It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Baby’s lives matter: Journalist questions abortion after PP videos

page: 10
12
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Chrisfishenstein


According to Websters Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language, viable of a fetus it means having reached such a stage of development as to be capable of living, under normal conditions, outside the uterus.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...




posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: kaylaluv

YES.

We, here in the US, don't abort viable fetuses.



again..wrong....www.newsweek.com...




Premature babies born at 22 weeks are more likely to survive outside the womb than previously thought, according to new research.

The study, published in The New England Journal of Medicine on Thursday, looked at nearly 5,000 babies born before 27 weeks of gestation. It found that a significant number of babies who were born at 22 weeks, just over five months of gestation, survived after being medically treated in a hospital. Previously, 22 weeks was considered too early to resuscitate a baby because survival rates were so low.



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Chrisfishenstein


According to Websters Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language, viable of a fetus it means having reached such a stage of development as to be capable of living, under normal conditions, outside the uterus.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


So a baby at 20 weeks, is that viable? It can't survive under NORMAL conditions but it sure can being incubated until grown properly....You want to kill it because it doesn't fit under the term viable?



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: kellyjay

Don't send me hunting for proof as why I'm wrong, tell me why I'm wrong. Quote the article.


i posted the link...try clicking it


Not going on a scavenger hunt. I stand by my posts.



no need for a scavenger hunt the whole post is about babies being viable at 22 weeks.....the whole post is your answer....click it


Roe V Wade prohibits abortion after viability. Late term abortion target fetuses that are stricken with anomalies that make them "incompatible with life", enviable.



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Chrisfishenstein


According to Websters Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language, viable of a fetus it means having reached such a stage of development as to be capable of living, under normal conditions, outside the uterus.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


What about that definition don't you understand?


edit on 12-8-2015 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

So you will just dismiss what I said? Figures.....

By the way Webster, how about answering the question instead of repeating the encyclopedia to me?



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: kellyjay

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: kellyjay

Don't send me hunting for proof as why I'm wrong, tell me why I'm wrong. Quote the article.


i posted the link...try clicking it


Not going on a scavenger hunt. I stand by my posts.




no need for a scavenger hunt the whole post is about babies being viable at 22 weeks.....the whole post is your answer....click it


Roe V Wade prohibits abortion after viability. Late term abortion target fetuses that are stricken with anomalies that make them "incompatible with life", enviable.

PP carrys out abortions at 24 weeks...



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: kellyjay


The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid," adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks.
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: kellyjay


The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid," adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks.
en.wikipedia.org...





Premature babies born at 22 weeks are more likely to survive outside the womb than previously thought, according to new research.

The study, published in The New England Journal of Medicine on Thursday, looked at nearly 5,000 babies born before 27 weeks of gestation. It found that a significant number of babies who were born at 22 weeks, just over five months of gestation, survived after being medically treated in a hospital. Previously, 22 weeks was considered too early to resuscitate a baby because survival rates were so low


www.newsweek.com...

what year was roe v wade again? 1973 right? but medicine and technology hasnt advanced one iota since then right?....right??



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Chrisfishenstein

I linked you to wonderful "abstract" on fetal viability that addresses all your questions, written by a physician, who is far more qualified to answer you than me.



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: kellyjay




what year was roe v wade again? 1973 right? but medicine and technology hasnt advanced one iota since then right?....right??


That may be, but Planned Parenthood hasn't broken the law.



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Chrisfishenstein

that anger post wasnt aimed at you....



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: kellyjay




what year was roe v wade again? 1973 right? but medicine and technology hasnt advanced one iota since then right?....right??


That may be, but Planned Parenthood hasn't broken the law.


we are talking about viability you say its 28 wks by using roe v wade thats over 30 years old and im proving that babies can be viable at 22 weeks



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: kellyjay

I agree that Roe V Wade is outdated. I also think that science will answer our problems before lawmakers do.

Here's a thread I did on that:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

But, the issues that are going round and round in this thread, and others, is whether or not Planned Parenthood is breaking the law. So far, no one has proven that they are.



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: kellyjay

I agree that Roe V Wade is outdated. I also think that science will answer our problems before lawmakers do.

Here's a thread I did on that:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

But, the issues that are going round and round in this thread, and others, is whether or not Planned Parenthood is breaking the law. So far, no one has proven that they are.



and we dont have evidence that they havent,which is hy im witing to see what the investigation turns up



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: windword


But, the issues that are going round and round in this thread, and others, is whether or not Planned Parenthood is breaking the law. So far, no one has proven that they are.


Not really....Kelly and I were talking about viability multiple times and you Webstered us over and over....If you don't want to face the question, I understand when someone gives up....Hint, Webster nor "science" will answer this question for you...dick



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: kellyjay




and we dont have evidence that they havent,which is hy im witing to see what the investigation turns up


Innocent until proven guilty.

Anyway, for perspective, here's some snippets from one woman's story of her "late term" abortion.


Our daughter Maia was 2 years old and we were halfway through our second pregnancy, I could feel our baby moving. I had my “20 week ultrasound” when I was actually 21 weeks pregnant. We were so excited.



After a long wait, the genetic counselor came in and wrote 2 long words on a piece of paper and turned it towards us and slowly read out loud “Thanatoporic dysplasia”. “What’s that??? I interrupted.

She said it is a rare form of dwarfism. “Oh, so our baby will be a dwarf.” The air was so thick. Pointing at the first word she said “thanatophoric” means “imminent death”. WHAT?? What do you mean??? My head was screaming, even though the room was completely silent.



Our counselor called with more had bad news. To comply with Wisconsin’s 24 hour waiting period law, I would be too far along to have the procedure at Planned Parenthood. She said there is a clinic in Chicago who could see me in a few days. If they assessed that the baby was too big, then I would have to go to Kansas.



Friday morning, lying on my hotel bed, my partner and our moms all laid their hands on my belly. We said prayers. We said goodbye. Goodbye baby boy. Goodbye Evan.


Why I had a late term abortion



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Chrisfishenstein

Look, you can bluster and bloviate all you want. The fact is, you can't force your morality on others.



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 10:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Chrisfishenstein

Look, you can bluster and bloviate all you want. The fact is, you can't force your morality on others.



My morality? I asked you a question, now going on 5 times....Who is doing what here? Oh well, I don't care to hear your opinion now, you want to keep dodging because you KNOW what the retort will be....I would say well played but I will call you a coward instead...



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

windword, you have to remember that these anti-abortionists don't care what the mother thinks, or feels. the mother is simply a incubator to them. the mother has no critical-thinking skills, reason, or the mental ability to make choices regarding her own body....the anti-abortionists are the only ones that possess those attributes.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join