Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Brown Bomber

gctest50 wrote: »

Can you think of a better method ?

Yes. Adoption.

My wife was born to a homeless drug addict in Chile and was left to an orphanage. She was adopted into a Swedish family who are multi-millionaires and extremely kind and loving parents. She has had a wonderful life full of every opportunity you could imagine.

Alternatively she could have had her brain sucked from her head so her skull would cave in before she had a chance at life.

Brown Bomber

gctest50 wrote: »

...................

Found the non-looper version of above pic

:rolleyes: The PG version more like.

Mark Hamill

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Perhaps. If you ever find out let me know but for know I think I'll take the word of the credentialed medical expert.

Are you incapable of critically examining the medical experts opinion yourself? Do you understand the problem I have with their description of events? Do you have an explanation for why my problem is flawed, another source perhaps? Because we now have another poster, Lingua Franca, telling us that the foetus does get a direct injection to avoid pain, thus directly contradicting the medics claim. Do you not think that maybe its important to find out if you're right, you know for the sake of the women you would deny abortions?

gctest50

Brown Bomber wrote: »

:rolleyes: The PG version more like.

Like some of the rest of your posts,

the pic you posted has been "modified" for maximum "appeal-to-emotion"

Nodin

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Yes. Adoption.

My wife was born to a homeless drug addict in Chile and was left to an orphanage. She was adopted into a Swedish family who are multi-millionaires and extremely kind and loving parents. She has had a wonderful life full of every opportunity you could imagine.

Alternatively she could have had her brain sucked from her head so her skull would cave in before she had a chance at life.

....good thing to see we're steering away from the emotional arguments.

Had the latter happened, neither you nor her would have been aware of it.

Brown Bomber

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Are you incapable of critically examining the medical experts opinion yourself? Do you understand the problem I have with their description of events? Do you have an explanation for why my problem is flawed, another source perhaps? Because we now have another poster, Lingua Franca, telling us that the foetus does get a direct injection to avoid pain, thus directly contradicting the medics claim. Do you not think that maybe its important to find out if you're right, you know for the sake of the women you would deny abortions?

You have already explained why your explanation is flawed i.e. you are have admitted you are not sure what you are talking about. I am quite sure the medical expert does know what he is talking about.

Brown Bomber

gctest50 wrote: »

Like some of the rest of your posts,

the pic you posted has been "modified" for maximum "appeal-to-emotion"

An unborn child up to 24 weeks old having it's limbs ripped from it's body doesn't need to be "modified" for impact. This is the harsh reality. Not the watered down version you provided.

Brown Bomber

Mark Hamill wrote: »

It is incredibly dishonest to quote a source but not show where you are getting your information from. Your source is the wiki page on Intact dilation and extraction, which starts with a boxed warning which states:

and then goes onto say:

so like Lingua Franca said, it is not in any way representative of late term abortions. In fact, according to the end of the wiki page, it does not happen in the UK at all:

Unfortunately they do happen, they are hushed up. The official figures are worthless. As the very first media investigation into this revealed. The numbers for NJ alone were higher than than the official national figures.

Pro-choice activists categorically insist that only 500 of the 1.5 million abortions performed each year, in this country involve the partial-birth method, in which a live fetus is pulled partway into the birth canal before it is aborted. They also contend that the procedure is reserved for pregnancies gone tragically awry, when the mother's life or health is endangered, or when the fetus is so defective that it won't survive after birth anyway.

The pro-choice claim has been passed on without question in several leading newspapers and by prominent commentators and politicians, including President Clinton.

But interviews with physicians who use the method reveal that in New Jersey alone, at least 1,500 partial-birth abortions are performed each year--three times the supposed national rate. Moreover, doctors say only a `minuscule amount' are for medical reasons.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r104:1:./temp/~r104MKF4AO:e25486:

Brown Bomber

I found this account by a nurse working with an abortionist extremely sad. Truly gruesome.
http://judiciary.house.gov/legacy/215.htm

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
TESTIMONY OF BRENDA PRATT SHAFER, R.N.
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 21, 1996

Mr. Chairman and honorable members of the Judiciary Committee, I am Brenda Pratt Shafer. I am here before you, at the request of the Committee, to relate to you my experience as an eyewitness to what is now known as the partial-birth abortion procedure.


I am a registered nurse, licensed in the State of Ohio, with 14 years of experience. In 1993, 1 was employed by Kimberly Quality Care, a nursing agency in Dayton, Ohio. In September, 1993, Kimberly Quality Care asked me to accept assignment at the Women's Medical Center, which is operated by Dr. Martin Haskell. I readily accepted the assignment because I was at that time very pro-choice.
...

On the second day, I saw Dr. Haskell do a second- trimester procedure that is called a D & E (dilation and evacuation). He used ultrasound to examine the fetus. Then he used forceps to pull apart the baby inside the uterus, bringing it out piece by piece and piece, throwing the pieces in a pan.
...

On the third day, Dr. Haskell asked me to observe as he performed several of the procedures that are the subject of this hearing. Although I was in that clinic on assignment of the agency, Dr. Haskell was interested in hiring me full time, and I was being given orientation in the entire range of procedures provided at that facility.


I was present for three of these partial-birth procedures. It is the first one that I will describe to you in detail.


The mother was six months pregnant (261/2weeks). A doctor told her that the baby had Down Syndrome and she decided to have an abortion. She came in the first two days to have the laminaria inserted and changed, and she cried the whole time. On the third day she came in to receive the partial-birth procedure.


Dr. Haskell brought the ultrasound in and hooked it up so that he could see the baby. On the ultrasound screen, I could see the heart beating. As Dr. Haskell watched the baby on the ultrasound screen, the baby's heartbeat was clearly visible on the ultrasound screen.


Dr. Haskell went in with forceps and grabbed the baby's legs and pulled them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby's body and the arms-- everything but the head. The doctor kept the baby's head just inside the uterus.


The baby's little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors through the back of his head, and the baby's arms jerked out in a flinch, a startle reaction, like a baby does when he thinks that he might 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 was completely limp.


I was really completely unprepared for what I was seeing. I almost threw up as I watched the doctor do these things.
...
Dr. Haskell delivered the baby's head. He cut the umbilical cord and delivered the placenta. He threw that baby in a pan, along with the placenta and the instruments he'd used. I saw the baby move in the pan. I asked another nurse and she said it was just "reflexes."


I have been a nurse for a long time and I have seen a lot of death-- people maimed in auto accidents, gunshot wounds, you name it. I have seen surgical procedures of every sort. But in all my professional years, I had never witnessed anything like this.


The woman wanted to see her baby, so they cleaned up the baby and put it in a blanket and handed the baby to her. She cried the whole time, and she kept saying, "I'm so sorry, please forgive me!" I was crying too. I couldn't take it. That baby boy had the most perfect angelic face I have ever seen.

Chattastrophe!

Wtf is wrong with you. Do you get off on looking up that sort of stuff?

As has been explained to you several times, that procedure is extremely rare. It is NOT the usual method of abortion. Nobody here is arguing for the introduction of late-term partial birth abortions in Ireland. Why post those things when they are completely irrelevant to the issue at hand?

Esoteric_

Just because somebody is pro-choice, that does not mean that they believe in late term, partial birth abortions. I sure as hell don't. IF I were to ever have an abortion (I don't want to ever have any myself, but if I were raped I would not be able to carry a rapist's baby, that is the only circumstance in which I would personally have one), I wouldn't have one past 16 weeks, which, iirc, is when the heartbeat starts.

Turtwig

Morning folks,

Just a wee little reminder to keep things civil and avoid personal insinuations. Comments asking if a person gets off on something are inappropriate.
K, thanks, enjoy your weekend.



Bb, would you mind spoilerising the more graphic stuff and leaving a warning around it. Both sides have horror stories that can be told but not everyone will be up for reading them.

magicbastarder

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Yes. Adoption.

My wife was born to a homeless drug addict in Chile and was left to an orphanage. She was adopted into a Swedish family who are multi-millionaires and extremely kind and loving parents. She has had a wonderful life full of every opportunity you could imagine.

are there five million pairs of millionaires in sweden who would be up for adopting a new child every year? if you're suggesting that adoption is the answer to every abortion.

loveisdivine

It would be useful if brown bomber could post some information that's actually relevant to Ireland.

You keep posting all these examples of obscure cases from America and its just scaremongering.

Why not address the facts of what's happening here, in Ireland.

_rebelkid

No foetal pain up to 24 weeks

aloyisious

@Brown Bomber: ta for the bombshell you posted, I'm sorry (not) that it may have collaterally-damaged your position and rebounded on you. It's the Official Position of the current Irish Gov't that it gives Irish Women a bit more freedom of choice on what happen's to their bodies (even if a European Court bounced it, as our state's Govt, into doing so). Our state, as part of our EU membership obligations, bound us to recognize the EU courts decisions as not a menu we can pick and choose from.

No one can credibly expect Lucinda Creighton to remain as a Govt Minister while opposing a Govt bill. Ditto for being credible as a TD member of a Govt party, while opposing a furtherance of woman's rights.

You're free to maintain your position, if you want to. Just bear in mind that YOU do not lose any rights by the Govt bill passing into law.

If it's all about defence of the unborn (on the grounds that no one speaks for them) please remember that abortion is not just about a matter of convenience for women (despite some interested parties claims) it's also a matter of necessity. Please also keep in mind that a woman who has had an abortion can conceive again and have a full-term pregnancy.

_rebelkid

aloyisious wrote: »

Please also keep in mind that a woman who has had an abortion can conceive again and have a full-term pregnancy.

That is something all too often forgotten by the anti-abortion side. Yes, all life is "precious", but not all life is feasible. Just because one unborn doesn't get to fuel gestation doesn't mean another by the same mother won't. If they are serious about having kids, but can't do it for whatever reason the first time, they'll no doubt take an even more reasoned and serious approach to their subsequent attempts at pregnancy.

Mark Hamill

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You have already explained why your explanation is flawed i.e. you are have admitted you are not sure what you are talking about. I am quite sure the medical expert does know what he is talking about.

Except I am saying the medical expert (should they even exist, because lets face it, making up a medical expert wouldn't be on a top ten list of worst things pro-lifers had done) is contradicted by medical practise. I wasn't sure at first, but from Lingua Franca's post and googling it, I am sure now that the method proposed by the medical expert is not what is done. Why would they anaesthetise the foetus via the mother when they can just supply it directly to the foetus?

Mark Hamill

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Unfortunately they do happen, they are hushed up. The official figures are worthless. As the very first media investigation into this revealed. The numbers for NJ alone were higher than than the official national figures.

How does pointing out they happened in the US in the past impact on teh fact they don't happen in the UK?
Your link is dead, but from googling I imagine you were quoting a Congregational record? You are going to have to do better than a politician referencing a newspaper article. We need the original article to make sure the reference is accurate and to see how the reporter came to her numbers.

Then again, that's all largely academic, because partial birth abortions were banned in the US in 2003, so still not representative of late trimester abortions.

Lingua Franca

Sure why acknowledge the mundane truth when it's more amusing to post fantastical nonsense from pro life sites and graphic descriptions of a procedure that isn't performed?

Some of the recent posts here are beneath contempt.

aloyisious

What's "said" in this news item - http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/group-of-psychiatrists-back-creightons-abortion-amendments-29401482.html - amuses me with it's inherent contradiction, re the last line, if I'm correct in thinking that Lucinda is against the mere notion of abortion itself being enshrined in a Govt bill.

Mark Hamill

aloyisious wrote: »

What's "said" in this news item - http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/group-of-psychiatrists-back-creightons-abortion-amendments-29401482.html - amuses me with it's inherent contradiction, re the last line, if I'm correct in thinking that Lucinda is against the mere notion of abortion itself being enshrined in a Govt bill.

I'm more amused how three psychiatrists constitutes a group according to the indo.

Doctor Strange

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Yes. Adoption.

So a woman should be forced to carry a child to term?

bumper234

Unforgettable _ Fire wrote: »

So a woman should be forced to carry a child to term?

If you are expecting to get a straight answer for this then i wouldn't hold your breath. I asked something BEAR the same thing last night and it managed to avoid answering everytime (even whinged to a mod about me and tried to set rules cor the thread lol) Keep asking by all means because it at least seems to make them squirm. For the record most of them would happily make a rape victim carry the child to term if it meant saving the rape baby (would probably insist on father having visitation rights too)

shruikan2553

antiskeptic wrote: »

I'd suspect little was made of the imbalance since it was a pro-life rally.

I also suspect that a point of importance might be that the protest outnumbered anything the pro-choice movement managed to stir up anywhere along the line. Did the pro-choice movement do anything in fact? I'm not a news hound but I don't recall hearing much of anything in that direction.

Enda the day, 30, 40, 50 or 60 thousand people turning out has a significance. Made more especially so if no one turns up for the opposite. Whether that makes a difference to what has been a sorry excuse of a (government issued) case for abortion is neither here nor there.

I never heard about any pro choice events, its always the pro life people advertising.

60k is a lot but consider the youth defense multiple, children and people brought in to massage the numbers how many of that 60k are able to vote?

They seem to have some idea that out numbering pro choice in these events matter when it makes no difference. All the other statistics show that they are a minority and if I had to choose between people with work with statistics or a bunch of religious nuts who protest against something until they lose (eg contraception) I think I will listen to the people with jobs in the area.

marienbad

shruikan2553 wrote: »

I never heard about any pro choice events, its always the pro life people advertising.

60k is a lot but consider the youth defense multiple, children and people brought in to massage the numbers how many of that 60k are able to vote?

They seem to have some idea that out numbering pro choice in these events matter when it makes no difference. All the other statistics show that they are a minority and if I had to choose between people with work with statistics or a bunch of religious nuts who protest against something until they lose (eg contraception) I think I will listen to the people with jobs in the area.

The pro life people are missing the point in this numbers comparision game.
From a pro choice perspective the bill will be law this time next week so why bother ?.

YD and co. are whistling in the dark at this stage .

shruikan2553

marienbad wrote: »

The pro life people are missing the point in this numbers comparision game.
From a pro choice perspective the bill will be law this time next week so why bother ?.

YD and co. are whistling in the dark at this stage .

I would consider it more screaming and throwing toys out of the pram than whistling.

Be interesting to hear what crap they come up with afterwards, I'm sure it will be well thought out and logical.

bumper234

shruikan2553 wrote: »

I would consider it more screaming and throwing toys out of the pram than whistling.

Be interesting to hear what crap they come up with afterwards, I'm sure it will be well thought out and logical.

I work around d city centre I wonder will they be upping their campaign as it gets closer? Not had one of those aborted foetus pics shoved in my face in a while.

The Black Oil

Well, Lucinda ain't happy with Reilly.

Tweet

Found this in the FG 2011 manifesto -

European Court of Human Rights Judgement on Abortion: We will establish an all-party committee, with access to medical and legal expertise, to consider the implications of the recent ruling of the ECHR and to make recommendations. Such a process would, we believe, be the best way of examining the issues in
a way that respects the range of sincerely-held views on this matter.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0215/finegaelmanifesto.pdf

So...I presume there is more to this.

Galvasean

bumper234 wrote: »

I work around d city centre I wonder will they be upping their campaign as it gets closer? Not had one of those aborted foetus pics shoved in my face in a while.

Upping their campaign would be impressive. You can barely walk 20 yards in Dublin city center without seeing a poster or encountering the fetus-mobile.