Planned Parenthood Exposed - New Undercover Video

[Angel Heart]

There is no such thing as an abortion surviver. That's like claiming someone survived being murdered.

She survived an instillation abortion.

Saline-instillation abortion with laminaria and megadose oxytocin.

She was born alive and thankfully someone on the staff had the peace of mind to save her. Maybe you should watch the video before you comment on it. Her mom aborted her... She survived.

 

[Makedde]

She was born alive and thankfully someone on the staff had the peace of mind to save her. Maybe you should watch the video before you comment on it. Her mom aborted her... She survived.

She survived an attempted abortion. If the baby is born alive, then abortion has failed. She was not aborted because the abortion failed.

You could not say that someone murdered another person and that person survived. That's why we call it attempted murder. The act of killing has failed, as happened in this case.

 

[eots]

There is no such thing as an abortion surviver. That's like claiming someone survived being murdered.

there are attempted abortion survivors if you wish to split hairs..you know like surviving a attempted murder

 

[Anguille]

I can understand the nurse putting a child first and her career second, it's just sad that no such girl existed.

The nurse showed courage and selflessness. It's sad but also good that the girl did not exist. The person who pretended to be her will have to live with the knowledge of what she did to trick a person who thought she was helping her.

 

[Makedde]

there are attempted abortion survivors if you wish to split hairs..you know like surviving a attempted murder

Then could we please use this term to describe any person who is alive as a result of a failed abortion?

The nurse showed courage and selflessness. It's sad but also good that the girl did not exist. The person who pretended to be her will have to live with the knowledge of what she did to trick a person who thought she was helping her.

I agree, but I doubt the woman really cares. Likely she is hopeful this will drive women away from PP. This just makes me distrust anti abortionists even more. They will go to any lengths to push their agenda.

 

[Angel Heart]

The nurse showed courage and selflessness. It's sad but also good that the girl did not exist. The person who pretended to be her will have to live with the knowledge of what she did to trick a person who thought she was helping her.

I would see her that way if she took a baby that survived and ran it to the NICU. That would get her fired faster than this did. This should get her arrested IMO.

 

[eots]

helping her to be molested and to murder her child

 

[Anguille]

If the woman is so depressed she is threatening suicide, then I would think that abortion would be in her best interests, don't you? Putting her in a hospital is all well and good, but it's not going to rid her of her suicidal thoughts, is it? Unless you keep her sedated, and that's simply putting the fetus's rights ahead of her own, which is grossly unfair.

Not to mention the risk to the baby should the depressed mother suffer post partum depression and kill her baby and/or or kill herself.

But in any case, who is Angel Heartless or any of us to decide. That is up to the woman and if she is incapable of making a same decision due to mental illness, then it's for a doctor to decide. Not for any of us.

 

[Makedde]

I would see her that way if she took a baby that survived and ran it to the NICU. That would get her fired faster than this did. This should get her arrested IMO.

I disagree. There was no crime because the 13 year old did not exist. What do you suggest charging the nurse with? How can she be fired when she did nothing wrong?

 

[eots]

its called intent and she was fired

 

[Makedde]

helping her to be molested and to murder her child

As opposed to sending her to her parents to abuse her physically and psychologically and force her to gestate against her will?

 

[Makedde]

its called intent and she was fired

No crime was committed. She could sue her place of employment if she were indeed fired for unlawful sacking.

 

[Gem]

Anguille Wrote:

I think I read what you meant in your original post loud and clear.

LOL. Ok, Anguille...if you want to pretend that my asking you if you would have a problem with a woman aborting a baby that would be viable outside the womb for a frivalous reason was really my way of saying that most women who require late term abortions need them for vacation plans then I apologize...I had no idea your comprehension skills were so poor.

For the record...I was not implying that - and I feel strongly that everyone here knows that. I was asking you if you felt a woman had the right to abort her baby at any time for any reason. Obviously, I do not feel that a woman has the right to abort a baby that could live outside of her because of the mother's convenience. Since you responded that it was not your business, nor mine...I assume that you feel differently. Thats just fine.

You had already stated that according to you a woman should not be able to abort a third term pregnancy unless the woman's life was in danger but NOT if her health was in danger.

And I stand by this, of course. I think that the vague "health" definition is left too open to interpretation over what might constitute a woman's "mental health." I think that if a baby can survive outside the womb, then a C-Section can be done - sparing the woman's "health" and the baby's life. I'm sorry this is difficult for you to grasp.

You've tried to sneak words in my mouth more than once in this thread.

I haven't done any thing of the sort, of course...but if you think my asking you if a woman should be able to abort her 8 1/2 month old baby in order to be more comfortable on vacation means that I think most women abort for that reason...I can see how you would be confused.

Keep up the neg rep. What ever floats your pissy little boat.

Thank you for giving me your permission to give you negative rep. And don't you worry about me, I'm not pissy in the slightest...more amused. But have a great night and keep up the great work here.

 

[Makedde]

I think that if a baby can survive outside the womb, then a C-Section can be done - sparing the woman's "health" and the baby's life.

The woman would need to consent to such an invasive procedure. She would need to consent to being drugged and stitched up afterwards, etc. If such a procedure were performed without her consent, it would be assault - unless you change the law and make such a procedure 'legal assault'.

 

[eots]

As opposed to sending her to her parents to abuse her physically and psychologically and force her to gestate against her will?

no sending her to her parents..to give her wise council and from allowing her to damage herself physically psychological and spiritually...by murdering her child

 

[Makedde]

no sending her to her parents..to give her wise council and from allowing her to damage herself physically psychological and spiritually...by murdering her child

How can her parents give her 'wise counsel' if they are, for example, deeply religious and would never, ever consent to allowing their daughter to make her own decisions?

 

[Angel Heart]

Not to mention the risk to the baby should the depressed mother suffer post partum depression and kill her baby and/or or kill herself.

But in any case, who is Angel Heartless or any of us to decide. That is up to the woman and if she is incapable of making a same decision due to mental illness, then it's for a doctor to decide. Not for any of us.

You can name call all you want. It's a sign that you are loosing the debate BTW.

Back to the debate:

Why not extend it past delievery... Heck if we can all ready kill them at full term just because the moms depressed. Why not after? The child is still as dependant on her.

 

[Makedde]

Why not extend it past delievery... Heck if we can all ready kill them at full term just because the moms depressed. Why not after? The child is still as dependant on her.

The child is no longer dependant on the mother once it is born. The child need never see his/her biological parents again. It relies on human contact to survive, but no longer needs to source nutrients from the mothers body. It is now a separate being.

 

[Gem]

Makedde Wrote:

The woman would need to consent to such an invasive procedure. She would need to consent to being drugged and stitched up afterwards, etc. If such a procedure were performed without her consent, it would be assault - unless you change the law and make such a procedure 'legal assault'.

An abortion at this stage would likewise be highly invasive, require drugs and stitching, etc.

The hypothetical baby Anguille and I were talking about is one in the very late stages of development...8 1/2 months to be exact. Babies are delivered with no health complications far earlier than this. To allow a woman to choose an abortion instead of a c-section at this stage - when the baby could survive outside of its mother's body is, in my opinion, wrong.

In order to remove a baby as large as it would be at 8 1/2 months would require serious, invasive surgery...so a C-Section would not be significantly more severe.

Why would it be assault on the mother to force her to deliver a viable baby instead of killing it...but not murder for the baby who could survive outside the womb?

 

[eots]

How can her parents give her 'wise counsel' if they are, for example, deeply religious and would never, ever consent to allowing their daughter to make her own decisions?

so deeply religious people are not wise ?...not consenting to murder is unwise ?