Planned Parenthood endorses post-birth abortion

reply to post by beezzer

Point one; when a woman becomes pregnant, she shares her body with another.

She shares her fallopian tubes with a zygote for 5 weeks, then she shares her uterus with a blastocyst for another 2 before it becomes an embryo that is developing a brain stem and spinal column.

The fate of the body within is at the whim of the mother.

It isn't a body until about 10 weeks. But I believe most States define unborn child at embryo.

Point two; outlawing abortion will not end abortion. True. Teaching the values of a human life, teaching morality, might

Social engineering?

Point three; we are talking about post-birth death and the total lack of value placed on a human life here.

I don't think the woman the OP and you are outraged about is exhibiting a lack of value on human life, she is stating it is between the doctor and the family. A Planned Parenthood councilor has no place after a woman has decided to go ahead with an abortion, they're out of the equation.

I believe all States have seperate laws for abortions after 27 weeks (legally viable) that they can only be performed if the mother's life is at serious risk and there is a law protecting that child if it lives, so I'm not sure why this is even being debated.Born-Alive Infant Protection Act signed into law in 2002, something I agreed with GW Bush on, by the way.

The first time I aided in giving birth, was to a woman who fell down a flight of stairs because she was drunk. She didn't give a tinkers damn about her child. She was pissed because her last beer bottle broke.

That's really sad, that woman shouldn't be a mother. I wonder how that girl is doing now.

You are a mother, how could you NOT hold your own and weep against the miracle?

You're emotional about this issue so I'll let that slide and answer. When I held my son for the 1st time I more than wept, I literally felt like I would physically explode because there was no way my body could contain the amount of love and joy I was experiencing, I couldn't breathe because I was trying to hold back my sobbing so that I wouldn't scare him. Yes he was a miracle.

But I am not every woman, I wanted to be a mother, he was conceived in love. My emotional attachment to my zygote and blastocyst and embryo and baby were there because I wanted him, not because zygotes and blastocysts are human.

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by beezzer

 

I find it evil to outlaw a woman's choice.
Women have always, women to this day in ME countries and other countries that abortion are illegal in, have ways to take care of an unwanted pregnancy, modern medicine has a much safer way to do it. Outlawing abortion won't stop abortion, just criminalize women for deciding on whether they want to or can be a mother at that time as well as put the health of the woman at risk and if it fails could have a profound effect on the development. You're a doctor of some sort aren't you? You know the stages of pregnancy, most abortions are performed very early before there's even technically a fetus

You find it evil to outlaw a woman's choice.
Conclusion: murder of unborn babies is a good.
Conclusion. One cannot criminalise a good.

Truly, good is evil and evil is good

reply to post by WhoKnows100


I never said murdering unborn babies was good.
But I understand that people like you have to use such tactics to make someone, that has a different opinion than yourself, look bad.

Life should be cherished. Without conditions.

Unfortunately life is just a commodity, an annoyance. A growth in some woman's belly. It has become a commodity. A bartering tool. A parasite.

A thing to destroy before it is born and after.

Progressives? Fair warning. DON'T YOU DARE USE SANDYHOOK AS AN EXAMPLE TO WHY WE NEED TO RID SOCIETY OF GUNS!

If a casual murder of a child is okay in an abortion clinic, then you should not shed a god damned tear for those at SandyHook!

reply to post by tothetenthpower

Planned Parenthood does NOT support post-birth abortion. They are stating they are not getting involved in a medical decision that is for the birth parents and the doctors involved.

reply to post by Southern Guardian

What did the representative say about post-birth abortion? She said that this decision should be left up to the woman in question and her doctor.

See, at that point, I don't think it should be the parent's choice any longer. The chief argument I always hear from pro choice advocates is that 'it's a woman's body' and even some more morbid statements like the fetus is a 'parasite' inside the woman so it's her choice.

In this instance of a failed abortion attempt, it is no longer 'the woman's body' but it's own separate entity so the old pro-choice argument fails. If the mother doesn't want the child- fair enough. But at that point, it should no longer be her call.

reply to post by beezzer

If a casual murder of a child is okay in an abortion clinic, then you should not shed a god damned tear for those at SandyHook!

BRAVO!!!!!!


You my friend! Have pulled aside the curtain and shown the man behind it!!

FEED on the hypocrisy !

My friend! Your statement, was so brilliant, I am copying it and sending out in a few emails!

Honestly Beezer! That is the most profound and honest statement I have seen on ATS!!!! You ever get to W. PA let me know, beers on me!

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by beezzer

 

Point one; when a woman becomes pregnant, she shares her body with another.

She shares her fallopian tubes with a zygote for 5 weeks, then she shares her uterus with a blastocyst for another 2 before it becomes an embryo that is developing a brain stem and spinal column.

The fate of the body within is at the whim of the mother.

It isn't a body until about 10 weeks. But I believe most States define unborn child at embryo.

Point two; outlawing abortion will not end abortion. True. Teaching the values of a human life, teaching morality, might

Social engineering?

Point three; we are talking about post-birth death and the total lack of value placed on a human life here.

I don't think the woman the OP and you are outraged about is exhibiting a lack of value on human life, she is stating it is between the doctor and the family. A Planned Parenthood councilor has no place after a woman has decided to go ahead with an abortion, they're out of the equation.

I believe all States have seperate laws for abortions after 27 weeks (legally viable) that they can only be performed if the mother's life is at serious risk and there is a law protecting that child if it lives, so I'm not sure why this is even being debated.Born-Alive Infant Protection Act signed into law in 2002, something I agreed with GW Bush on, by the way.

The first time I aided in giving birth, was to a woman who fell down a flight of stairs because she was drunk. She didn't give a tinkers damn about her child. She was pissed because her last beer bottle broke.

That's really sad, that woman shouldn't be a mother. I wonder how that girl is doing now.

You are a mother, how could you NOT hold your own and weep against the miracle?

You're emotional about this issue so I'll let that slide and answer. When I held my son for the 1st time I more than wept, I literally felt like I would physically explode because there was no way my body could contain the amount of love and joy I was experiencing, I couldn't breathe because I was trying to hold back my sobbing so that I wouldn't scare him. Yes he was a miracle.

But I am not every woman, I wanted to be a mother, he was conceived in love. My emotional attachment to my zygote and blastocyst and embryo and baby were there because I wanted him, not because zygotes and blastocysts are human.

Zygotes and blastocysts are just science terms for baby!
Will we ever recognise satans? They are adversaries to God's revealed words and what He has placed in our consciences. You absolutely did not weep for any darn zygote, you wept because your BABY was born! You wept at the miracle of creation of life coming from your womb! You wept at the joy! A woman caught up in acute alcoholism or drugs does not experience the joy simply because they want that alcohol or drugs more. And it is because of those things that the BABY becomes an interference to their addictions. It's no different than any woman who chooses abortion - the excuses are endless, the excuses that are used to reason away what all of our consciences know - it's a BABY. They'll latch on to anything to justify that it's not murder - the doctors deem it not life just a zygote...the doctors deem it not life just a fetus ...society says its my choice......zygotes aren't "human"....

Woman in the days of pyramids handed over their newborns for slaughter in hopes of a better harvest.... And today the pyramids are coming back and yet we cannot recognise that women are handing over their babies in hopes of "better harvests" too - more money, more convenience, better careers, continued addictions etc.

In other words, it's state sanctified child sacrifice. If we call yesteryear child sacrifice, then call a spade a spade.

reply to post by beezzer


Now I'm gonna call you out.

Unfortunately life is just a commodity, an annoyance. A growth in some woman's belly. It has become a commodity. A bartering tool. A parasite.

BS! Your emotions have gotten the better of you here.

Progressives? Fair warning. DON'T YOU DARE USE SANDYHOOK AS AN EXAMPLE TO WHY WE NEED TO RID SOCIETY OF GUNS!

That's about the 3rd or 4th post I've seen of yours today that lumps anyone who doesn't agree with you as Progressives and in a tone that suggests you view them as an enemy. Are you drinking today? I can't otherwise fathom where this is coming from.

reply to post by WhoKnows100


Religious fanatics don't typically understand science, so I'll kindly thank your God to stay the hell out of my business.

But in case you are curious this is a blastocyst.

It's amazing to me that Dr Krevorkian spent time in jail for mercy killing those who willingly made the choice to die because of their suffering and yet women and doctors might soon be allowed to make the choice to kill live babies who might or might not be suffering but were born ALIVE.

Murder plain and simple.

I have halfheartedly believed that some abortions should be allowed...rape, incest, if mothers life is in jeopardy and that is her or the fathers wish. But there is a point when a embryo is still an embryo and a fetus is an actual live baby.

I'll never understand the Liberal agenda. Isnt this the same country that was in an uproar that involved the murders of small children? and now they want to allow the murder of small infants. One minute "save the children" and then "kill the babies" "we need to allow women to kill their babies" WTF? talk about mixed messages.

Women can't abandon baby's in orphanages yet they want to allow women to murder them after an actual live birth. Imbeciles!!

This world disgusts me.

reply to post by Kali74

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by beezzer

 

Now I'm gonna call you out.

Bring it.

BS! Your emotions have gotten the better of you here.

Progressives? Fair warning. DON'T YOU DARE USE SANDYHOOK AS AN EXAMPLE TO WHY WE NEED TO RID SOCIETY OF GUNS!

That's about the 3rd or 4th post I've seen of yours today that lumps anyone who doesn't agree with you as Progressives and in a tone that suggests you view them as an enemy. Are you drinking today? I can't otherwise fathom where this is coming from.

I'm trying to avoid republican-democrat.

Progressives have oozed their way into both sides.

As I stated in a previous post, GW Bush signed a law that prohibits killing a living child after an abortion attempt.
There isn't even a case since 2002 when any of this would be an issue. That law in my opinion was the right thing to do.

Manufactured outrage over something there is a law prohibiting.

reply to post by beezzer

Progressives? Fair warning. DON'T YOU DARE USE SANDYHOOK AS AN EXAMPLE TO WHY WE NEED TO RID SOCIETY OF GUNS!

That argument could easily be turned around. CONSERVATIVES AND CHRISTIANS DON'T YOU DARE TRY TO OUTLAW ABORTIONS WHEN GUNS ARE USED TO SLAUGHTER CHILDREN!

Isn't quite fair, is it?

Disclaimer: I support the 2nd amendment and was only trying to make a point.

reply to post by brandiwine14

Originally posted by brandiwine14
It's amazing to me that Dr Krevorkian spent time in jail for mercy killing those who willingly made the choice to die because of their suffering and yet women and doctors might soon be allowed to make the choice to kill live babies who might or might not be suffering but were born ALIVE.

Not sure where you came on with the idea that pro-choicers oppose voluntary euthanasia by the suffering and elderly? I personally don't so, I'm yet to meet a pro-choice advocate who does.

I have halfheartedly believed that some abortions should be allowed...rape, incest,

Which is rather hypocritical. In one breath you claim abortion is murder, plain and simple, but in another breath you make this little exception in the case of rape and incest, yet it doesn't change fact that by your definition, you're still committing murder. So make up your mind, you either oppose abortions or you don't.

reply to post by AshleyD


Do I supported the killing of born babies from botched abortions? For no legitimate reason? Nope. Neither did the woman in the video state that she endorsed such a practice or whether she personally supported it.

I'm just curious what cases concerning the murder of babies born from botched abortions, for no legitimate reasons, are there. Let me know if you find any?

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Because in the case of a rape or murder it comes down to the life and sanity of the mother or the child who has not yet been born. When women and girls who have been the victim of rape or incest are forced to go through with a full term pregnancy then give birth they themselves often die inside, live out their lives like a dead vacant shell of existence (I don't wish that on anybody). At that point it becomes a choice of life for one or the other and that choice should then be up to the women or girl whose body the fetus is inside of.
Though I still think that under no cirsumstances should post birth abortions be allowed, did I not make that clear before?

Big difference in an eight week old fetus and a live born breathing on it's own baby dont you think?

There was a story not a long ago, I am sure that someone brought it up (I didn't read the entire thread), where a woman had 'finished the job' on several babies with scissors.

I am very anti-abortion, it's a position I will not debate, and, will not apologize for.

I believe a person's a person no matter how small, which might be because I have some small people who follow me around calling me mommy and asking me for things all day.

I just cannot wrap my mind around killing a baby that survived something like that. If they lived through the procedure, I think the kid deserves a shot. I am sure that if they survived, there would plenty people who would jump at the chance to adopt them.

Killing a living, breathing baby, regardless of the situation, can no longer be termed an abortion; it's murder no matter how you slice it.

reply to post by brandiwine14

Because in the case of a rape or murder it comes down to the life and sanity of the mother or the child who has not yet been born.

Oh I agree and I'm glad you recognize this, but it doesn't make you any less of a hypocrite. If murdering an innocent life is never justified (because abortions in your view are murder, period), then the crime committed to the mother would not really be a real justification to killing that "human being" regardless.

I understand perfectly well why anti-abortionists try and avoid discussing abortion in the case of rape, because they always end up sounding hypocritical, much like you here.

Though I still think that under no cirsumstances should post birth abortions be allowed,

Who stated in this thread that they support post birth abortions?? In fact, did the representative from planned parent hood endorse post-birth abortions? Or did she state this is between the physician and the woman in question, which isn't necessarily an admission that they support it?

Tell me, are post-birth abortions a problem? Do they exist? Has there been a case of a born baby was killed for no legitimate reason and this was legal?

reply to post by Southern Guardian


I believe her opposition was transporting the baby to a hospital for immediate life saving measures, and her reasoning was that often times that can be a 40 minute ride which would be too late for the child. The law apparently requires that a surviving baby be transported to a hospital... life saving measures could be administered on the spot.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
reply to post by beezzer

 

I do support the woman's right and choice to have an abortion, which is not murder.

If they try to abort the baby, and it survives, it IS MURDER if they kill it again.

Jesus, how many times do you support a woman killing a fetus?

Are you OK with women killing 1 year olds? yes? Then why not one minute olds? When does it stop being OK to kill babies? If I stick a child up my butt can I claim it's MY body to kill anything inside it?

Sick sick sick...