Abortion S.L.E.D.
by IgnoranceIsBliss | Published on February 3rd, 2008, 2:12 pm | Religion
A Person wrote:Don't worry, you don't do a lot of it.
A Person wrote:Don't worry, you don't do a lot of it.
Many mothers cherish the first kicks they feel from their unborn babies.
But unknown to one U.K. mother, the kicking she felt from the twins growing inside her actually saved her life, according to a report from the Daily Mail.
Michelle Stepney, 35, said her twins Alice and Harriet, now age 13 months, were a lively pair in the womb. At the time, however, she had no idea that constant kicking she felt actually dislodged a tumor that had formed on her cervix and, according to doctors, saved her life.
Shortly after becoming pregnant, Stepney of Cheam in South-West London was taken to the hospital after suffering what was believed to be a miscarriage. Soon doctors realized she was still pregnant, but had developed life-threatening cervical cancer. Stepney declined to have an abortion and doctors at the Royal Marsden Hospital in London agreed to give her reduced chemotherapy in the hope of stopping the cancer spreading during the pregnancy.
But it wasn't the chemo that ultimately saved Stepney.
"I couldn't believe it when the doctors told me that the babies had dislodged the tumor," she said. "I'd felt them kicking, but I didn't realize just how important their kicking would turn out to be. I owe my life to my girls, and that's why I could have never agreed with a termination."
A Person wrote:No, my opinion is that it can be extended futher back to when the fetus has the beginnings of life - a functioning (if not reasoning) brain and the wherewithal for life - viability.
Questioner wrote:This whole argument for outlawing abortions is well understood by intelligent women as a smokescreen for regaining control over women's bodies.
Viability means that the baby can live on its own outside the womb. (Or live with medical assistance and care). That part is very important. Before viability, the fetus is an obligate parasite, and therefore incapable of living on its own, that is, not viable.
Intelligent women have long understood that the person who has no control over his/her own body is not a person with any rights.
He or she who has control over my body may choose to give me priviledges, but I have no rights.
In the world today, a minority of women have the right to determine whether or not some man uses them for sex.
It has been very recent in this country that the concept that a man could rape his wife even existed. It was called "marital rights" and men had them and so the woman had no right or ability to decide not to have sex (for any reason, including in order to avoid pregnancy).
This whole argument for outlawing abortions is well understood by intelligent women as a smokescreen for regaining control over women's bodies.
Nothing in the bible defines personhood as beginning at fertilization.
In fact, history and even some passages in the bible make it clear to anybody who wishes to learn about what the people of that time believed, that they believed life begins when the baby is born and takes its first breath, and at that time God infuses the child's soul into its body. That is the BIBLICAL position.
Jesus didn't change that.
He was a grown man, and I assume he knew very well about what went on around Him. He never taught that abortion was wrong.
And He sure taught a lot of things. So why, if early abortion is such a terrible sin didn't Jesus Himself say anything about it.
History tells us why. A fetus was not considered a person back then. Abortion was not considered a crime; particularly abortion at any time prior to quickening. And people did know about abortion during biblical times.
And BHL / IIB, don't waste your time trying to tell me that I'm proving I'm not a Christian by saying these truths.
Please find one single place, anywhere in the Bible that Jesus says anything about abortion, much less that He forbid it. If you can't do that, then just shut up until you have some biblical evidence to produce.
SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:Questioner wrote:This whole argument for outlawing abortions is well understood by intelligent women as a smokescreen for regaining control over women's bodies.
I finally realized this only a few years ago, and it made me even more supportive of the right to choose. Whatever I might think of abortion personally, I value the rights of competent women to decide these and all other matters of a personal nature for themselves.
BecauseHeLives wrote:SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:Questioner wrote:This whole argument for outlawing abortions is well understood by intelligent women as a smokescreen for regaining control over women's bodies.
I finally realized this only a few years ago, and it made me even more supportive of the right to choose. Whatever I might think of abortion personally, I value the rights of competent women to decide these and all other matters of a personal nature for themselves.
I wonder if you would feel the same way if at one time your wife became pregnant and then decided about 3 months into it that "I just don't feel like a baby right now". If so, I think you should be in the operating room when the doctor crushes the brain of the baby and pulls him out.
BecauseHeLives wrote:SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:I finally realized this only a few years ago, and it made me even more supportive of the right to choose. Whatever I might think of abortion personally, I value the rights of competent women to decide these and all other matters of a personal nature for themselves.
I wonder if you would feel the same way if at one time your wife became pregnant and then decided about 3 months into it that "I just don't feel like a baby right now". If so, I think you should be in the operating room when the doctor crushes the brain of the baby and pulls him out.
BecauseHeLives wrote:I wonder if you would feel the same way if at one time your wife became pregnant and then decided about 3 months into it that "I just don't feel like a baby right now". If so, I think you should be in the operating room when the doctor crushes the brain of the baby and pulls him out.
SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:BecauseHeLives wrote:SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:I finally realized this only a few years ago, and it made me even more supportive of the right to choose. Whatever I might think of abortion personally, I value the rights of competent women to decide these and all other matters of a personal nature for themselves.
I wonder if you would feel the same way if at one time your wife became pregnant and then decided about 3 months into it that "I just don't feel like a baby right now". If so, I think you should be in the operating room when the doctor crushes the brain of the baby and pulls him out.
In a situation when it's a decision between my wife and myself, that would be a decision we would make as partners in life. It should be none of your business, nor of the government's.
A Person wrote:BecauseHeLives wrote:I wonder if you would feel the same way if at one time your wife became pregnant and then decided about 3 months into it that "I just don't feel like a baby right now". If so, I think you should be in the operating room when the doctor crushes the brain of the baby and pulls him out.
At three months there is no brain to crush, just a developing brain stem. But that aside - of course the partner should be with the woman, loving and supporting her. Brandishing a Bible and telling her that she's destined for hell as a murderess is not supportive or respectful of her as an independent and responsible person i.e. wife.
nobody in particular wrote:as far as the human tissue issue (sorry about the rhyme), an embryo is not the same as tumor tissue. tumor tissue or any other body part removed does not have the same potential that an embryo does. tissue removed from the human body has no potential to develop on its own at any time, it will die unless rigorous and sometimes in spite of rigorous laboratory conditions. On the other hand, an embryo has the potential to grow and become an independent organism, it has the potential to live on its own outside of the body. IMHO, tissue is not that same as viable organism, even if a viable organism is made up of tissue.
Not at three months. The likely method would be to use vacuum aspiration. A five minute procedure, a tube is inserted into the uterus and suction applied. They don't chase it round the surgery with a hammer trying to crush its head.BecauseHeLives wrote:But they do crush the head.
Just using a flashlight.BecauseHeLives wrote:Interesting how you keep bringing religion and religeous sterotypes into this topic.
A Person wrote:Not at three months. The likely method would be to use vacuum aspiration. A five minute procedure, a tube is inserted into the uterus and suction applied. They don't chase it round the surgery with a hammer trying to crush its head.BecauseHeLives wrote:But they do crush the head.Just using a flashlight.BecauseHeLives wrote:Interesting how you keep bringing religion and religeous sterotypes into this topic.
In a marriage of equals, important decisions are discussed jointly. As an example, the decision have a vasectomy is ultimately the man's choice - it's his scrotum that's going to get opened and if he's opposed to the idea then no one can force him. Of course the woman could say "if you want to ever stick that thing in me again you're going to have to get the knife" but the choice is still the man's.
BecauseHeLives wrote:SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:In a situation when it's a decision between my wife and myself, that would be a decision we would make as partners in life. It should be none of your business, nor of the government's.
According to you its not a decision between you and your wife. You stated it's the woman's decision. Apparently its none of your business what she decides.
BecauseHeLives wrote:SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:In a situation when it's a decision between my wife and myself, that would be a decision we would make as partners in life. It should be none of your business, nor of the government's.
According to you its not a decision between you and your wife. You stated it's the woman's decision. Apparently its none of your business what she decides.
SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:BecauseHeLives wrote:SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:In a situation when it's a decision between my wife and myself, that would be a decision we would make as partners in life. It should be none of your business, nor of the government's.
According to you its not a decision between you and your wife. You stated it's the woman's decision. Apparently its none of your business what she decides.
My wife and I are partners in life. She gives her input on decisions regarding my medical decisions, and I give my input on hers. I respect her decisions about her body. Don't you do the same in your marriage?
BecauseHeLives wrote:
I do. I'm simply playing the devil's advocate here. In one post you are saying it's the woman's choice but in another you are saying it's also your choice (both of you). You really can't have it both ways. If she wants to have an abortion and you don't then what? Would you truly "respect" that decision? Keep in mind I'm just using you and your wife as an example here.
BecauseHeLives wrote:I do. I'm simply playing the devil's advocate here. In one post you are saying it's the woman's choice but in another you are saying it's also your choice (both of you). You really can't have it both ways. If she wants to have an abortion and you don't then what? Would you truly "respect" that decision?SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:My wife and I are partners in life. She gives her input on decisions regarding my medical decisions, and I give my input on hers. I respect her decisions about her body. Don't you do the same in your marriage?
SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:BecauseHeLives wrote:I do. I'm simply playing the devil's advocate here. In one post you are saying it's the woman's choice but in another you are saying it's also your choice (both of you). You really can't have it both ways. If she wants to have an abortion and you don't then what? Would you truly "respect" that decision?SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:My wife and I are partners in life. She gives her input on decisions regarding my medical decisions, and I give my input on hers. I respect her decisions about her body. Don't you do the same in your marriage?
I'll give you this one tiny glimpse into my personal life, BHL.
My wife has indeed made decisions regarding her body that hurt me and that I disagreed with. The details are none of your business, obviously. But I have indeed respected her decisions and managed to live with those decisions, because I love her.
yes we can. The one thing we will agree on is that it's not your decision or the governments. Let's go back to another example - a vasectomy or tubal ligation. As a couple we can agree that we don't want more children, who undergoes the surgery? We can discuss this and no one really wants surgery, but ultimately one partner cannot force the other.BecauseHeLives wrote:I do. I'm simply playing the devil's advocate here. In one post you are saying it's the woman's choice but in another you are saying it's also your choice (both of you). You really can't have it both ways.
Absolutely. I might fundamentally disagree, it might even affect our marriage but it would still be her decision.BecauseHeLives wrote: If she wants to have an abortion and you don't then what? Would you truly "respect" that decision? Keep in mind I'm just using you and your wife as an example here.
BecauseHeLives wrote:Viability means that the baby can live on its own outside the womb. (Or live with medical assistance and care). That part is very important. Before viability, the fetus is an obligate parasite, and therefore incapable of living on its own, that is, not viable.
You can visit several nursing homes that have several people that can't get out of bed by themselves or feed themselves. In your words they are "incapable of living on their own, that is, not viable". The only difference in this respect is that one is in the womb and the other is in a nursing home (location). I suppose when you get in that shape then it'll be OK to abort you, right?
BHL wrote:questioner wrote:Intelligent women have long understood that the person who has no control over his/her own body is not a person with any rights.
Flawed argument. If you suddenly came down with terminal cancer (something you can't control) then are you a person without rights? Nope.
BHL wrote:Questioner wrote:He or she who has control over my body may choose to give me priviledges, but I have no rights.
Do what you will with YOUR body as long as it is no consequence to the OTHER body inside you. I have a right to protect my home too but I can't kill somebody just because they come inside my house.
BHL wrote:I thought it took two people to have sex and usually it's consenting, correct. Where is this "using" coming from? Were the women not aware they were having sex? Where is this place you speak of?
BHL wrote:That may have been something you were brought up with but not I. It's also not biblical. Biblical speaking than women belongs to the man AND the man belongs to the woman. They are to treat each other likewise.
BHL wrote:God knew us before we were in the womb. What's not to understand?