Planned Parenthood Exposed - New Undercover Video

[Makedde]

I think that if a baby can survive outside of its mother - then it has reached person status. And I'm don't think I'm alone in that opinion - there have been cases of people charged with two counts of murder for killing women late in their pregnancies.

Those people are charged with fetal homicide, which is a very specific law. If someone harms a woman with the sole purpose of making her miscarry, then a crime has taken place. As we saw with Lacy Peterson, her husband Scott was charged with the homicide of baby Conor, because Lacy had intended to give birth to her baby. The choice to abort belomgs to the woman, and only the woman. No one else can take that right away. If someone violates that right, a crime has been committed.

I think if a baby can survive outside the womb, then it deserves protections - and if that means that instead of a partial birth abortion, a woman can have a c-section instead...then I think it is worth it to protect a viable life. Just as I would support the decision to abort the baby if the life of the mother was at stake - I think that, as a society, protecting viable life so late in a pregnancy...is more important that protecting a woman's right to decide at 8 1/2 months that she no longer wants to have a baby.

No woman is going to wake in the morning and decide on a whim to have an abortion. If a woman is going to have an abortion so late in pregnancy then it would most likely be due to fetal anomaly - which is an acceptable excuse to abort.
Woman who seek late term abortions are required to undergo counselling before the procedure. No doctor is going to perform a late abortion just because the woman has changed her mind about her pregnancy.

 

[Anguille]

But that's not what's happening. They are being left in linen closets to die.

In those sad cases, all the more reason women and girls should not be denied abortions.

 

[Anguille]

And I guess thats where you and I are going to disagree.

I think that if a baby can survive outside of its mother - then it has reached person status. And I'm don't think I'm alone in that opinion - there have been cases of people charged with two counts of murder for killing women late in their pregnancies.

I think if a baby can survive outside the womb, then it deserves protections - and if that means that instead of a partial birth abortion, a woman can have a c-section instead...then I think it is worth it to protect a viable life. Just as I would support the decision to abort the baby if the life of the mother was at stake - I think that, as a society, protecting viable life so late in a pregnancy...is more important that protecting a woman's right to decide at 8 1/2 months that she no longer wants to have a baby.

Let's just hope you don't encounter complications with your pregnancy that require you to decide between giving birth to a baby not likely to survive and thus losing your ability to ever bear a child again or doing as medical professionals recommend. But whatever happens it will be your choice to make for yourself.

 

[Gem]

Anguille Wrote:

Force is the key word. You said it yourself.

Absolutely...in this you have actually read me correctly. I do not think a woman should be able to abort. I would state that the law should either say that she should carry the baby to term, or deliver early. Pat yourself on the back as you prepare to call me names, I'm proud of you!

I think that if a woman is carrying a baby that could survive without her than she should not be allowed to abort that child unless her life depended on it. In order for her to abort she would need a serious and invasive procedure...just as delivery would be - so it would not be forcing a woman to have surgery...it would be forcing her to have surgery to deliver the baby as opposed to having surgery to kill it.

Since the baby has reached a stage where is is possessing all of the qualities so many here have listed as "necessary to qualify as human" I do not think that the child should be able to be killed because it hasn't breathed air yet.

Despite your desire to jump all over me, calling me names, implying things I never said, etc. I truly respect your strong desire to fight for a woman's right to her own body. While you can not see it, you and I feel similarly about the need for a woman to have that power and control over our own bodies.

Where we disagree is that I feel that part of being a woman is being aware that you have a responsibility to seek an abortion early in your pregnancy because it is much safer for you physically and mentally and because you would not be terminating a life that could life without you. I feel the way I do in large part because I respect myself and all women immensely. I think that women are capable of taking ultimate responsibility for their bodies, their decisions (and mistakes) and what happens to our bodies. I want abortion to be legal...but at the point where a baby becomes viable I definitely feel that women should to take responsibility for the fact that they are now carrying another human life...and they should treat that life with the same respect and regard that they treat themselves...

 

[eots]

Those people are charged with fetal homicide, which is a very specific law. If someone harms a woman with the sole purpose of making her miscarry, then a crime has taken place. As we saw with Lacy Peterson, her husband Scott was charged with the homicide of baby Conor, because Lacy had intended to give birth to her baby. The choice to abort belomgs to the woman, and only the woman. No one else can take that right away. If someone violates that right, a crime has been committed.



No woman is going to wake in the morning and decide on a whim to have an abortion. If a woman is going to have an abortion so late in pregnancy then it would most likely be due to fetal anomaly - which is an acceptable excuse to abort.
Woman who seek late term abortions are required to undergo counselling before the procedure. No doctor is going to perform a late abortion just because the woman has changed her mind about her pregnancy.

that's not true all she has to do is say its overly stressing her or depressing and its granted for medical reasons and it flys in the face of your premiss that no one has a right to stop a abortion..when you say no doctor would preform one for those reasons..then in effect forcing a pregnancy

 

[Anguille]

[


secular humanism is a religion one that sacrifices the unborn...it may be the devil or it may be the lord...but your going serve somebody....

Somebody has been taking too many pills again.

 

[Angel Heart]

No doctor is going to perform a late abortion just because the woman has changed her mind about her pregnancy.

They will if she says she's going to kill herself. It's that simple.

 

[Anguille]

I disagree with their choice but until the laws are changed there's nothing I can do about it so long as they are informed.

I think some of the people here who think the choice is up to the parents are going to take issue with your statement.

 

[eots]

Somebody has been taking too many pills again.

no I don't take pills..just the truth..one that's to hard for you to face

 

[Makedde]

that's not true all she has to do is say its overly stressing her or depressing and its granted for medical reasons and it flys in the face of your premiss that no one has a right to stop a abortion..when you say no doctor would preform one for those reasons..then in effect forcing a pregnancy

That may be the case over there, but not over here.

A woman does not suddenly become depressed, she is likely be be depressed over a prlonged period of time. The woman who comes to a doctor and claims to be feeling depressed over her pregnancy would have felt depressed weeks, even months before that. The depression would have simply got out of control, possibly because she was not recieving treatment for it.

 

[Makedde]

They will if she says she's going to kill herself. It's that simple.

If there is sufficient evidence the woman will harm herself if she is not granted an abortion, then you grant the abortion. After all, is it okay that she kill herself - and the fetus - or be granted an abortion so that she may begin to heal from her illness?

 

[Anguille]

wow that's kind of sick but not surprising its often part of the religion
so you belive pedophiles are created.. through ?....temptation..?..seductive..children ?

If an adult is posing as a young child, the person who has sexual feelings towards them is not an acting pedophile.
PS You have a very dirty, not in a nice way, mind.

 

[Gem]

Makeede Wrote:

No woman is going to wake in the morning and decide on a whim to have an abortion. If a woman is going to have an abortion so late in pregnancy then it would most likely be due to fetal anomaly - which is an acceptable excuse to abort.
Woman who seek late term abortions are required to undergo counselling before the procedure. No doctor is going to perform a late abortion just because the woman has changed her mind about her pregnancy.

I agree with you whole-heartedly on that. This is where I think you may have missed out by not being part of the earlier discussion.

Anguille was telling me that she felt abortions should be no ones business but the mother and the doctor at any time. I asked if that meant that a person who was 8 1/2 months pregnant should be allowed to get an abortion a 8 1/2 months pregnant because of a truly silly reason, like wanting to go on vacation. Anguille's response was that it wasn't her business or mine to decide that. I disagree.

I do not think that there is a "problem" with women seeking abortions when their babies are viable for "frivolous" reasons. I just think that such a thing should not be allowed. I was trying, again in that earlier conversation, to see if Anguille had a point in which she would say, "No, an abortion should not be performed for that reason." But Anguille seems ardently devoted to giving the woman the right to make that decision for any reason, at any time in the pregnancy...which is of course, her opinion, and her right.

Hope that clears things up - but to restate...no, I do not think that the vast, vast majority of late-term abortions are done for anything but the most serious health reasons.

Anguille Wrote:

Let's just hope you don't encounter complications with your pregnancy that require you to decide between giving birth to a baby not likely to survive and thus losing your ability to ever bear a child again or doing as medical professionals recommend. But whatever happens it will be your choice to make for yourself.

I'll take that at its face, and truly hope that you mean that you hope I don't have any complications with my pregnancy...rather than some smarmy comment. Because, again..here is where simply asking me for clarification would have come in handy...if we were willing to specify "health" reasons not to include those vague areas that are concerning...I think that health reasons like the one you "hoped never happened to me" are perfectly valid reasons for a woman to seek a late term abortion.

 

[Angel Heart]

If there is sufficient evidence the woman will harm herself if she is not granted an abortion, then you grant the abortion. After all, is it okay that she kill herself - and the fetus - or be granted an abortion so that she may begin to heal from her illness?

At 9 months she will have to deliever regardless if it's born alive or dead. Why not let it live?

 

[eots]

Kansas Agencies Pass the Buck at Abortion Hearings
Contact: Troy Newman, President, 316-841-1700; Cheryl Sullenger, Senior Policy Advisor, 316-516-3034; both with Operation Rescue; [email protected]



TOPEKA, Kan. Sept. 1 /Christian Newswire/ -- Testimony began on Friday at a special interim legislative committee hearing focusing on Kansas late-term abortion laws and their lack of enforcement.



"The theme of the day was 'Pass the buck,'" said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. "Everyone who testified acted like enforcement of the law was someone else's job. It is obvious that no one in the state has really knows if abortionists are in compliance with the law."



At issue is the Kansas ban on post-viability abortions, K.S.A. 65-6703, which late-term abortionist George R. Tiller of Wichita has been accused of violating. That law states that abortions after 21 weeks can only be done to prevent maternal death that would be caused by the pregnancy or to "prevent substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman." It also states that before such abortions can take place, two doctors not financially or legally associated must both conclude that the abortions are medically justifiable under the provisions of the law. Those abortions must be reported to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) with the reason and basis for the abortion.



However, Greg Crawford of the KDHE told the committee that his job is simply to make sure that the forms submitted by abortionists have no empty fields. He said he makes no "judgment call" about the content of the field nor does he report any incidents where he may suspect an abortion has taken place illegally.



"I think an abortionist could put his dog's name in those fields, and the KDHE would consider that as acceptable," said Newman. "It makes the law requiring reporting for the purpose of enforcement a joke."


Kansas Agencies Pass the Buck at Abortion Hearings - Christian Newswire

 

[Anguille]

Absolutely...in this you have actually read me correctly. I do not think a woman should be able to abort. I would state that the law should either say that she should carry the baby to term, or deliver early. Pat yourself on the back as you prepare to call me names, I'm proud of you!

I think that if a woman is carrying a baby that could survive without her than she should not be allowed to abort that child unless her life depended on it. In order for her to abort she would need a serious and invasive procedure...just as delivery would be - so it would not be forcing a woman to have surgery...it would be forcing her to have surgery to deliver the baby as opposed to having surgery to kill it.

Since the baby has reached a stage where is is possessing all of the qualities so many here have listed as "necessary to qualify as human" I do not think that the child should be able to be killed because it hasn't breathed air yet.

Despite your desire to jump all over me, calling me names, implying things I never said, etc. I truly respect your strong desire to fight for a woman's right to her own body. While you can not see it, you and I feel similarly about the need for a woman to have that power and control over our own bodies.

Where we disagree is that I feel that part of being a woman is being aware that you have a responsibility to seek an abortion early in your pregnancy because it is much safer for you physically and mentally and because you would not be terminating a life that could life without you. I feel the way I do in large part because I respect myself and all women immensely. I think that women are capable of taking ultimate responsibility for their bodies, their decisions (and mistakes) and what happens to our bodies. I want abortion to be legal...but at the point where a baby becomes viable I definitely feel that women should to take responsibility for the fact that they are now carrying another human life...and they should treat that life with the same respect and regard that they treat themselves...

If you think women are capable of taking ultimate responsibility for their bodies, their decisions (and mistakes) and what happens to our bodies, why do you want to make those decisions for them? Make your own for yourself. I also think you are very naive if not heartless to think that a woman should give up her chance to have future children.
You think life starts at one stage, I another. But I think we can both agree that the mothers are alive. Something so many just want to forget.

 

[Anguille]

that's not true all she has to do is say its overly stressing her or depressing and its granted for medical reasons and it flys in the face of your premiss that no one has a right to stop a abortion..when you say no doctor would preform one for those reasons..then in effect forcing a pregnancy

You've got more red herrings that a fleet of communist Dutch fishermen!!!!!

 

[eots]

If an adult is posing as a young child, the person who has sexual feelings towards them is not an acting pedophile.
PS You have a very dirty, not in a nice way, mind.

I think not its your filthy mind that is of the belief that if someone believes the person they are attempting to lure into sex is a child ..but it is in fact a adult..they are no longer acting as a pedophile

 

[Gem]

Anguille Wrote:

If you think women are capable of taking ultimate responsibility for their bodies, their decisions (and mistakes) and what happens to our bodies, why do you want to make those decisions for them? Make your own for yourself.

Why do we have laws? Why do we follow rules? Why do we all seem to understand a basic code of right and wrong - we don't steal things when no one is looking, we don't break the laws (at least not the big ones ) just because we can...

In my opinion, its because we understand that for our society to work and function...we all have to live together, play together, work together, and protect ourselves and others.

We all have decisions "made for us" everyday. I am completely capable of driving 15 miles over the speed limit or more safetly...yet someone has decided to set a limit for me. (Yes, I am aware that it is a strange way to approach this issue...but I get to my point, in a second, I promise)

With the abortion issue...I feel that limits have to be set at some point because, at some point, you are not just discussing one person's life...you are discussing two lives. At that point - we as a society can, in my opinion, cling to the selfish answer of - I can do whatever I want to my body and until that kid is out and learning his multiplication tables he is part of my body! (yes, that was sarcasm) OR we can as a society say, "You have complete and total control over your body...up until the point where we aren't talking about just your body anymore."

You have the right to you, to your person....in my opinion...you do not have the right to kill another person for your convenience...and at 8 1/2 months...a baby is certainly another person.

Are there exceptions? Absolutely...and the law must be flexible for those serious exceptions. But - I think that women do a disservice to themselves - to our wisdom, our intelligence, our ability to be responsible for our own lives - when we say that we have the right to kill another human because we have the right to do whatever we want with out bodies whenever we want to.

P.S. I'm not going to respond to the whole "heartless because I want women to give up on future babies" comment because I answered that idea in an earlier post you might have missed...where I stated that that sort of scenario would certainly be one of those that falls under legitimate "health" concerns...my problem with the "health designation" are the grey areas where women can choose to abort rather than deliver viable babies for reasons that would not cost them life, limb, future children, etc.

 

[Anguille]

They will if she says she's going to kill herself. It's that simple.

No it isn't. Mental illness must be diagnosed.

But then what if a woman does kill herself because a doctor said, " tough shit" and refused to treat her. How many women, young girl especially, do commit suicide when they can no longer handle a pregnancy? Throwing yourself down a well was how they did it in the 19th century if the herbs failed to work.