what happens to women in countries where abortion is outlawed

[koshergrl]

Go ahead and keep waiting.

 

[koshergrl]

I thought you were waiting for the answer to some other irrelevant (and already addressed) question that you had popped up with...I can't keep track. And why would I want to?

 

[Antares]

LOL, why?

He is a freak wh did awful things and everyone knows it.

Let's move to the penalty faze use the "coil" on his dick.

Whatever Gosnell did, he did with the permission and knowledge of the health professionals, including those who inspected the site and observed his practices, took the complaints, and treated the women he maimed and killed. They were complicit, and the grand jury statement says they were complicit, repeatedly.

And if that is the case, then those people have a few questions to answer, but how about we wait and see what happens with the trial first, shall we?

 

[koshergrl]

The trial is going on now. We have the grand jury report. 8 others have already been convicted.

And they have the testimony of the people who enabled him to butcher and kill, even after they found out.

 

[FA_Q2]

still waiting for you to explain why you're obsessed w/ this topic allie.

For those that see it as murder legalized, I don’t see why they would not be obsessed.

Whether or not you agree is irrelevant to others convictions.

 

[g5000]

ummm..... thats one provider who you have quoted 3+ times in another thread allie. You're going to have to do better than that.

Considering you have quoted no pro-lifers who believe the life of the mother is trumped by a dead fetus, she's one up on you.

 

[Agit8r]

I know of no one who advocates that position.

Would you care to name a few?

The people who support full personhood for embryos do. Paul Ryan did when he signed on to that bill. Y'all act like this isn't actually a threat to our western values

I would love you to explain that....

Oh wait, no I wouldn't, because it's idiotic. Meanwhile, I notice that you have provided no real support for your stupid statement...aside from another, even more ridiculous comment.

" the current regime of abortion on demand in America is a grave evil that ought to be abolished. It is murderous, if not categorically then at least in its extreme manifestations. Maintaining it requires an assault on language and logic that has taken on a totalitarian character. And it is politically poisonous."

..."To avoid confronting the reality of what they were doing, Gosnell and his employees spoke in an elaborate euphemistic code. A baby wasn't born, "the fetus precipitated." Gosnell didn't slash it to death, he "snipped" it to "ensure fetal demise." The Times, in that A17 story, adopted the Gosnell code, referring repeatedly to the babies Gosnell is charged with murdering as "fetuses." "So did Roger Simon, we're guessing out of "pro-choice" habit. This Orwellian use of language was a commonality between the Gosnellites and the "safe and legal" abortion crowd. "Pro-choice" itself is one such euphemism. Lots of political movements are in favor of one or another form of "choice," but this is the only one we can think of that cries foul if you specify the choice that they're pro."

"
Most news organizations have adopted this pro-abortion doublespeak as a matter of style. The New York Times, for example, characterizes the two sides as "abortion-rights" and "antiabortion." That at least has the virtue of acknowledging that the debate is about abortion, but it still tips the scale in favor of the pro-abortion side by acknowledging its claims of rights but not the antiabortion side's. And then there's the ever-popular "procedure whose opponents call it partial-birth abortion." What do its supporters call it? And who are they?
The most jaw-dropping example of pro-abortion Orwellianism is the one we cited last week: the fierce objection to the assertion that life begins at fertilization. As we noted, that is a simple statement of scientific fact--a tautology. MediaMutters responded, in essence, that human embryogenesis is just a theory. The proof was--you guessed it--an appeal to authority, namely the majority opinion in Roe v. Wade:

The law has been reluctant to endorse any theory that life, as we recognize it, begins before live birth or to accord legal rights to the unborn except in narrowly defined situations and except when the rights are contingent upon live birth.​

Justice Blackmun says it, I believe it, and that settles it!
We'd like to cite one more example because we find it especially neuralgic, though we must acknowledge this is one that professional abortion advocates typically have the sense to avoid. It is the characterization of an unborn child as a "parasite" because it depends for sustenance on its mother. Again, this is at best scientifically illiterate: In biology, a parasite by definition is a creature of a different species from the host. At worst, calling a baby a parasite is an act of rhetorical dehumanization, of a piece with likening hated minorities to insects or rodents or pigs."


That is a brilliant piece, incidentally.



Best of the Web Today: From Roe to Gosnell - WSJ.com

You do realize how ironic it is that you continually cite Gosnell; a guy who operated in a jurisdiction that didn't allow abortions after 24 weeks!

Now it can be argued that this isolated incident is no reason to allow safe and legal abortion after 24 weeks, but it obviously gives a glimpse about what would occur if the much more common early term abortion were further restricted. By citing Gosnell, you are actually giving an example of the very heart of the pro-choice argument.

 

[g5000]

What about the 55 million babies slaughtered in the U.S. alone since Roe vs Wade? Do those deaths count too? I didn't think so.

fetuses aren't "babies"...

Not in the law, not in medicine and not even in the bible.

You are wrong about the bible.

 

[g5000]

they're treated as 2nd class citizens of course:

Critically ill woman faces jail time if she goes forward with lifesaving abortion

According to a report from Amnesty International, a seriously ill and pregnant El Salvadorian woman may face jail time if she goes forward with a lifesaving and medically recommended abortion. Abortion is illegal under all circumstances in El Salvador.

It's pretty pathetic you have to find a story from the Third World to justify the annual million-plus abortions that have NOTHING to do with threats to the mothers lives in America. If that's the best you can come up with, you are morally bankrupt.

 

[Antares]

I'd like you to prove your claim about the Bible Joe?

Surely you can back your assertion up?

What about the 55 million babies slaughtered in the U.S. alone since Roe vs Wade? Do those deaths count too? I didn't think so.

fetuses aren't "babies"...

Not in the law, not in medicine and not even in the bible.

 

[g5000]

Exodus 21 plainly states that if someone harms a fetus in the womb, the punishment will match the injury. Life for life. If someone hits the mother and she gives birth prematurely, but no harm is done to the child, the offender is to be fined. Fined, even if the infant is okay.

If the infant in the womb is killed, the punishment is to be life for life.

22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, 24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

 

[Agit8r]

Exodus 21 plainly states that if someone harms a fetus in the womb, the punishment will match the injury. Life for life. If someone hits the mother and she gives birth prematurely, but no harm is done to the child, the offender is to be fined. Fined, even if the infant is okay.

If the infant in the womb is killed, the punishment is to be life for life.

Actually it says that if she is caused to miscarry, the offender must pay pecuniary damages. If the mother is killed, that is life for life. You have to recall that in the OT, children were considered absolute property of parents (see also; Jephthah)

 

[g5000]

The reasoning in the OP is seriously flawed. "They won't let a woman in the Third World get an abortion to save her life. Therefore, women here should be able to get one if they are inconvenienced by having a child."

 

[Antares]

C'mon man, I wanted Joe to squirm.

Exodus 21 plainly states that if someone harms a fetus in the womb, the punishment will match the injury. Life for life. If someone hits the mother and she gives birth prematurely, but no harm is done to the child, the offender is to be fined. Fined, even if the infant is okay.

If the infant in the womb is killed, the punishment is to be life for life.

22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, 24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

 

[g5000]

Exodus 21 plainly states that if someone harms a fetus in the womb, the punishment will match the injury. Life for life. If someone hits the mother and she gives birth prematurely, but no harm is done to the child, the offender is to be fined. Fined, even if the infant is okay.

If the infant in the womb is killed, the punishment is to be life for life.

Actually it says that if she is caused to miscarry, the offender must pay pecuniary damages. If the mother is killed, that is life for life. You have to recall that in the OT, children were considered absolute property of parents (see also; Jephthah)

Wrong. It says "if no mischief follow" there is a fine, but if "any mischief follow", then it is life for life. It is clearly talking about the infant in the womb in the same breath.

 

[g5000]

Regardless, the illogic of the OP fails miserably.

 

[FJO]

A woman MUST have the control of her own body.

Preferably, PRIOR to getting pregnant, as the result by irresponsible and horny behavior.

 

[Agit8r]

Exodus 21 plainly states that if someone harms a fetus in the womb, the punishment will match the injury. Life for life. If someone hits the mother and she gives birth prematurely, but no harm is done to the child, the offender is to be fined. Fined, even if the infant is okay.

If the infant in the womb is killed, the punishment is to be life for life.

Actually it says that if she is caused to miscarry, the offender must pay pecuniary damages. If the mother is killed, that is life for life. You have to recall that in the OT, children were considered absolute property of parents (see also; Jephthah)

Wrong. It says "if no mischief follow" there is a fine, but if "any mischief follow", then it is life for life. It is clearly talking about the infant in the womb in the same breath.

The original Hebrew is quite vague, so we must judge the meaning by the context of the rest of the OT. Anything else would obviously be mere licentiousness.

 

[FJO]

I visited my old-country in 2007, after being away for almost 50 years.

The differences between what I was expecting and and what I actually found were startling and very eye-opening.

Reagan was RIGHT!!!!

My long lost and almost forgotten brother complained that God has taken His hands off Hungary.

I replied that maybe if more Hungarians were in Church than in the abortion clinic God would view the nation of Hungary differently.

 

[Noomi]

A woman MUST have the control of her own body.

Preferably, PRIOR to getting pregnant, as the result by irresponsible and horny behavior.

Goodness me, so any woman who dares to get sexually excited and make love with her partner must be a selfish slut!!!

You pro lifers really hate women, don't you?