What is your position on frozen embryos in fertility clinics? What should be done with them if they are not implanted?
This is demonstrably false, even by abortionists' own admissions: http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/keymedical.html Even this nebulous "privacy right" is a judicial invention. In other words, these laws defer to the judgment of the abortionist, which means they do not meaningfully restrict abortion at all. Most doctors won't perform abortion, period. However, abortionists are not the most scrupulous bunch. Yeah, I'd like to see the actual language. "D&E" is hardly new. Huh? They can be adopted: http://www.embryoadoption.com
Like I mentioned before, Huck... .01% of all abortions in Ameica are done in the third trimester. That is a VERY small number, and I don't think that anyone is arguing that there needs to be a very strong reason before this type of abortion is permitted. But you can't apply your same arguments to the 91% done duing the first trimester.
Thanks to Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, this is entirely up to the abortionists. Why? First and second trimester abortions are also gruesome.
Huck, I found this while searching for homicide abortion laws; right on a site that you gave to me. I was mistaken, New York actually has conflicting laws...see the very bottom of this. Other states have similar laws though. Also, a lot of medical procedures are gross. Miscarriages, such as what could be in those pictures you seem rather fond of showing off, are gruesome, are they not? Giving birth is also a rather disgusting process.
These laws penalize the killing of unborn babies by anyone other than an abortionist. First, miscarriage doesn't tear off limbs or scald babies' skin, as shown in those pictures. Second, other procedures might be "gross," but they are not horrifying. Abortion isn't merely messy, it's violently destructive.
You know it takes women YEARS to get over one of the most difficult decisions of their lives and you posting those pictures just to prove your point or win an argument over something YOU will never experience is unacceptable. Stop trying to tell us that you care anything for human life or the living, you just proved you don't. This is why abortion should remain a personal choice and something PRIVATE between a patient and her doctor. Not somebody trying to be a smartass.
By anyone else but an abortionist - could be the woman herself even! Is that any better? Prosecuting a woman who causes herself to miscarry? Giving birth was certainly horrifying. It was painful and disgusting. But I would not expect you to understand anything of the sort. Also, what do you think about the destruction of frozen embryos - if they are not adopted? How about women who get fertility treatments and then find out they have concieved triplets or more, and have to reduce for one or two to survive?
These pictures demonstrate precisely why the brutality of abortion is anything but a "private" concern. How can bringing new life into the world be compared with violently ending it? All such killing is morally reprehensible. Why not just adopt?
It is only private. The fetus is using the woman for life support. We are not compelled to give life support to another person. You are not forced to give blood to someone who needs a transfusion, you are not forced to donate a kidney if someone needs one, you are not forced to give bone marrow for a transplant to someone who needs one. EVEN IF THOSE PEOPLE WOULD DIE WITHOUT. My point was a lot of medical procedures are rather disgusting. And giving birth is not always the wonderful experience everyone would like to make it out to be. Especially people who are anti-abortion. Good point: why not just adopt? Finally, something we agree on. So, what should be done with all the frozen embryos? And what should we do with all of the unwanted children of the women who would be forced to carry to term if abortion ever became illegal again?
I'm pretty sure it is a crime to remove a feeding tube from a person who is neither terminal, permanently comatose, nor brain dead. Most abortions have no medical justification whatsoever. So what? They are not brutal like abortion. As I already said, they can be adopted. There is no shortage of adoptive parents for newborn infants.
Nice, I notice how you skipped over the part about difficult decisions and how long it takes to get over something like that. Women are tramatized over abortion whether they had to have one for medical reasons, personal choice or miscarriages. There are women on these forums who have been in these situations. Posting those pictures was being a ingnorant ass and throwing probably one of the worst possible situations they have ever been in back in their faces to live all over again. Shame on you! It was uncalled for no matter what. You could have posted links to those pictures far more easily than posting them the way you did. When you post things like that your argument loses credibility and so do you. Not only did you harm other people on these forums, but you did harm to yourself by losing any credibility or respect you might have had.
you complete and total lack of knowlege in bioethics field aside....this is still one of your dumbest comments ever! there is no shortage of adoptive parents for HEALTHY WHITE NEWBORNS. and the people who dont mind a non-white baby adopt over sees. However there are hospitals and children's homes overflowing with both healthy and less then healthy non-white babies and children all over the damn country. the vast majority of children waiting to be adopted are black,latino,and biracial between the ages of 3-13.Most wont ever get adopted...they will bounce around as wards of the state until they turn 18 and then get tossed into the world with a whopping $250 to survive on. WE HAVE MILLIONS OF CHILDREN THAT NEED HOMES!..not just in the USA but worldwide. And now you expect people to adopt frozen embryos??? are you out of your mind? have you truly lost it? you are as stupid as I had always assumed. go away and dont ever breed.
You completely missed the point. Say you have a child. That child is going to die unless it receives a bone marrow transplant. You are a match. You are, however, under no obligation whatsoever to provide a bodily resource so that another person can continue living. And if they are not? What do we do with them then? Hmm. I think cynical_otter covered it fairly well. No shortage of adoptive parents for healthy white newborn babies. How about the ones born addicted to crack? With birth defects? With AIDs? Would you volunteer to take in a couple of them? What about all the kids already being thrown about in the foster care system we currently have? What is your solution?
I know women who've had abortions, and they now display such images in front of abortion mills, in hopes of deterring other women from making the same dreadful decision.
It is, however, illegal for me to starve, suffocate, scald, decapitate, or dismember my children. They should at least be made available. Of course, the real problem is the fact that they are allowed to be manufactured in the first place. Minority infants are easily placed, too, though there's not as long a waiting list for them. The solution is to love and care for these kids, not to kill them! (We have 2 adopted sons, and we might take in a foster child when they are a bit older.) Abortion is certainly no answer. If anything, it reinforces the notion that problem children can be discarded at will.
You really have no idea do you. I had an abortion 2 years ago. It was at 5 weeks, and there was no dismembering, vaccum tubes, burnt skin or anything. They simply gave me medication that dialated my cervix. I even took it at home. Also, there were no pictures of torn up fetuses on the wall. There is nothing wrong with thinking abortion is wrong. BUt that doesnt mean that everyone else has to think the same as you, or they are murderers. It is absurd to take it that far. You are using those pictures as emotional propaganda to debate your point. The flat out facts of the situations are as follows: 91% of abortions are first trimester. And none look like those pictures you have shown. 9% are second trimester .01% are third trimester In my opinion second and third trimester abortions should be only in circumstances where they are health concerns. And it is only natural that this is left up to the doctor/parents and not some congressmen.
Some of those picture are from the first trimester. For more, see: http://www.abortionno.com/Resources/pictures.html Again, what "health concerns" justify ripping an unborn baby limb from limb?
Not all women will regret what they do, in fact most feel relief, but you just can't wrap your narrow little mind around that concept, can you? I am not even going to bother. Well I hope a lot of people line up to love and care for them, because the mothers certainly aren't going to.
