Post Reply
Page 3 of 9  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 9 Next
5 years ago  ::  Aug 13, 2009 - 10:23AM #21
newsjunkie
Posts: 5,744

Aug 13, 2009 -- 9:23AM, kat8765 wrote:


Ok, haven't posted on here in a while but... this article is trying to sympathize with a man who aborts babies ,mostly late term at that.  And if I remember correctly, it said they don't ask why because they don't judge.  That means that they don't care if the baby is healthy and would be able to survive outside the womb, they don't care if the mother is healthy either. 


You are absolutely incorrect. Go back, read more carefully, and try reading beyond page one next time. They most certainly do judge whether or not to do a post-viability abortion. If you had read the article you would know that, and know that they have turned women seeking very late term abortions away. The rest of your comments about Dr. Hern are products of your imagination. You're wasting your time misrepresenting what is in the article -- others here have actually read it. You and faith are taking things out of context, and posting incomplete information that is cherry-picked to support your made-up story. The information, in its proper context, does not support your claims. Your methods are typical of propagandists; we're familiar with them as we've seen the same tactics on PL websites.


Why? Because he makes lots of money doing this. Do you really think that he would risk his life and his families if he wasn't making a ridiculous amount of money.  HE is putting his family in danger.  I'm not saying that the people going around assassinating doctors are justified in any way.  They def. are not prolife because we value EVERY human life no matter what kind of life they may live.  If you have the time go read about Dr. Nathanson. He is a former abortionist who has come over to our side of the argument.  He actually is the co-founder of NARAL and coined phrased such as pro-choice (mainly to try to make abortion attractive to the womens rights movement).  He and many other doctors make some pretty schocking claims about abortion.  He even says that with medical technology today, there is absolutely no medical reason for abortion.  He has a book called "The Hand of God" which is really interesting as well.  I've heard him speak several times, he is  a wonderful voice out there for us pro-lilfers. 



Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 13, 2009 - 11:37AM #22
kat8765
Posts: 70

First of all, I did read the whole thing.  I was commenting on one part but that doesn't mean that I didn't read the whole article.  I still do not sympathize with the Dr.  He performs a procedure which is unnecessary, and he puts his whole family at risk by doing so.   Once a baby is past 21 weeks, if for some reason the mothers health is an issue, the baby can be taken by cesarean and at least given a chance.  In my opinion all abortions are unnecessary but the most heinous would be late term for obvious reasons and this dr. makes a living by doing exactly that. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 13, 2009 - 12:12PM #23
Tmarie64
Posts: 5,277

Unnecessary???  So you think a woman SHOULD die even if it can be prevented?


You think a family SHOULD be forced to wait for the birth of a child that they KNOW will only live hours, or maybe days.  You think family SHOULD be forced to take on the horrendous expenses that would be piled on by the hospital trying to keep a baby that IS GOING TO DIE alive?


Yeah, it's easy to sit in your white bread, never known a REAL problem world and judge others.

James Thurber - "It is better to know some of the questions than all of the answers."
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 13, 2009 - 2:06PM #24
kat8765
Posts: 70

Aug 13, 2009 -- 12:12PM, Tmarie64 wrote:


Unnecessary???  So you think a woman SHOULD die even if it can be prevented?


You think a family SHOULD be forced to wait for the birth of a child that they KNOW will only live hours, or maybe days.  You think family SHOULD be forced to take on the horrendous expenses that would be piled on by the hospital trying to keep a baby that IS GOING TO DIE alive?


Yeah, it's easy to sit in your white bread, never known a REAL problem world and judge others.





What I am saying is that there is no medical reason for a late term abortion these days with our medical technology.  If a woman is at risk then she should carry the baby as long as it is safe and then the baby should be taken by cessarean. If the baby dies because if this at least it would not be intentional taking of a life. 


And yes, a baby with birth defects should not be discarded like a piece of trash.  Doctors get things wrong all of the time.  They don't know how long a baby will live or about the quality of life. There are plenty of stories about women who were told to abort and carried their babies to term only to have healty babies.  Even if the baby is not born healthy he or she should still be given the same human rights as any human being disabled or not.  How heartless to just give up on a human because they are not perfect and may only live a few hours.  A human who has a voice should not hold the power over one who does not, at any age or state of life.  And I wonder... how would you react to a family member with terminal cancer.  "Oh they are going to die anyway, why waste money and time on them"  That's basically what you are saying.  We are all going to die one day.  I guess we should just forget about healthcare all together.  What absurd reasoning!


And last, you don't know me! 

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 13, 2009 - 2:16PM #25
kat8765
Posts: 70

And one more thing while I'm all fired up:  I love how people use the word judge to refer to opinions that differ from their own. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 13, 2009 - 2:23PM #26
Tolerant Sis
Posts: 4,201

Well, Kat, here's the thing.


YOU are the one trying to remove basic health care rights from women who are pregnant and are suffering from a serious problem in their pregnancy.  YOU are the one suggesting that they must consent to major surgery to give birth to a corpse or a doomed baby, possibly ending their own chances of a healthy pregnancy in the future.


We are not making those decisions for other people.  So yes, you are judging what is right or wrong for these women.  You are making health care decisions FOR THEM because of your personal inability to see shades of gray (never mind color) in the abortion debate.  For you, it's black or white, nothing in between.  That's simply not true for most healthy adults.


 

First amendment fan since 1793.
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 13, 2009 - 2:27PM #27
bluehorserunning
Posts: 1,754

IIrc the majority of late-term abortions performed by Dr.Hern are for fetal abnormalities.  Some of them are for abnormalities that *I* personally would not abort for:  dwarfism, for example.  One of my best friends in college was 3' 11 3/4" tall, and I would not have the slightest problem having a dwarf child.  However, there are a lot of fetal abnormalities that cannot be diagnosed until late in the pregnancy and cannot be repaired, and that the zef will not survive after birth.  The zef that Hern described as having a 'cleft face - no face at all, really.'  Do you think that's going to somehow grow in, in the last few weeks of pregnancy?  Do you think that the woman should be forced to carrry that zef to term and deliver it, or even that she should have an early induction or c-section that is far more dangerous to her than an abortion is?  That child would not survive no matter what the mother did; why should she suffer any more than she has to?


As for the clinic staff not judging:  not all of their abortions are late term.  Chances are high that they do elective early abortions as well.  They're leagally required to judge in the case of late-term abortions, and it is clear in the article that they do.


As for 'Baby Sarah,' I wonder if that 'teen mother' was raped, hmmm?  And how old she was.  Given that they "traveled 900 miles," they must have been pretty desperate.  Btw. Faith - the link you posted took me to a blank page with nothing but 'Sarah Brown' at the top.

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 13, 2009 - 2:47PM #28
kat8765
Posts: 70

I see everyone's point here and I'm certainly not trying to take away the rights of anyone.  I just see the unbalance of respect for life.  A mother's rights should be equal to her unborn child plain and simple.  If women were being slaughtered by the millions so that babies could live you could be sure that ther would be an uproar.  Why is it so often that the babies rights are cast aside? Is it because it's legal to abort them so that means it must be okay.  It's just too easy to look at an unborn child as a lesser human because they don't can't voice their concern or fears or pain.  It's all about equal rights here. 


And yes it is black and white for me.  A life is a life and I have respect for them all old and young, inside and outside the womb.  There is no middle ground when it comes to a heathly adult, but when you get to someone who can't speak for themselves then they relinquish all rights and that is very scary to me.

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 13, 2009 - 2:55PM #29
faith713
Posts: 3,892

Aug 13, 2009 -- 2:27PM, bluehorserunning wrote:


As for 'Baby Sarah,' I wonder if that 'teen mother' was raped, hmmm?  And how old she was.  Given that they "traveled 900 miles," they must have been pretty desperate.  Btw. Faith - the link you posted took me to a blank page with nothing but 'Sarah Brown' at the top.




Try this link to read more about baby Sarah's story:


www.truthtv.org/abortion/evidence/surviv...


 

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."--John14:6

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.-- John 3:16

"We love Him because He first loved us."--1 John 4:9-10

"There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear ... "
1 John 4:18
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Aug 13, 2009 - 3:03PM #30
Tolerant Sis
Posts: 4,201

Aug 13, 2009 -- 2:47PM, kat8765 wrote:


I see everyone's point here and I'm certainly not trying to take away the rights of anyone.  I just see the unbalance of respect for life.  A mother's rights should be equal to her unborn child plain and simple.  If women were being slaughtered by the millions so that babies could live you could be sure that ther would be an uproar.  Why is it so often that the babies rights are cast aside? Is it because it's legal to abort them so that means it must be okay.  It's just too easy to look at an unborn child as a lesser human because they don't can't voice their concern or fears or pain.  It's all about equal rights here. 


And yes it is black and white for me.  A life is a life and I have respect for them all old and young, inside and outside the womb.  There is no middle ground when it comes to a heathly adult, but when you get to someone who can't speak for themselves then they relinquish all rights and that is very scary to me.




A mother's life is NOT the equal of a fetus, Kat.  Imagine your own life at risk because of a pregnancy gone seriously wrong.  You have two little children who are depending on you, your husband needs you, you have a mother and father and family who all love you and would grieve your loss.  Are you telling me you would seriously lay down your own life to give a doomed fetus another few hours of 'life'?  Seriously?


Pregnancies go wrong sometimes.  Sometimes pregnancies start growing in the fallopian tubes.  If the pregnancy is allowed to continue there, the woman dies, along with the embryo.  Nobody in their right mind suggests that an ectopic pregnancy should be allowed to continue.  So when does the doomed embryo or fetus start gaining these essential rights you think it has?


In the case of a severely deformed fetus who has no chance of life, which are the vast majority of Dr. Hern's late term cases, why would you think that a mother, who might have children, parents, a loving husband, a dog that loves her, should risk death to perhaps ... PERHAPS ... give a fetus without a GI tract or without a face or without a brain a chance to gasp a first breath before it expires.  


That's absolutely barking mad.  

First amendment fan since 1793.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 3 of 9  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 9 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook