‘What Kind of Mother Is 8 Months Pregnant and Wants an Abortion?’

Like having an abortion because the fetus is missing a hand? Seriously? Going by your logic we should just allow abortions up till birth simply because she is poor and poor kids don't have all the benefits rich kids do. Oh wait, that already is in fact an argument that is used by abortion advocates constantly.

- - - Updated - - -

You claimed that it was humane to end a pregnancy if a child had a deformity. That is exactly the same argument that Hitler and eugenicists like your hero Margaret Sanger proposed.

 

I'm not surprised you're incapable of reading or learning and so dishonest, like all other Anti-Choicers,. that you can't address posts you quote

Quote Originally Posted by FoxHastings View Post

...and YOU DON'T ?????



Under Hitler there were FORCED pregnancies and FORCED abortions and women were considered property of the state........and YOU want to FORCE women to give birth and obey laws designed to make them property of the state....so WHO has the most in common with Hitler???


And NO, I can tell by your posts that you couldn't have read the following :

"""Quote Originally Posted by FoxHastings View Post

Have you EVER given a thought to how those people with "problems" feel ?

No, I didn't think so. It IS all about you and how YOU feel, isn't it?

FORCING them to live with their "problems" makes YOU feel all warm and fuzzy and righteous so it's a good thing.


YOU don't have to PAY for their care...how nice and warm and fuzzy for you....

YOU , of course, will make sure every one of them has adequate loving care until their deaths so no one abuses them...????"""





And YOU credit Hitler with being humane !!!! OMG......your ignorance of history is astounding !!!

 

Oh, are you in your little make believe world of movies?

Well, real pregnant women live in the real world.....



It IS hilarious that your only argument has a Batman movie as """"" proof""""...

 

NONE of us, including and especially YOU, are qualified. That's why Pro-Choicers fight to protect women's CHOICE. The pregnant woman is the only one qualified to make the decision......YOU want to make the decision for her...YOU DON'T WANT TO GIVE THE ONE WHO IS PREGNANT THE OPTION,YOU WANT TO DO IT FOR HER!!!!!


And WTF do you mean by giving the seriously deformed a "chance" ?? A chance at what ? A miracle cure? And someone with no functioning brain or no way to communicate their misery has an OPTION? Of WHAT....

 

Nobody here is saying that, so can the melodrama.

 

In this case, it was pretty much *constant* seizures. I know a pediatric neurologist with epilepsy who would support this woman's decision.

 

Sanger was anti-choice. She was one of YOU. And your fellow anti-choicer, Anders, promotes late term abortion when the fetus is deformed, he also promotes killing newborns that are deformed. So, don't go accusing pro-CHOICERS of being eugenicists!

 

so the cited medical definitions are a "strawman" are they, I suggest you let all those medical dictionaries etc know that fact, after all it seems you know more about it than they do.

I wonder if you can even read or even bothered to read the links provided, if you had you would have seen that none of the items linked to are about miscarriages.

- - - Updated - - -

You really do have this fascination with producing fiction in support of your thin arguments.

 

Oh look another set of pro-life sound-bites pulled straight from the pro-life manual 101.

1. Compare abortion with Hitler/Nazi's/Holocaust at every opportunity
2. Try to promote that Sanger was pro-choice and pro-abortion.

Number 1 is a failure and always has been
Number 2 is a failure as Sanger was very, very much anti-abortion, in fact she would sit very well on your side of the fence.

 

I am pro-choice. I am just not nuts like some people here who advocate abortion up till birth. At some point the fetus has rights as well. Sanger advocated forced sterlization of "feeble minded and disabled people". The only difference between that and some of the people here is at what point do you stop the reproductive process.

- - - Updated - - -

I will continue to compare it because there is no difference in your positions. You made a blanket statement distinguishing between unborn and born which indicates support for late term abortions and you also said that it was humane to terminate problem pregnancies.

 

And the one's at Children's Hospital here in Milwaukee that I met would completely disagree. One of my nieces has mild brain damage and she will never be a scientist or engineer or a great poets. However, she is happy and she functions well enough that she can enjoy life. She was born with internal brain bleeding level 4 which is severe. She was given a low chance of being functional and even her survival was 50/50. She pulled through and she surpassed expectations just like the girl with spina bifida who wasn't supposed to live passed 10 years but is now in her 20s.

Medicine in these areas is still mostly guess work. To kill a fetus for maybes or probablies is just monstrous behavior akin to any dictator engaged in ethnic cleansing.

 

You of course are free to continue to use any falsehoods you wish.

Whatever your assumption tells you does not relate to reality.

 

So you are against late term abortions or not? If you are against late term abortions then change your argument because you are not making sense. The line of differentiation with most people is NOT unborn versus born unless you are talking about naturalization/citizenship laws. When you are talking about laws protecting life it is in fact viability, not birth.

 

I support the current legislation as far as abortion is concerned .. I do not support TRAP laws or bastardization of UVVA type laws.

It makes perfect sense when read correctly, the argument I put forward is one based on the ideology of pro-lifers of person at conception .. Everything I have written pertaining to that argument is based on that pro-life goal. If you took the time you would see that I only use the argument when pro-lifers start to bring in the rights of the unborn (usually from conception), what I am doing is using their own agenda against them and everything I say can be backed up in law IF personhood at conception were to become a legal reality.

Perhaps this will help clear up any misunderstanding - http://www.politicalforum.com/abortion/363145-abortion-choice-consent.html - please note the very first paragraph that states "Firstly I will apologize for the length of the forthcoming posts, it is required in order to explain the legal standings concerning abortion, and to show that the pro-life ideology of 'person at conception' actually strengthens the legality of abortion instead of weakening it."

Correct, and that is what I support .. Perhaps there is confusion here, I do not advocate for abortion at any time for any reason, I merely point out the legal realities of what could happen under the person at conception ideology should it ever be passed into law.

I hope that clears things up and stops you making false accusations and assumptions.

 

Ok, then I misunderstoodified you. You said difference between unborn and born in response to that other guys post which confused me. I apologize. Conception legislation will never pass because there is zero scientific/empirical evidence for it.

 

No problem, it is not the first time it has happened, and I agree with you Conception legislation will never pass .. but .. my arguments on the subject should it for some reason be passed puts pro-lifers into a tail spin.

 

Really - strawman building

Late term abortions - which are actually termed "terminations of pregnancy" are done for WANTED pregnancies and the vast majority of people will accept physical deformity and love the child even more but we are not talking here about a "physical deformity" we are talking about a child which has not developed a fully functioning brain
http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/dandywalker/dandywalker.htm

In answer to the question posed by the title of this thread "What kind of woman is 8 months pregnant and has an abortion?" is a desperate and heart broken one

Despite all of the witch hunt mentality of the pro lifers no woman gets to 8 months of a pregnancy and decides on an abortion because "she could not be bothered to stay pregnant longer", That is just ridiculous because there is a better option - early induction. Why would she want to destroy the baby when she can end the pregnancy AND have the baby?

 

Don't you think it's Really Ignorant to base your ideas on one or two people when birth defects cover a such a large range...Yes, it is Really Ignorant.


Bur, again, it isn't YOU so you don't care.


Hitler didn't mind other people suffering either....

 

And don't you think its idiotic to end a life based on guesses? There are literally people that defend abortion because its mostly poor people getting them. In their own words poor people don't have the same quality of life so its better to not let them live it. They don't know which kids will excel or not? They don't have crystal balls.

 

Beccause women are EVIL. Fer Crissake it's not like the Calvinist theology was exactly unknown, It was the dominant, expressed and fully recognized theology in re abortions and women for well over a thousand years (it predates John Calvin, btw, who largely derived his belief from accepted Catholic doctrine going back to Augustine and the other Church Fathers) ALL of this concern about what is alive when is NOTHING but bushwa. Augustine, in fact, was perfectly OK with abortions until he realized how forbidding it turned women into chattels, his real purpose and the real purpose of all abortion prohibition

Oh, and most late term abortions are done to save the life of the mother, so being against them trumps the mother's life for the child's. A clearer indication of the sick hatred for women this bs derives from cannot be imagined

 

More proof, if any be needed, that Pro-Choicers just LOVE abortion, and will go to any lengths to justify it.

 

Actually in my experience cases where the mother's life is in peril they will do a Caesar - stick the baby in NICU and pray real hard. Abortions late term are often for Foetal abnormality it becomes a maternal issue when there is placenta abruptio leading to immanent foetal demise with the attendant mixing into the maternal circulation substances that do threaten life

 

I think you are misunderstanding. They do not need to do a C-section. It is possible to prematurely induce labor.

 

A Caesar? Julius Caesar? Or maybe you mean a cesarean section? Maybe that's what you people call it down under . . . ??

 

That is what people call it down under - every so often the Aussie habit of shortening EVERYTHING comes through. We do have the habit of shortening Cesarean section to "Cesar" and a combination of the flu and the bloody spell checker, which has a habit of changing words on me - made the whoopsie - sorry

- - - Updated - - -

Depends on a lot of factors there mate