The Eagle editorial board supported the federal ban on partial-birth abortion for the same reason the U.S. Supreme Court upheld its constitutionality Wednesday — there are abortion methods other than this gruesome procedure that doctors can use. That said, dissenting Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was justifiably concerned about federal intervention in medical decisions. And the ruling will likely inspire pro-life lawmakers to try to ban other procedures as a way to restrict abortions.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- littlejohn on Health care reform would save state money
- littlejohn on Health care reform would save state money
- ANTI on Let immigrants run
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- gster on Open thread 11/23
- LonnythePlumber on Health care reform would save state money
- aldenrw on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Too many exemptions
- Monkeyhawk on Let immigrants run
88 Comments
The fetus can simply be dismembered in the womb so the ruling makes little difference. The now banned procedure was a bit safer so now doctors will have to resort to a procedure that increases the chance of complications. But since when did anti-abortionists actually care about women’s health, they are only interested in a more intrusive government and theocracy.
I was curious about the procedure since I tend to stay away from abortion issues, so I went to the legal definition rather than the medical definition.
I found this at “Find Law.” Website.http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/abortion/2003s3.html
This Website, also gives a summary of what was passed in 2003 by Congress and what the Supreme Court recently upheld as Constitutional.
You can read the description of the process there at the “Find Law” page.
From what I read, the procedure involves using ultrasound to find the fetus legs, then pulls by forceps the fetus until it is in the breech position (feet first, head down.)
Then they extract the baby along the birth canal until everything is outside of the woman’s body but the head.
Scissors are poked into the base of the skull, then spread so a vacuum tube can extract the brain out of the fetus. The skull of the fetus then collapses and is easier to pull out of the woman’s birth canal.
What I gathered that if the head passes the woman’s birth canal, then the fetus becomes a human life and cannot be killed in any manner.
I also learned there are currently no medical schools that provide instruction on abortions that include the instruction in partial-birth abortions in their curriculum.
I learned as well that this procedure can cause hemorrhage of the woman and if not stopped, the woman could die in ten minutes. There was something about an embolism that could lead to death of the woman, involving amniotic fluid, but couldn’t find anything else on that.
Basically, what I gather is that that in 2003, Congress passed this law and the Supreme Court upheld the law passed by Congress. There are other procedures I suppose at that gestation stage that can be done, that are somewhat more “brutal” which I won’t describe here.
Not sure I understand completely the reason for upholding it, but that’s my look at it.
I guess if I had to be classified, I’m semi-pro choice. Yeah, I know , straddling the fence, but it’s a tough issue and I have reservations about on both sides of the issue.
It never ceases to amaze me how they’re so worried about petri dishes and can’t wait to drop Cluster-bombs.
Republican, from what I understand you are correct on the procedure.
I did some research into this years ago – so it’s very likely new info is out – but back then the studies showed that this procedure – done identically as you say – was reserved mostly for cephalic babies that were not expected to survive. Their heads are huge and if left to nature – the mother will not vaginally deliver them due to the size in most cases.
I understood that the other procedure at a late stage like this – if the baby isn’t terminated – would involve a C-section – baby delivered alive and then allowing it to die on its own.
But, I think they said the law made an exception for the ‘life of the mother’ and with cephalic babies I think that determination would likely still be made – since a mother can’t deliver them naturally anyway.
These were the babes that ended the mom’s life (if birth was unattended) two hundred years ago, as she labored until she died.
Maybe I’ve gotten it wrong – but that’s what I remember.
I am a liberal and I support 100% a woman’s absolute right to abortion but I also support reasonable restrictions on it including a ban on late term abortions except to save the life of the mother. The so called “health” exception to late term abortions was so big you could drive a truck through it. Doctors would do the procedure for no good reason and cite “mental health” as a reason. My whole thinking is, that if somebody wants an abortion, they can get it during the first 3 months. There is no valid reason for 9 month abortions when the fetus has clearly become a baby.
“It never ceases to amaze me how they’re so worried about petri dishes and can’t wait to drop Cluster-bombs.”
The conservatives are not worried about fetuses. What they are worried about is their loss of control over women. Conservatives always feel the need to control others and to think they are better than others. They are generally miserable people and misery loves company. One thing that bugs them more than anything else is that others might find fun in sex. Conservatives usually don’t enjoy sex. They consider it dirty and only do it to have little conservatives. So they want you to have to pay for sex with unwanted babies or AIDS if possible. They have, in a few honest moments, said so.
Hey if Liberals enjoy killing babies, then it is not our problem that we try to stop you. There are different people that live in this world and liberals should not be the only one shoving laws that suit them. Some of their laws like abortion are fundametally wrong. Even with the Orwellian terms you use, it still kills babies. Many women know that.
But there is nothing fundamentally wrong with murdering millions of Palestinians and Lebanese and Iraqis even in their sleep, their children’s sleep, the husbands sleep, their grandparent’s sleep, with the shrapnel and blast from 3 thousand bombs and the aftermath of cluster bombs designed to look like toys?
Hippocrates of America unite to save those cells in that petre dish, because they’re to small to shoot or bomb?
“One thing that bugs them more than anything else is that others might find fun in sex. Conservatives usually don’t enjoy sex. They consider it dirty and only do it to have little conservatives.”
Kev, If I ever had to classify a statement as ‘Liberal Redneck’, your statement about conservatives should does qualify. Unbelievable, it’s humorous and sad you even think that.
Hey, John. Did you really mean to say “Liberals enjoy killing babies”. If so, they I must ask what bubble you grew up in, or were educated in? I know many liberals, and no one “enjoys” abortion – especially the women who have them. I just became a grandfather for the second time, and grandchildren are a wonder and a delight. Though I would have cried had abortions happened with these pregnancies, I also feel women should still have this right . . . the recent decision by the Supreme Ct. doesn’t undermine Roe by the way. If we allow government to dictate to us whether women have to give birth, then the next step is for government to order women to become pregnant, or to give birth to only male children, or indeed to tell all of us when it is time to die. I fear governments that think they know best how to manage my life and that of my daughters.
The Constitution is all about government not interfering with our lives or some religion dictating morals { and by the looks of our current crop of religions, their morality is a bit twisted }.
I’ve always been curious why, if you believe God will punish these people eternally for making bad choices, why you spend so much time on this earth trying to interdict on his behalf? Isn’t it awfully presumptuous to assume you are shouldered with all of the righteousness of the Creator, and get to go around enforcing his will? If I were God, I’d be pissed that you were trying to do my job for me. The omnipotent needs no help.
Postal, God forbid it happen, but what if someone grabbed all the kids in your life and sucked their brains out or dismembered them? Would you leave it up to God to punish the perpetrator? What if the parent’s of those children arranged to have that happen? Would you stand idly by while it happened?
Except for a small percentage of abortions, if left unmolested, the babies would be born and lead full natural lies. So because the baby can not survive outside the mother’s womb you consider it less than human. How about we take you out of your environment, let’s say 2 miles deep in the ocean without any gear. Bet you won’t be viable either.
And as for Republicans killing off a bunch of foreigners, yeah I guess that wasn’t Bill Clinton that ordered troops into action. Every single military action has been ordered by a republican. Get a freakin clue.
So why don’t you head on down to the nursery at your local hospital and start deciding which kids have a right to live and which ones should be murdered. The policy you support is no different than that.
lies = lives
Sol,
I have a 19 year old daughter in college. Her brains were sucked out at puberty, and we’re waiting patiently for her mid-20’s, when we’re fairly certain they’ll grow back.
::eyeroll::
And with that, have a lovely weekend, bloggers. I’m on my way to STL.
Have a good trip Tom.. and good luckwith your daughter :->
So sad that so many are so willing to chip away at the rights of women. A “partial birth” has been deemed medically neccessary in some cases. And no, they left the door open to challenge it later on a case by case basis, but they did not leave it open to just do it. Which of course by that time, it’ll be the family of the woman who is taking it back to the supreme court as she will probably already have died.
The first three months thing is a crock Kev, sorry. There are many many reasons why later abortions happen. They’re smaller in number but the reasons are there and valid.
There is a reason why everyone is spouting off about how this is a good day for the rights of the unborn….because they just were handed a victory to go ahead and strip more rights away from women.
And Kennedy, with his language in the opinion was the most disrespectful anti-woman opinion I think I”ve ever read. How dare he say he’s protecting women who may not know what they are getting into. We don’t need someone else deciding what is best for us.
Wait a sec, someone else used to use the words “unmolested” when refering to an abortion…
P_Mom,So sad that so many are willing to throw away children. It is not that child’s fault that the so called mother does not want her baby. P_Mom, who the hell fights for the rights of the child?????
You are so avid about the rights of women, when (guess) 95% of abortions are done because the women don’t want the responsibility of having a(nother) child. So screw it, it is her body, she gets to decide to kill the life SHE (most likely) helped put in there.
To march this up the flag pole, by a MOTHER of a disabled child no less, as a women’s rights issue is disgusting P_Mom. The gov’t is saying you can no longer perform a barbaric form of abortion. Let’s roll it the other way P_Mom, the gov’t decided that since your child wasn’t perfect, he/she had to be destroyed. It takes your right away and you’d be pissed. Who fights for the rights of the children who are the ONLY innocents in the situation?
Partial birth abortion involves opening the skull with scissors and sucking out the brains. Some of you support this procedure when done to humans. Would you support it if done to kittens? Puppies? Calves? Colts?
We live in a country that cries over cattle and chickens being killed “inhumanely,” yet supports the “right” of the mother and doctor to kill humans. Sick, sick, sick…
A couple of months ago the Eagle had articles on late term abortion. I thought it was really a great edition. It was about two women who found in the 6 month or so in their pregnancy that the babies they carried would either be still born or live a few hours before dying.
This is a horrible situation that I would not wish on anyone. The women in question chose to handle it differently. One choice to deliver her baby (which lived a couple of hours) and one who choose to abort.
I respect both women’s decisions. While I normally would not consider an abortion, I don’t know what I would do faced with that situation.
I support legal abortions. I don’t want us to go back to back street abortions. Abortions have always happened in America, they just weren’t always safer than giving birth. More women still die giving birth then die from legal abortions.
I do think you should have a really good reason to have a abortion after the first trimester though.
I think that when the baby is developed to the stage that a parital abortion is a being considered as a way of ending his/her life, a more human way can be found. Can you imagine what it would be like to go through this process? I remenber a nurse who assisted with one and talked about how the baby flinched when the scissors were poked into the base of it’s skull. It’s cruel and inhumane and there has to be a less painful way make someone die.It’s not always just about the woman, there is another life to condsider here, but the extremists cry foul anytime someone mentions the fact that a fetus is human and has feelings.
Sol I am the parent of a disabled child, TWO disabled children if you want to get technical. And I support women’s rights to terminate a pregnancy for that reason too. Because it’s damn hard, and you don’t even know how hard it is for THEIR lives.
Sometimes the way I see it, abortion IS the more humane thing to do.
Go rent your body out to someone who is dying. Easy for you to say when you’re not the one who has to do it.
Flinched? Come on Mary, you know that was reflex. You’re cutting nerves. Took all of one second.
I don’t hear all this about the pain of the fetus while having intrauterine surgery to save the baby’s life. and I assure you that probably hurts a lot worse for the fetus.
PM
Well said — all of it ….
P_Mom,Why didn’t you abort your kids then? If you are so supportive of killing kids that aren’t perfect, then put your kid’s heads in a trash bag. From what you have just said, your own words, that would make your and their lives better.
Hey, P_Mom, how about you sit your kids down and tell them that you support murdering children JUST LIKE THEM, cause it is just oh so troublesome to raise imperfect kids. LOVE to hear how they feel about your support of this vile action then.
Sol, funny you should say that, I asked my daughter how she’d feel if I’d have aborted her..and she said ‘um, I wouldn’t”.
And I did consider abortion when I was pregnant with my daughter. I had genetic testing that determined she would not have Trisomy 9 like my baby brother did. I certainly would have if she did. “I” watched that baby suffer, and you did not. And “I” would never want that for my child.
I did not know of the other handicaps they would end up having, but I guess since I’m a genetic trainwreck, I had my tubes tied so hopefully I won’t ever need an abortion. I often think this is a direct link to my father’s agent orange exposure but that’s a story for another day.
But SINCE I have my tubes tied, if I DID end up pregnant, I’d probably end up a late term since I would not expect to be pregnant.
And I WILL not ever have another child born with disabilities. I refuse.
Aborition lowers crime rates.
But I bet that the vast majority of pro-aborition advocates will never get an aborition themselves.
But I’m all for the right to choose. Aborition is necessary is many cases, but as a birth control procedure during late genestation period is pretty cruel and disgusting, but go for it. Learn the next time to use other birth control methods.
But it’s not all that uncommon to hear women having several aboritions.
Oh, well as long as the baby doesn’t really feel pain. Kind of like killing someone in their sleep, right?
But I would like to extend that to people who would also like to end their lives.
It should be legal for phyician assistant suicide. I know the christians think it’s evil and the person soul will remain in purgatory, but who are you to inject your own religous beliefs into what is legal and illegal.
Instead! We like to suck every last penny out of a person before they finally die, regardless of their suffering and pain. Heartless Bastards you guys are.
You know what? It is sad and conceited to decide that your child will suffer too much. If they are born with a debility, that is all the child knows. If the child was born with pain, then that is all the child Knows. But you are going to decide if he/she breaths or not. Real nice.
Joe, I am in the same camp with the assisted suicide post. If an ADULT makes a decision to end his/her OWN life, then so be it. It is not right to decide to kill or let live base on discomfort.
Look guys, I am really really pissed off about some things outside this blog. I am hoping y’all will take a second and read this, especially you P_Mom. I have to apologize for taking out my anger in here and on you all. Most of y’all know my stand point on abortion. So again, I was acting childish and lashed out at people that didn’t deserve it.
P_Mom, I do respect you, otherwise I would ignore you (big loss huh?) So I apologize directly to you for going overboard.
It’s all good SolDevVB. We all get that way sometimes.
But on some controversial issues, there is probably no way in changing peoples minds on it. It’s nearly impossible to convience people to change sides.
But let’s not stop the debate.
I understand Sol, I’m highly passionate about this subject as well.
Probably because I’ve lived it and seen it. Have you?
I’d almost bet money that if you had, you’d support it too.So if a life of pain is all the child knows, it’s fine?
And sol, I don’t think you acted disrespectful, I expect this sort of debate and responses.
P_Mom, I have not lived your reality, but I have had a tragdey within this scope. I posted it several months ago and would rather not post it again here. In fact I have a little more information on it that makes it even more disgusting. My email is live, if you send me a safe-for-you email address, I’d be more than happy to tell you about it.
I’ve not got into abortion debates here, and I won’t now. They’re pointless.
But this struck me:
“What they are worried about is their loss of control over women.”
Bull*$%@. This is not about “control” over women, or “women’s” rights. The issue of abortion splits women as much as it does men; to portray this issue as one pitting “women’s” rights vs. men is to set up a strawman and divert attention from areas of legitimate disagreement.
Let’s just set that canard aside, shall we? We may well disagree over this issue, and those points of view are passionately held and legitimate. So be it. But let’s not pretend this is issue revolves over “control over women.” It doesn’t, and we all know it.
That’s a false premise.
I am curious how the males here that are against abortion feel about circumcision. Those of you with boys, please weigh in with your circumcision decision factors.
I fully accept the political reality that we will never outlaw all abortions.So does the general public.Opinion polls that ask “Should abortions only be allowed in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother” routinely show a majority in favor of such laws.States like New York and Maine have more restrictive abortion laws than does Kansas.Eventually, this issue will be returned to the states, where it belongs.—-By the way, it is not pure science fiction to ponder what the future might look like if abortion laws remain the same.
If “birth” determines whether or not life is to be protected by law, what happens when we are able to “grow” a fetus completely outside the womb?
No birth certificate!
We could potty train and teach that baby to talk.
However, what if a parent then decided to “kill” this organism?
Think about it.
There is no distinct, hard and fast rule about how many days of gestation are required before a fetus can survive outside the womb. The 24 week line for survival is in the middle of the 2ND “Trimester” and babies HAVE survived at that point, outside the womb!
Again, if we continue down the road of Mengele-type experimentation on embryos, if we continue to insist that the “Right to Life” requires birth, what does the future hold?
Abortion law could provide us with undocumented, “non-person” slaves and with spare parts.
Before you call me crazy, ask yourself if you ever thought “partial birth abortion” would be performed in this country, back when you first thought about the abortion subject?
Admit it, prochoicers, you used to argue that late term abortions almost never happened. The partial birt abortion debate at least brought some truth to the issue.—–By the way, Roe V Wade is not nearly as controlling as Doe V Bolton on the abortion issue.
“Health” is a very wide-open term and will be abused.
Hopefully we can all agree that there are very few people that are actually ‘for’ abortions.
If both the pro-life and pro-choice factions can actually get together and have a civil discourse on how to lower the frequency of abortion there may actually be some headway towards actually doing something about the number of abortions in the US.
The sad fact is abortion is going to remain as long as it remains the cheapest alternative to all other options. We have more kids that propestive adoptive parents mostly because of the maze of laws regulations, and the need for a fat bankroll. reform adoption laws to make it cheaper and less of a legal headache. Abortion is cheaper than giving birth, few hundred dollars, vs 10 grand for live birth, coughing up tax dollars for welfare vs abortion ect.
Damn Tom you nailed it. We can’t have children, so we looked into adoption. In MI, it runs you about a total of $40,000 to adopt. That is a little more than we can afford. Aside from the staggering cost, we found that the majority of the money goes to the government (mostly state, some federal). What the hell? If you really want to get down to basics, what do you need? I little background check to make sure we aren’t deranged, that we are employed and can provide for the child.
Reform the adoption policy. Amen.
Its why rich celebs go overseas. Going to africa, vietnam, so on is cheaper as less hassle than here.
Damn shame too. There are plenty of fine upstanding couples that can’t have kids here but also can’t afford that much money to adopt. Damn sad.
eBa(b)y?
When a baby “flinches”, they feel pain, thats what happens when you have nerves, P Mom. You can stay in denial that late term abortions are not painful to a baby, but medical science says you’re wrong. I guess thinking that it doesn’t hurt to be killed that way just makes it easier for those who believe in that “right”.How selfish and blindfolded our culture has become.
Gsheridan:You fell for another of the abortion industry’s big lies. In the year 2000, about 2200 partial birth abortions were committed. 95% were for convenience – healthy babies, healthy mothers. No partial birth abortion has ever benefitted a mother’s health. Arguments before the Supreme Court recently proved that killing a late-term baby while she is outside the womb (that’s the intolerable part) is never medically necessary.You can hear a radio broadcast of January 27 of an abortionist describing his committing a partial birth abortion, and the audience applauding at the moment the baby is killed, at “Life on the Line” pagehttp://lifeontheline.com/audio/index.htm
There is legislature in some states that states the abortionist must show the perspective – ‘mother’ – a sonogram of the baby before the procedure. It sounds promising as even in the first trimester the baby is a baby and can be seen as such. This has proven successful in a couple of RESPONSIBLE abortion clinics.
But just like Tiller keeps on killing thru loopholes, I think that the sonogram will be shown in a distorted state to maintain the ‘lump of tissue’ meme the mills feed the ‘mothers’
I read that 40 percent of fetus, once birthed can live on their own breathing for about five minutes.
Obviously, their lungs need assistance, but there are many cases where 21-26 week olds live to be human beings.
If one believes in God, I’m sure Abortion Doctors will find out when they die whether they were right or not.
I find it strange myself that people who will commit acts of violence against people to save a snail darter will quickly agree to abortion of a viable fetus.
Snail darters – what a load of horse crap. Name the acts of violence against people by the supporters of snail darters.
That is just BS. Disgusting. Use real facts to support your debate, not BS.
Sol: You probably know that there is a $10,000 tax credit for adoption related expenses. That helps some. Also, private adoptions are less expensive than those through an agency with fewer hoops to jump through. There are attorneys who specialize in adoptions. We went through an attorney when we adopted 11 years ago. But I agree that it is far from a perfect or fair system. We should do more to encourage adoption.
PETA – Well known for their Violent Protests and support of violent protest with organizations like E.L.F.
“According to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, human beings are just another animal species, no more special or important than a snail darter or dairy cow. The group believes, as one commentator put it, that “animal trainers, hunters, fishermen, cattlemen, grocers, and indeed all non-vegetarians are the moral equivalent of cannibals, slave-owners, and death-camp guards.” Newkirk insists that the world would be a better place without people: “Humans have grown like a cancer. We’re the biggest blight on the face of the earth.”
parkay: “95% were for convenience – healthy babies, healthy mothers. No partial birth abortion has ever benefitted a mother’s health.”
Please provide objective evidence that partial birth abortions were for “convienience”. In fact, I’d like to see your definition of “convienience”.
Indeed, the claim that 95% of any type of abortion is done for convienience is, to put it kindly, questionable, and is only likely to be provided by someone who is so strongly “pro-life”/anti-abortion that they are likely to subscribe to a very liberal definition of “convienience”.
All that being said, I can’t get too alarmed by the Supreme Court’s ruling. The partial birth abortion procedure should be extremely rare, and only done when the risks of passing a fetus through the birth canal or a c-section are likely to risk the life of the mother. By the way, 2,200 is a low number in a country of over 280,000,000 people at the time, and I am not about to argue that the figure shouldn’t be much lower than that.
I find it strange myself that people who will commit acts of violence against people to save a snail darter will quickly agree to abortion of a viable fetus.
Where is the violence? You made a statement as fact to back up your argument – where is the proof?
When my youngest was born, my wife was sick with pneumonia, and required a c-section. Anesthetic would have killed her. The only way to save her would have been what you refer to as “partial-birth abortion.”Luckily, we knew a very screwy (and much sued) anesthesiologist, and luckily we managed to convince her surgeon to work with him, and my son was born using hypnosis. My wife was awake and aware during the whole procedure- she said it felt like she was being unzipped.Not many woman are that lucky! They need options other than dying in childbirth. If “partial birth abortion” is necessary, it must be available!
Parkay, the D&X procedure is commonly used on fetuses with Hydrocephalus. The excessive fluid must be drained out in order for the fetus to safely pass through the birth canal. I suppose you’d suggest that it just gets yanked out?
That’s why medical decisions should be left to doctors, not extremists and not politicians (like the one nut who diagnosed Terri Shiavo after watching a video).
Jed, thank God for you, your son and your wife. And yes, the decision is between the patient, the doctor and God.
Violence?”The baby’s little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his little feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors in the back of his head, and the baby’s arms jerked out, like a startle reaction, like a flinch, like a baby does when he thinks he is going to fall. The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening, and sucked the baby’s brains out. Now the baby went completely limp. . . “. . . abortion mill nurse’s testimony before the U.S. Supreme Court, depicting the violence of partial birth abortion
Jed-
I am very curious about this. A so called partial birth abortion requires that the child (fetus to some) is rotated to a breech position, then extracted until just the head is left inside. How wouold this have saved your wife’s life?
Being cut open with just hypnosis would have been a terrifying thing.
Abortion mill? Strange phrase but thankfully there are definitions.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Abortion+mill
I never accused antis of having a grasp on reality. They can only argue with emotions, not actual facts.
In September 1996, the Metropolitan Medical Associates abortion mill in New Jersey admitted to doing 1,500 partial birth abortions a year, most on healthy mothers of healthy babies. This abortion mill was shut down by the board of health earlier this year for violations of safety and cleanliness, and for illegal abortions and illegal drug dispensing.See news pagehttp://www.lifenews.com/state2236.html
The abortion facts web page says 80% of partial birth abortion babies are normal, an understatement, and most babies are viable. Clearly, this was infanticide.See facts pagehttp://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_18.asp#partial%20birth%20abortion
“I am curious how the males here that are against abortion feel about circumcision. Those of you with boys, please weigh in with your circumcision decision factors.”
I am FOR abortion- at least in the first 3 or 4 months BUT I am OPPOSED to circumcision. I find it unacceptable to butcher or cut off any part of a baby and I think that boys whom this is done to should have the right, once they reach adulthood, to sue the hell out of the doctor who did it. Doctors should never be allowed to make this decision. If the boy wants it done after he reaches adulthood, so be it.
Kev,Thanks for responding. While I do not necessarily share your views, I understand your reasoning.
I am surprised no one else has chimed in.
“Its why rich celebs go overseas. Going to africa, vietnam, so on is cheaper as less hassle than here.”
And it is far less likely that somebody will crawl out of the woodwork in 5 years and say “hey I am daddy and I want my kid back”.
Parkay, you reference a website that deliberately presents false medical information. One example is their claim that latex condoms have holes and let’s the virus through. So if you want some credibility then don’t reference a website that is more interested in lies and propaganda. That’s why you antis have no credibility.
Kev, and often they do it without anesthesia of any sort.
I am pro-circumcision, because ew, some just don’t know how to do proper hygiene. And not being circumcised promotes penile cancer.
Sol, yes, force the mother to feel more guilt for the procedure that she already feels. Yay. Guilt them out of their decisions. Fabulous. What do you propose, the woman be forced down and eyes propped open?
I have no problem with offering if she wants to see, but there should be no forcing about it.
DougYou called me a convicted terrorist once, did you not?Your credibility is a bit in question, as well!Oh, and you also claimed that I believed in “young Earth” theory, — also false.If you insist on facts, from your opponents, you should be more carefull with your emotions.
littlejohn,My wife was postpolio and her pelvis was too narrow to permit normal delivery, especially the head. C-section was the only way for her to deliver an intact child. This was her 4th and last c-section.Any method of being cut open is terrifying. She was enthusiastic about hypnosis after her delivery, as it had none of the aftereffects of anesthesia, and little postoperative pain. Also, she happened to be a good subject for hypnosis; not everyone is.
Sol I did send you an email.
My email is live as well.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/13/health/13cnd-hiv.html?ex=1323666000&en=959fbdf90a59b3bb&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
In a study of African men, circumcision reduced the chances of getting aids by 70% as compared to uncircumcised men.
Another SCOTUS case is comming:
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52210
Off the subject, I’ve heard that in China, acupunture is often used for anesthesia when delivering a baby by C-section, I wonder why we don’t do more of that here? It seems a lot less risky than general or local anesthesia and would be a great alternative.
I tried acupuncture. It worked well with one thing but not at all with another.
Doe and Roe are both incredibly full of it to claim they didn’t know what they were getting into.
Come on.
Troy boy’s quote today ““Today the Roberts court opened the door for new prohibitionson abortions. This is a new day in the abortion battle. After 34 years of innocent children dying throughout the country, we now have a new court, led by Chief Justice John Roberts, that has a plan to end abortionin America.”
PETA – Well known for their Violent Protests and support of violent protest with organizations like E.L.F.
“According to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, human beings are just another animal species, no more special or important than a snail darter or dairy cow. The group believes, as one commentator put it, that “animal trainers, hunters, fishermen, cattlemen, grocers, and indeed all non-vegetarians are the moral equivalent of cannibals, slave-owners, and death-camp guards.” Newkirk insists that the world would be a better place without people: “Humans have grown like a cancer. We’re the biggest blight on the face of the earth.”
Ouch — If in fact Newkirk said that — and I know I can trust EVERYTHING the poster said is true — PETA should lose their Not for Profit status. Never liked em — never repsected em ….. I agree the world would be better off without humans — at least the one who said that ……….
Mary,My wife’s anesthesiologist was into acupuncture as well as hypnosis. Unfortunately, he was also into experimenting on patients with homebrew anesthetics, with sometimes tragic results. Seeing as he was probably the most sued doctor in the state, we had one hell of a fight to get the surgeon to allow him within 50mi of the OR. We were very lucky to get him in this instance, and very lucky it worked. We did it out of sheer desperation. I wouldn’t recommend our approach to anyone who had another choice.
Paul I don’t recall calling you a convicted terrorist, I think I’ve always reserved that for Cheryl Sullenger of Operation Rescue. No, I just think you are batty but I don’t think I’ve accused you of a crime since being willfully ignorant isn’t a crime.
DougPerhaps you were trolled.I will be right back, I need to find the quote.
DougDid you say this?
“Yeah for science! Stem cell research has already shown immense progression in eliminating Parkinson’s from laboratory mice so it shouldn’t be surprising the research can be carried to humans.
I’d advise people not to go to Paul for scientific advice, he still believes the Earth is 6,000 years old. And why are people quoting rants from a convicted terrorist?
It’s no surprise the reichwing nuts on this forum support the terrorists but I am rather surprised they are so open about it.
Posted by: Doug | April 18, 2007 at 11:58 AM—
My name is in the paragraph that uses the word “terrorist” — if this post was yours, on the Gov Kathy thread (She HATES to be called Kathy) — I think you should have made clear who you thought the “terrorist” was.Also, If this was your post, I do NOT believe in a “young Earth.”As I said, previously, I do not think that Evolution and Genesis are in conflict.I don’t think EITHER explanation is complete without the other.
Paul, the convicted terrorist line was from Mary’s quoting of Cheryl Sullenger’s piece, I wasn’t calling you a convicted terrorist. I tend to refer to people on the forum as morons, idiots, cowards and fascists but I don’t think I’ve called anyone here a convicted terrorist. That’s strictly reserved for Operation Rescue types. Perhaps I should have been more clear on that post.
“Terrorist” is in the eye of the beholder…I’m sure to any unborn child, George Tiller would be considered a “terrorist”.
You slay me Mary, you believe abortions are necessary and unfortunate, but the same person who performs them you think is a monster? How exactly do you rationalize that in your own mind? Would you prefer he just sit there and let the women die?
Terrorism definition:
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
How does Dr. Tiller qualify as a terrorist Mary? Cheryl supplied bomb materials and conspired to blow up a medical clinic. Dr. Tiller performs legal medical procedures. That would qualify him a terrorist as much as a doctor who removes tonsils.
The stupidity of antis never ceases to amaze me.
Yes, to me anyone who can kill babies as a career choice and sleep at night is a monster. I’m not a supporter of abortion, and most abortions aren’t performed because the woman’s life is in danger.The only reason I think abortion should be legal is because outlawing it won’t work, it will just drive women to the back alleys. It’s not a black and white issue, but I have no respect whatsoever for George Tiller. He’s as sick as they get as far as I’m concerned and he’s an embarassment to the whole medical community.
And the hypocrisy of the pro abortion folks never ceases to amaze me.
Tell you what Doug, when you can honestly say that you’d be willing to have sissors jammed into the base of your skull and your brains sucked out in order to support your mother’s “right to choose”, then I’ll respect your opinion. Until then, shut up.