0
   

Abortion.What do you think about it?

 
 
BDV
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 05:05 am
I know many disabled people who are quite happy with their lives.Check out: http://www.specialolympics.org. Your comments our rather offensive to anyone who has developed or had a severe problems, I know some are terminal but there are people who have recovered from such ailments and others who are quite happy to live with them. I have yet to hear one wishing for death, although i would not doubt that it does happen.

The point here is simple, if the child was not aborted then it would be quite likely to live and be normal, even if it had been adopted to other childless parents.

Parents of a child who survives an abortion deserve to see what crime they have done, no matter what the expense is, that child has a right to life and if it fought that hard to survive the abortion then it should be allowed a chance, no matter how slim or how expensive, he/she might have a mental or physical handicap but who are you or anyone else to deny it a chance.


[quote="USAFHokie80"
Perhaps "productive" was a poor word. I'm quite sure you know what I mean, so I'm not going to fumble around with the explanation. As for you, you can't "choose" to have severe mental handicaps or choose to be tube fed or choose to have lung disease or choose to have your muscles tighten up to the point that you can't move. And if you could, you wouldn't "deserve" to die. Although, I suspect if those afflictions were to suddenly be placed upon you or the majority of reasonable people, they would wish they were dead.

That is no way to live. Immobile and quite possibly with barely enough higher brain function to even know you are alive. And as for a doctor doing "everything we can," we know there are things we cannot fix and no amount of doing or trying can help. You could leave a kid on life support for weeks or months if you want, and all you will have managed to do is to delay his death, and cost his parents hundreds of thousands of dollars.

In cases dealing with these children, I think it more kind to let them go rather than force them to keep living as a non-functional human.

Your entire argument is based on your belief that this kid would want to live. But what if he wants to die? What if he doesn't' want to live with all these machines and medical attention he needs just to survive? You would make him suffer through because you are displacing your feelings about life onto him.

I can't think of anyone that would say they would rather be alive and suffering in anguish than to just pass on.[/quote]
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 07:15 am
Really, "real life," that's your dodge? Christ Hospital, Illinois? Care to speculate on how many hospitals there are in Illinois, and how hard it is to identify any specific institution based upon so vague a title? It apparently does not occur to you that such a statement is sufficiently vague and unsupported, and sufficiently difficult to verify, as to constitute the worst sort of anecdotal evidence.

We already know that BDV rants against abortion--such statements on his part, which you gleefully took to run with, have little value other than noting it is a bald, unsubstantiated assertion by a self-professed opponent of abortion.
0 Replies
 
USAFHokie80
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 09:09 am
BDV wrote:
I know many disabled people who are quite happy with their lives.Check out: http://www.specialolympics.org. Your comments our rather offensive to anyone who has developed or had a severe problems, I know some are terminal but there are people who have recovered from such ailments and others who are quite happy to live with them. I have yet to hear one wishing for death, although i would not doubt that it does happen.

The point here is simple, if the child was not aborted then it would be quite likely to live and be normal, even if it had been adopted to other childless parents.

Parents of a child who survives an abortion deserve to see what crime they have done, no matter what the expense is, that child has a right to life and if it fought that hard to survive the abortion then it should be allowed a chance, no matter how slim or how expensive, he/she might have a mental or physical handicap but who are you or anyone else to deny it a chance.


Apparently you don't understand the disabilities these children would suffer. These aren't things that one can recover from. You say the child has a right to life, but what sort of life is that? He'll never know the life you do. His would be filled with pain and suffering. And you would have him continue to suffer for as long as a machine could keep him alive. I think that would be criminal.
0 Replies
 
BDV
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 10:37 am
I am quite aware of what can happen, and most deaths are usually to do with bleeding in the brain, the point is, if they had no abortion then the child would not have to suffer in first place, dehumanising the situation is the problem in the first place, and mothers should be made aware of what they are doing.

USAFHokie80 wrote:
BDV wrote:
I know many disabled people who are quite happy with their lives.Check out: http://www.specialolympics.org. Your comments our rather offensive to anyone who has developed or had a severe problems, I know some are terminal but there are people who have recovered from such ailments and others who are quite happy to live with them. I have yet to hear one wishing for death, although i would not doubt that it does happen.

The point here is simple, if the child was not aborted then it would be quite likely to live and be normal, even if it had been adopted to other childless parents.

Parents of a child who survives an abortion deserve to see what crime they have done, no matter what the expense is, that child has a right to life and if it fought that hard to survive the abortion then it should be allowed a chance, no matter how slim or how expensive, he/she might have a mental or physical handicap but who are you or anyone else to deny it a chance.


Apparently you don't understand the disabilities these children would suffer. These aren't things that one can recover from. You say the child has a right to life, but what sort of life is that? He'll never know the life you do. His would be filled with pain and suffering. And you would have him continue to suffer for as long as a machine could keep him alive. I think that would be criminal.
0 Replies
 
BDV
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 10:40 am
Frank quoted that source, not me, read back in the posts and you will see, and i quoted from that source

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/apr/05042505.html

Setanta wrote:
Really, "real life," that's your dodge? Christ Hospital, Illinois? Care to speculate on how many hospitals there are in Illinois, and how hard it is to identify any specific institution based upon so vague a title? It apparently does not occur to you that such a statement is sufficiently vague and unsupported, and sufficiently difficult to verify, as to constitute the worst sort of anecdotal evidence.

We already know that BDV rants against abortion--such statements on his part, which you gleefully took to run with, have little value other than noting it is a bald, unsubstantiated assertion by a self-professed opponent of abortion.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 12:55 pm
Thanks BDV for the clarification of the source. I probably had not read the previous post which contained the link.

A Google search for
Quote:
"Christ Hospital" nurse testify


yields as the #1

Christ Hospital update from http://www.illinoisrighttolife.org/newpage36.htm

Quote:
Nurse's Testimony shocks Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee

SPRINGFIELD, IL, March 27, 2001 (RFM NEWS) EXCLUSIVE RFM News has exclusively obtained a written transcript of Nurse Jill Stanek's written testimony before the Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee's hearing on the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. Stanek, a labor and delivery nurse at Christ Hospital and Medical Center in Oak Lawn, Illinois, was first to expose an abortion procedure which many are calling "live-birth abortion."

Stanek will appear in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday afternoon in Springfield. Following is a transcript of Mrs. Stanek's testimony.

*****

I am a Registered Nurse who has worked in the Labor & Delivery Department at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Illinois, for the past 5-1/2 years. Christ Hospital performs abortions during the second and even third trimesters of pregnancy.

The abortion method being called into question that Christ Hospital and other Illinois hospitals practice is called "induced labor abortion." This abortion technique sometimes results in infants being aborted alive. In the event that an infant is aborted alive at Christ Hospital, she or he is given no medical assessments or care whatsoever, but is left to die.

The induced labor abortion procedure can be performed using a couple different medications, but the goal always is to cause a pregnant woman's cervix to open so that she will deliver a premature baby who dies during the birth process or soon afterward. At Christ Hospital the physician inserts a medication called Cytotec into the mother's birth canal next to the cervix. The cervix is the opening at the bottom of the uterus that normally stays closed until a mother is about 40 weeks pregnant and ready to deliver. But Cytotec irritates the cervix and stimulates it to open early. When this happens, the pre-term baby drops out of the uterus, sometimes alive.

In the event that a baby is aborted alive at Christ Hospital, he or she is not given any medical care, but is rather given what my hospital calls "comfort care." "Comfort care" is defined as keeping the baby warm in a blanket until the baby dies, although until recently even this was not always done. The baby is then offered to the parents to hold until he or she dies.

If the parents do not want to hold their dying aborted baby, as is most often the case, it is left to nursing staff or support staff on the floor to hold the baby until he or she dies. And, until this past December, when staff did not have time or the desire to hold the baby, the baby was taken to our Soiled Utility Room and left there alone to die. Christ Hospital's comfort care policy, #WHS492, only requires that live aborted babies be checked for signs of life once an hour, or "as needed in order to verify time of death."

It is not uncommon for a live aborted babies to linger for an hour or two or even longer. At Christ Hospital, one of these babies once lived for almost an entire eight-hour shift. Last year alone, of the 13 babies that I am aware of who were aborted at Christ Hospital, at least four lived between 1-1/2 to 3 hours, two boys and two girls. Christ Hospital says that it compassionately aborts babies with very serious mental or physical handicaps. But Christ Hospital will also abort for life or health of the mother. So at least two of the second-trimester babies who were aborted last year, for instance, were completely healthy.

One night, a nursing coworker was taking an aborted Down's Syndrome baby who was born alive to our Soiled Utility Room because his parents did not want to hold him, and she did not have time to hold him. I could not bear the thought of this suffering child dying alone in a Soiled Utility Room, so I cradled and rocked him for the 45 minutes that he lived. He was 21 to 22 weeks old, weighed about ½ pound, and was about 10 inches long. He was too weak to move very much, expending any energy he had -- trying to breathe.

Toward the end, he was so quiet that I couldn't tell if he was still alive, unless I held him up to the light to see if his heart was still beating through his chest wall. After he was pronounced dead, we folded his little arms across his chest, wrapped him in a tiny shroud, and carried him to the hospital morgue where all of our dead patients are taken.

Other coworkers have told me about incidences of live aborted babies whom they have cared for. A Support Associate told me about a live aborted baby who was left to die on the counter of the Soiled Utility Room, wrapped in a disposable towel. This baby was accidentally thrown into the garbage, and when they later were going through the trash to find the baby, the baby fell out of the towel and on to the floor. A nursing coworker told me about an incident she was involved in last spring that she said "I just can't stop thinking about." She participated in the abortion of a healthy 23-1/7 week baby who was given no medical assessments or care after delivery, but was allowed to languish for 2-1/2 hours until she died, even though she showed early signs of thriving.

Just three weeks after this baby was aborted, another mother came to the hospital under similar circumstances, carrying an identically aged baby, and she was offered the same options. But she said that she wanted her baby. And so present at her delivery - because Christ Hospital is a Level III mother/baby care hospital -- was a neonatologist, a pediatric resident, a pediatric nurse, and a respiratory therapist - all assigned specifically to take care of that little girl at delivery. And for the two days that I tracked her, that little girl lived. Christ Hospital is one of only 11 hospitals that the State of Illinois has designated as a level III perinatal institution -- its highest ranking -- which means that Christ Hospital is considered to have both the best equipment and the most highly trained medical personnel care for the sickest of the sick mothers and babies.

Another nurse friend told me about the patient she was caring for who had chosen to abort her second trimester baby, having been told that the boy had gross internal and external fetal anomalies. When her baby was aborted alive, however, he looked fine. The mother became hysterical and screamed for someone to help her baby. A neonatologist was called over, but told the family that the baby had been born too early to help. The mother was so traumatized that she had to be tranquilized, and it was left to the grandparents to hold the little baby boy the ½ hour that he lived.

Last July, I was asked to testify before the U. S. House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution regarding the babies I knew about who were aborted alive and left to die at Christ Hospital. Another nurse who worked at the hospital, but who has since moved to Virginia, Allison Baker, also agreed to testify. Allison described walking into the Soiled Utility Room on two separate occasions to find babies left naked on a scale and the metal counter. She told about the patient, that she herself had, who didn't know that her aborted baby might be born alive, and after he was taken to the
Soiled Utility Room she kept asking, "Is he dead yet? Is he dead yet?"

Allison and I were called to testify in Washington in regard to a bill called the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. This bill simply clarifies an apparently confusing tenet -- that any baby born alive, completely separated from his or her mother, whether through abortion or not, has the same rights as American citizen human beings that you and I have. This would include the right to medical assessments and care -- and not just "comfort care" when a baby is not wanted.

The Born Alive Infants Protection Act flew through the Judiciary Subcommittee, which had some well-known pro-choice congresspersons on it such as Jerry Nadler and Maxine Waters. It then passed in the House by a large vote of 380-15. Almost everyone on both sides of the abortion debate clearly saw that what was being discussed was infanticide. It was still confounding that 15 Congresspersons could vote against this bill in favor of infanticide, but they did. World Magazine listed these people and called them "the Fanatical Fifteen." The congressional session did end before this bill could be introduced in the Senate last autumn and still stands to be reintroduced in the House very soon.

Meanwhile, here in Illinois, life and death go on. Four months ago, Christ Hospital unveiled its "Comfort Room." So now I can no longer say that live aborted babies are left in our Soiled Utility Room to die. We now have this prettily wallpapered room complete with a First Foto machine, baptismal gowns, a footprinter, and baby bracelets, so that we can offer keepsakes to parents of their aborted babies. There is even a nice wooden rocker in the room to rock live aborted babies to death.

It is wrong that current Illinois law mandates a doctor to pronounce a born-alive aborted baby dead but does not mandate the doctor to assess that baby for life and chances of survival. It is wrong that Illinois law mandates both birth and death certificates be issued - admitting that these aborted babies are indeed human - but does not give these babies any rights whatsoever to medical care. No other children in Illinois or America are treated this way. It is just not right that a baby should be left to die simply because her mother does not want her. It is not right that the very doctors who may be miscalculating due dates and fetal birth weights or misdiagnosing fetal handicaps are the same ones deciding that these babies should not be assessed after delivery. They're being allowed to destroy the very evidence that might make them liable for lawsuits if they have been wrong.

What is the difference between a teen-age girl at her prom putting her unwanted baby in the garbage to die and the medical staff at a hospital putting an unwanted baby in a Comfort Room to die? There is no difference.

0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 01:19 pm
Jill Stanek has an own website: Jill Stanek pro-life pulse.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 01:24 pm
So, in fact, Miss Stanek has an agenda, and one must consider that when judging her testimony before the Illinois Assembly.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 01:47 pm
Setanta wrote-

Quote:
We already know that BDV rants against abortion--


Same old story-

Anybody doesn't agree with abortion "rants".

Anybody who does agree is a dignified, intelligent and considerate speaker.

The same applies to anybody who disagrees with anything Setanta says.
0 Replies
 
BDV
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 02:07 pm
Yes, I have noticed that.

spendius wrote:
Setanta wrote-

Quote:
We already know that BDV rants against abortion--


Same old story-

Anybody doesn't agree with abortion "rants".

Anybody who does agree is a dignified, intelligent and considerate speaker.

The same applies to anybody who disagrees with anything Setanta says.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 02:17 pm
Yes, and I am sure that since I post pro-life views on the internet (here) that I 'have an agenda' as well.

But nobody on the pro-abortion side 'has an agenda' , right?

Do groups like Planned Parenthood 'have an agenda' ? Since PP is into the American taxpayers pants to the tune of over $250,000,000.00 per year, can it be safely said that they 'have an agenda' ?

A nurse risks her career to testify about the deplorable practice under which infants are left to die and then dares to speak up by posting information in public, and 'she's got an agenda' eh?

ok

By the way, since Jill Stanek is not a man (did y'all catch that when you saw her picture?), where does that leave all the comments we heard a few days ago that it was men who were pushing the pro-life issue -- and women who are the ones who actually get pregnant were victimized by these men who would never have to be pregnant, blah blah blah

Look at many of the major and not so major pro-life groups. Quite a few are headed by, and mostly staffed by women.

(Sorry.......referring to facts again. Not that they matter in this issue, right? 'Oh which groups are headed by women?' some will ask. 'Prove your statement.' Look it up yourself. It will do you good. )
0 Replies
 
BDV
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 02:29 pm
Jill Stanek probably become pro-life after witnessing and reporting what she saw. This act caused her to loose her job, how many of you would commit an act that would cost you your lively hood ?

Do you not think its possible that she became pro-life after seeing the inhuman treatment of these tiny human beings? or is that too much to ask of the "Anti-life" crew?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 02:35 pm
Abortion should be manditory for every woman/girl in the US unless they have the required "Proof of Competency" certificate.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 02:36 pm
An item on our News yesterday said that one in three British women have had an abortion.

They should be made to signify it in the pub. Figures like that means that on a busy night about 15 of the sweet pretty things have done that to themselves.It taints all the women in the place.

The fact that I know not one woman who has admitted having an abortion,and I'm acquainted with a fair number is enough proof for me that they are ashamed of themselves and that's for life. And who wants to chat a woman up who's ashamed of herself. They are all suspect when it's one in three.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 02:54 pm
spendius wrote:
An item on our News yesterday said that one in three British women have had an abortion.

They should be made to signify it in the pub. Figures like that means that on a busy night about 15 of the sweet pretty things have done that to themselves.It taints all the women in the place.

The fact that I know not one woman who has admitted having an abortion,and I'm acquainted with a fair number is enough proof for me that they are ashamed of themselves and that's for life. And who wants to chat a woman up who's ashamed of herself. They are all suspect when it's one in three.

And they expect, nay, demand, the right to vote? Next thing you know they will want a right to decided who to marry! Brazen I say, simply brazen! The 8th century is just around the corner.
0 Replies
 
BDV
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 03:18 pm
You are playing the feminist card there, thats low. A better argument than that is needed, and we covered the sex bit in previous posts. Safe sex stops the spread of diseases, or didn't you know that? or should safe sex not be practised ? Obviously not, a woman and man has the right to get and spread disease.

Also woman who have had abortions dramatically increase their chance of developing depression and before you say it, last year only 1% of abortions in the UK where for reasons of the child being seriously disabled.

Abortion is a disregard for human life. Oh no I am ranting again....

dyslexia wrote:
And they expect, nay, demand, the right to vote? Next thing you know they will want a right to decided who to marry! Brazen I say, simply brazen! The 8th century is just around the corner.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 03:21 pm
It has nothing to do with that sort of thing dys.

It is to do whether it is possible for a bloke to find a woman who has had an abortion sexually desireable. For me it isn't. It just isn't full stop.

Geoge Bernard Shaw once said that if women get the vote the next thing you know we'll all be talking about ovaries. And here we are.

And on the marriage thing the Indians have a proverb which says about arranged marriages-If you put a cold kettle on a hot stove it will boil but if you put a boiling kettle on a cold stove it will go cold and with a 90+ marriage breakdown rate after big romantic weddings you can see that at the very least they might have a point.

Anyway-they don't choose who to marry. They all want to marry Warren Beatty or Brad Pitt or somesuch. Not that you will get them to confess it mind you.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 03:24 pm
What a load of drivel from the "pro-life" crowd. Of course, you are "pro-life" only until the child is delivered, after which, you don't give a rat's ass about the little perishers--unless, of course, someone might teach them a theory of evolution in school.

Yes, people in favor of abortion have an agenda, just as people who are opposed to abortion have an agenda. I would no more expect my unsubstantiated anecdotal allegations to be taken for proof of my point of view than you can expect me to take Miss Stanek's stories as evidence, being, as they so obviously are, unsubstantiated and anecdotal.

When you can provide statistical evidence that foetuses are commonly delivered live at age 23 weeks and left to die in a linen closet based upon the evidence of governmental or professional organizations whose mission includes compiling such statistics, you will get some credence from me. Until then, you're just peddling old wives tales designed to horrify bleeding-heart conservatives.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 03:31 pm
BDV wrote:
Jill Stanek probably become pro-life after witnessing and reporting what she saw. This act caused her to loose her job, how many of you would commit an act that would cost you your lively hood ?

Do you not think its possible that she became pro-life after seeing the inhuman treatment of these tiny human beings? or is that too much to ask of the "Anti-life" crew?


When you look over her various statements - she had always been "pro-life" - actually chose that hopsital for this reason.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jun, 2006 03:32 pm
I've always been pro-life, If all republicans aborted I would consider that to be pro-life.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/29/2025 at 11:08:43