
--
--sexkitten--Lead me not into temptation -- I can find the way myself.
--
--sexkitten--
--
--sexkitten--Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Flower Power" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
06 May 2004 09:49:18 PM |
|
|
"--sexkitten--" <ladyhawk_two_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2g06teF34hnvU1@uni-berlin.de...
Osprey wrote:
"Galen Hekhuis" <ghekhuis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ednl90l9204vb8oq9q620sjgre25boh1e0@4ax.com...
On Thu, 6 May 2004 20:51:31 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
No, it is a matter of right and wrong.
It is WRONG to abort at a late stage.
Actually it is wrong PERIOD to abort at all
It isn't about what is better or right for her, it is about what is
right
and what is wrong.
More correctly it would be your perception of what is right and wrong.
Correct, it is my position.
Why
not let the person involved decide what is right or wrong on a case by
case
basis?
I am not intefering with any woman making that decision
I will however vote for any politician that is willing to ban late term
abortions
WITH the exception that a late term abortion can happen if and ONLY if
the
woman's life
is in danger and there is absolutely no other possible method that can
be
used that can save
both her life and the unborn childs
Two questions:
What about cases of severe fetal deformity like the photos Mizzy's been
posting: IOW totally unable to survive after birth? They would pose risk
of moderate to severe injury and psychological damage to the woman but
not put her life at risk.
And who is going to decide if the life- saving abortion is necessary and
legal? Remember there is a time frame involved, so a state board would
not be an acceptable option: by the time they got around to answering
she'd be dead.
=====================
Then the Ospreys of the world will claim it was god's will. They, like the
fundies, have all bases covered. Don't think for one minute they give a
crap about the mother's life or welfare. I think it's lack of concern for
the girl's welfare and the lack of care for the unwanted child they coerce
her to product that gets my goat more than anything. These "problems" then
fall on others....
--
The Flower....
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent
force for atheism ever conceived."
-= Isaac Asimov =-
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mizzyandrea" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
06 May 2004 08:06:21 PM |
|
|
It is WRONG to abort at a late stage.
Actually it is wrong PERIOD to abort at all
**********************
This is why a woman would abort at "that late stage":
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN052.html
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mizzyandrea" |
|
| Title: Re: Reasons for Abortions |
06 May 2004 08:05:07 PM |
|
|
Here's what an abortion looks like:
http://www.angelfire.com/pq/pepsii/nuva.html
This is why women have abortions in the second and third trimesters:
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN013.html
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN014.html
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN019.html
http://www-medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/PRENATAL/PREN052.html
.
|
|
|
|
