1
   

Pro Life, or Pro Choice?

 
 
trappedbyparties
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 May, 2007 04:39 pm
@Reagaknight,
Reagaknight;15133 wrote:
This is your opinion and really, I think the only way to be fair is to nitpick details. Does it really matter whether it knows the difference between life and death? Yo're killing it anyway, whether it knows it or not.

And how in the world are you supposed to know when it will die? You can't get an abortion because it might die at a young age.

And here's an account of Kathy Sparks, a former abortion worker, to throw something in the mix:

"Sometimes we lied," Kathy says. "A girl might ask what her baby was like at a certain point in the pregnancy: Was it a baby yet? Even as early as twelve weeks a baby is totally formed, he has fingerprints, turns his head, fans his toes, feels pain. But we would say 'it's not a baby yet. It's just a tissue, like a clot.'"


Children that are going to have mental dissabilities are sometimes picked out as such. You can usually tell by the way the baby is forming. The only logical thing i can come up with on how they can tell. Do you think it would be better to wait for the baby to be born and then take it off of life support and die. you do have a choice of that as well. And while we are on the subject, do you think it is ok for people to decide wether or not a person in a coma should be taken off of life support? Even if the doctor says there is a good chance of recovery. It will cost a small fortune to keep that person on life support so some people who do not have the means to fullfill that financial burdon make the desicion to take the person off of life support. As hard of a desicion as it is it must be made.
trappedbyparties
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 May, 2007 04:41 pm
@trappedbyparties,
trapped.by.parties;15138 wrote:
Children that are going to have mental dissabilities are sometimes picked out as such. You can usually tell by the way the baby is forming. The only logical thing i can come up with on how they can tell. Do you think it would be better to wait for the baby to be born and then take it off of life support and die. you do have a choice of that as well. And while we are on the subject, do you think it is ok for people to decide wether or not a person in a coma should be taken off of life support? Even if the doctor says there is a good chance of recovery. It will cost a small fortune to keep that person on life support so some people who do not have the means to fullfill that financial burdon make the desicion to take the person off of life support. As hard of a desicion as it is it must be made.


further more the person on in the coma doesn't know the diffrence either, wich can be argued.
0 Replies
 
Reagaknight
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 May, 2007 06:20 pm
@trappedbyparties,
trapped.by.parties;15138 wrote:
Children that are going to have mental dissabilities are sometimes picked out as such. You can usually tell by the way the baby is forming. The only logical thing i can come up with on how they can tell. Do you think it would be better to wait for the baby to be born and then take it off of life support and die. you do have a choice of that as well. And while we are on the subject, do you think it is ok for people to decide wether or not a person in a coma should be taken off of life support? Even if the doctor says there is a good chance of recovery. It will cost a small fortune to keep that person on life support so some people who do not have the means to fullfill that financial burdon make the desicion to take the person off of life support. As hard of a desicion as it is it must be made.


But there is no way to tell if they will die in two years. I would rather let the baby have a chance to live. Is there so much difference in the baby from the point where you can tell something of the sort and when it is born? It is a doctor's responsibility to save his patients, both of them in cases of pregnancy, if they can. It is usually possible for the baby to live, even if there is a good chance it will die. If it's definitely going to die and it isn't suffering, well, let it live as long as it will, wouldn't you rather have a few extra months if you were going to die soon?

The only person who should be able to decide that is the person on life support, who may have a will dictating what to do. It isn't other people's choice to do that.
trappedbyparties
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 May, 2007 06:24 pm
@Reagaknight,
Reagaknight;15156 wrote:
But there is no way to tell if they will die in two years. I would rather let the baby have a chance to live. Is there so much difference in the baby from the point where you can tell something of the sort and when it is born? It is a doctor's responsibility to save his patients, both of them in cases of pregnancy, if they can. It is usually possible for the baby to live, even if there is a good chance it will die. If it's definitely going to die and it isn't suffering, well, let it live as long as it will, wouldn't you rather have a few extra months if you were going to die soon?

The only person who should be able to decide that is the person on life support, who may have a will dictating what to do. It isn't other people's choice to do that.


Not true, the next of kin has that descision. Usually it will be the wife or oldest son.

It would depend on how much pain i would be in! If i get shot tomarrow and it hits a major artery and the doctors say we can only fix you were you will live for two months, i would say numb me up and let me go now painlessly.
Reagaknight
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 May, 2007 06:27 pm
@LukeN,
No, in my opinion, not in whatever law.

But is this usually the case with unborn children? I do not know. And even so, if they could, would they agree with you?
trappedbyparties
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 May, 2007 06:27 pm
@trappedbyparties,
trapped.by.parties;15157 wrote:
Not true, the next of kin has that descision. Usually it will be the wife or oldest son.

It would depend on how much pain i would be in! If i get shot tomarrow and it hits a major artery and the doctors say we can only fix you were you will live for two months, i would say numb me up and let me go now painlessly.



well i would probably take enough time to write a note to my family and a will. I don't think i would want my wife and children to see me die or know that i chose it. I would have the doctor say it happened in surgery and there was nothing we could do.
Reagaknight
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 May, 2007 06:29 pm
@trappedbyparties,
trapped.by.parties;15160 wrote:
well i would probably take enough time to write a note to my family and a will. I don't think i would want my wife and children to see me die or know that i chose it. I would have the doctor say it happened in surgery and there was nothing we could do.


You seem to have a habit of posting and then quoting it and adding an afterthought. Why don't you just wrap it all together in one post?
trappedbyparties
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 May, 2007 06:30 pm
@Reagaknight,
Reagaknight;15159 wrote:
No, in my opinion, not in whatever law.

But is this usually the case with unborn children? I do not know. And even so, if they could, would they agree with you?


I'm sorry i don't really understand this post. can you refrase the quistion?
0 Replies
 
trappedbyparties
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 May, 2007 06:31 pm
@Reagaknight,
Reagaknight;15161 wrote:
You seem to have a habit of posting and then quoting it and adding an afterthought. Why don't you just wrap it all together in one post?


becouse i think about things after i have finished posting, i know it anoys me too. maybe i should just add with edit.
0 Replies
 
Reagaknight
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 May, 2007 06:34 pm
@LukeN,
Is the pain you would have experienced the case usually with the unborn children with defects? And if so, how do you know they would think in the same terms as you?

And in my opinion, it is no one's choice to take someone off life support, not in the world of the law.
trappedbyparties
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 May, 2007 06:53 pm
@Reagaknight,
Reagaknight;15165 wrote:
Is the pain you would have experienced the case usually with the unborn children with defects? And if so, how do you know they would think in the same terms as you?

And in my opinion, it is no one's choice to take someone off life support, not in the world of the law.


well i respect your opinion, altho it is the law. Just recently my aunt had to make just that descision. my uncle had no will. It is the next of kins responsibility to take care of all of the aspects from the desicion to pull the plug to taking care of the funeral and burial and all of that.

they wouldn't think the same because they don't have much of a thought process, if they did, i don't know. would you want to go through a painfull death or a peacfull death?
0 Replies
 
Reagaknight
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 May, 2007 07:00 pm
@LukeN,
I would rather have enough time to reflect on my life and do personal religious things like repent my sins. Speaking of religion, since mine is against euthanasia, I would not do it anyway.

And the law once said that no black people could become citizens. Just because it is the law does not make it right.

Oh, and sorry about the loss of your uncle.
trappedbyparties
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 May, 2007 08:41 pm
@Reagaknight,
Reagaknight;15169 wrote:
I would rather have enough time to reflect on my life and do personal religious things like repent my sins. Speaking of religion, since mine is against euthanasia, I would not do it anyway.

And the law once said that no black people could become citizens. Just because it is the law does not make it right.

Oh, and sorry about the loss of your uncle.


these are all good points, i have been corrected the next of kin can opt to let the state take care of the burial and funeral if they are not financialy able. but it will be a low level with just a crappy casket and a hole in the ground with a square concrete with your name on it. it's called a popers burial and there is a special grant set aside for that reason.

i don't know i trust my wife to make the desicion.

and thank you.
0 Replies
 
Reagaknight
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 May, 2007 08:45 pm
@LukeN,
Of course, that is also what is done when the dead have no or disinterested relatives. Sad.
0 Replies
 
trappedbyparties
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 May, 2007 08:58 pm
@trappedbyparties,
i mean, it really doesn't matter wether it is right or wrong, it can't be controlled. like i said before, the government has yet to gain controll over the illegal drug situation. I think if nothing else they should capitalize on it and use the money for medical studies or charities or a war fund or something were it will be usefull. I mean it is going to happen regardless. we shouldn't let the fetus' just go to waist. just an idea. it sounds horrible to profit from death but the government has no problem with it in any other case of death
i mean it doesn't make it right, but it can't be controlled. I think if they make it completely illegal it will happen more often. Just let it happen, make a profit, and make certain qualifications.
0 Replies
 
scooby-doo cv
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 May, 2007 10:59 am
@LukeN,
a tainted poll
0 Replies
 
rugonnacry
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 May, 2007 11:01 am
@LukeN,
I did not read any of the posts on here so I am not responding to anyone directly.

I have a penis, therefore I do not believe I have ANY say on this subject.

Of Course I have my beliefs, but this is one subject even I won't debate.

(I just wanted another POST credit haha)
Right Wing
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 May, 2007 05:43 pm
@jatuab,
jatuab;3553 wrote:
Tell a woman she has no rights to her uterus, and see how far it gets you. In the medical world, unless a patient is going to die immediately, the doctor has to get consent from that patient to perform procedures on him/her. You can't just enforce rules exclusively because a moral question might come about, so she can do whatever she'd like. Let the woman live with her decisions and make them right as she chooses.


So, how far do we give a woman a "right to her uterus"? I mean, if that is what we are calling abortion or murdering a baby these days, as it desensitizes it. How far do we grant her "right to her uterus"? If that is what we are going with, to be consistent with your own views, you would have to grant this "right" all the way up to the day of delivery. If at any point you say that is too extreme, you are conflicting with your own views.

So, should we allow abortions up to the ninth month or even the day of delivery?
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 May, 2007 11:13 pm
@rugonnacry,
rugonnacry;17630 wrote:
I did not read any of the posts on here so I am not responding to anyone directly.

I have a penis, therefore I do not believe I have ANY say on this subject.

Of Course I have my beliefs, but this is one subject even I won't debate.

(I just wanted another POST credit haha)

YOu post whore you.
0 Replies
 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 May, 2007 12:21 am
@trappedbyparties,
Quote:
YOu post whore you.

Pot calling the Kettle black.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/09/2024 at 01:42:40