Ohio legislators propose total abortion ban

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Of course, the people of that time didn't have ultrasounds. The didn't
know that the unborn child sucks his/her thumb, sleeps, opens his/her
eyes, plays with the cord, etc. They also thought you'd fall off the
flat planet if you took a boat out too far. So much for their knowledge
of science, eh?

Well except Jesus who was God and knew everything, but just kept it from us right? Because he thought it would be cool to fight over abortion and evolution 2,000 years later in a part of the world nobody knew existed except that sneaky know-it-all bastard that didn't bother to tell us (and "bastard" is the appropriate term actually given the lack of formal paternal lineage with his 13 year old runaway mother).

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Interesting find riley. I wonder if this was ever later recanted
or changed by Christ?

No he didn't.. as far as I remember his job was meant to enforce or interprite laws correctly not change them.

Of course, the people of that time didn't have ultrasounds. The didn't know that the unborn child sucks his/her thumb, sleeps, opens his/her eyes, plays with the cord, etc. They also thought you'd fall off the
flat planet if you took a boat out too far. So much for their knowledge
of science, eh?

So are you saying that Moses [guy who said 'shalt not kill'] wasn't relaying knowledge directly from god and was just ignorant?

I understand your personal beliefs on abortion being concreted by ultrasounds and the development of the fetus.. but clearly the bible does not hold fetuses up in he same high regard.. or even make a major point of their 'equality' with the already born. It only has a few reference to it. One where a husband can ask for monetary compensation for a wife's miscarriage [price decided by him of course] if she's assaulted.. and another something like 'thou knit be in thy mother's womb'. The pro-life community seem to use the bible to support their political stance.. yet the bible doesn't support them apart from a relative interpritation of 'thalt shalt not kill [murder]'. This doesn't apply because the bible clearly does not consider a fetus a person.. as proven by having abortion used as punnishment for adultory.. and a fine for miscarriage. If it was considered murder.. under the old law of 'an eye for an eye' wouldn't the one who assaulted her have been put to death and not just fined?

First of all the bible doesn’t mention anything about “Fetuses”

It does mention to not to despise “Children” talking living and walking children that is what Jesus preached about the “littler ones”

Using the bible for moralistic approach to abortion can only come from mosses law of “you should not kill ”

But this falls under the self inflicted shame of Moses about he murdering in the eyes of God because he did it also, and to avoid the exile people killing each other under Abraham views of and eye for and eye.

Moses or the testament never mentions fetuses, but it was geared to living breathing humans.

The concept of killing fetuses is a nice and more manufactured way of the moral modern concept of life.

In order to hide the real agenda of taking and controlling women and their bodies now thanks to modern science the so call “miracle of procreation” can be view from its beginnings, all inside or outside a women’s womb not a man’s womb "because men don't have one" but a women and taking away almost the role of the women womb as a independent entity that we women can not and should not have control over, but only by the moralistic standards, courts, politicians and religious groups.

The womb is not isolated from the women’s body and is not to be legislated like it was but that is the whole issue in fighting abortion.

Religious fundamentalist and pro life advocate, most gear the attention of how incapable a women is to take care of her “WOMB” because it’s the most precious part of the body and the only part that can experience “THE MIRACLE” of life, the womb has to be protected, legislated and put on a tied leach, regardless of what the rightful owners want or not.

A “WOMB” is a liability and I will not be surprised if abortion is banned in this country it will be insurance practices making insurance policies just for the protection of female “WOMBS” after all once the courts take hold of it is not stopping the repercussions and new ways of manipulation of such women private parts.

Are you ladies ready for it?






[edit on 19-9-2005 by marg6043]

Originally posted by marg6043
an uterus is part of the women body

Sure. But the baby is not the mother. He or she is a baby.
Separate heart beat, separate brain, separate pain receptors
separate soul.

You as a women should know that is wrong and more
immoral than getting rid of a fetus to submit women to slavery
through the courts.

Your 'get rid of fetus' is actually 'painfully kill a preborn child'.
I can't think of anything more immoral than a woman painfully killing
her preborn child. Painful for the CHILD, and later on painful for the
mother. Studies have shown women who have abortions have a
difficult time later on mentally. Most women excercised their right
of 'choice' when they had sex and got pregnant. There is nothing
'slavery' about disallowing murder.

Your 'you as a woman should know' was funny. I find it strange that
you as a woman don't understand how inhumane it is to allow mothers
to shred and burn their preborn children to death. So much for a
nurturing womanhood.

but it was her "punishment from God"

Said who? If anyone said that, then they were idiots.

when I ask my mother what was wrong with
her she told me to mind my own business.

she should have explained things to you. But heck ...
Kids don't come with a set of instructions on how to
exactly raise them. Wish they did.

before Roe vs Wade nobody gave a darn to women's
back ally abortions but only to said that if they died they deserve it.

There are idiots who say the same thing now. Idiots then, idiots now,
and there will be the same idiots in the future.

You do know that the woman in Roe vs Wade is now a Catholic and
is VERY anti-abortion. I'll get some links to her quotes. She says she
was used by those on the radical left who had a pro-abortion agenda.

So now preventing abortions through banning is the right
thing to do, and let the sinners die with "BAD JOBS"

Uh ... no. I think the whole purpose is to end abortions everywhere.
Educate the women so that they know what they are doing to the
preborn child.

Lets take away the birth control rights

So how does not allowing killing preborn equate with taking away
condoms or birth control pills? Where did you come up with that?

when they have sex they are sinning anyway. Right?

You really are hung up on sex being a sin.
I'm talking about the fact that children die painfully.

fetuses and murder

preborn children and painful murder

Your right to your body and your right to decided what to do

Sure. But you aren't killing your own body. You are killing someone else.
Stopping THEIR heart. Painfully shredding or burning THEIR body.

Wake up women

I like ya' marg, but I'll say that right back at ya'
Wake up .... this is death.

Originally posted by RANT
Well except Jesus who was God and knew everything, but just kept it from us right? Because he thought it would be cool to fight over abortion and evolution 2,000 years later i

Remember the quotes from scripture - Christ said He had much more
to teach us but that we weren't ready yet. It was also said by John
(I THINK it was John) that Christ taught so much that if it were to be
all put into books the world couldn't hold it all. For all we know abortion,
evolution, aliens, the fact that the planet is roundish and circles the sun,
etc etc etc all could have been part of those 'many things yet to teach'
that we weren't ready for 2,000 years ago.

the lack of formal paternal lineage with his 13 year old runaway mother.

She was probably more like 15 and the paternal lineage of Christ is
The Holy Spirit (remember - 'how is this to be done since I am a virgin' -
the Holy Spirit overshadowed her and she became pregnant).

RANT - my stand on abortion is not from religious reasons. It just so
happens that my stand on it matches up with the religious right. I
don't believe in it because the child dies such a painful unnecessary
death. If people want to make the choice to have recreational sex,
that's their choice. But that's when the choice stops ... if the next
'choice' causes a little person to be painfully ripped apart or burnt to
death with saline chemicals.

That's why I'm against abortion.

Originally posted by riley
So are you saying that Moses [guy who said 'shalt not kill'] wasn't relaying knowledge directly from god and was just ignorant?

There are times in the bible that I definately think that. I dunno' about
God telling Moses to make a snake statue and to raise it up so that
when people looked upon it they would be cured. I don't know about
him telling his soldiers to wipe out the enemy - all of the enemy except
the young virgin girls that they could keep for themselves (so much for
the 'thou shalt not commit adultry).

I understand your personal beliefs on abortion being concreted
by ultrasounds and the development of the fetus..

YES! Thank you for seeing that. It's not a religious thing for me.
Not really. It's more of a .. look at this little person who you are
about to shred all because you and your partner didn't use a condom
and you KNEW you should have.

but clearly the bible does not hold fetuses up in the
same high regard..

You are absolutely right. It doesn't. The only religious thing I can
say against abortion is from the 10 commandments of - Thou Shalt
Not Kill. And when you look at ultrasounds and you look at how
doctors give pain killers to unborn children that they are performing
surgery on in the womb ... My heart, my instinct, and my head all
tell me that abortion is painfully killing children because of poor choices
made by the child's parents, and that killing that child is yet another
poor choice heaped on the first one.

A fetus is not an independent entity it can not survived outside the womb until is mature enough, putting the late time abortions here as a more credible issue.

A women has the right to her body not matter what it takes if abortion is part of the issue and what most anti abortionist wants to used to cover over the real issue of taking women rights to their bodies away so beat it.

What you as a women are falling to see is that abortion is the scapegoat.

Painful for who for the mother? is her body, or you mean a born child? I condemn killing born children and that is happening in records in our country.

Only pro life groups are the ones emphasizing the "FETUS FEELINGS" here.

And women that chose to have children without the means what about them? child abuse, child neglect is the best way to treat an unwanted child.

They are by the dozens in our nation children that nobody wants.

Nurture comes when a women is willing and ready to have a child, love, a caring partner and a full life.

Women that are not ready for pregnancies can not always provide for the well being of their children these children ofter become the children that nobody wants.

But that is not what pro life seekers care about they are for the "Rights of fetuses and the unborn" once the fetus is a living child who cares where it ends up, death or alive without "Nurturing or care"

The Roe vs Wade made her choice when she was able to do it and now she has turn very religious and Catholic for conveniences. Now that she got her wish when she had the need she rather see other women been robbed of their rights. I think she has gotten old and childbearing is no a problem with her anymore.

Educate women now without taking their rights away.

You know why that is not possible? because is never and has never been about abortion, education and contraceptive is all about "CONTROL" control of women's bodies.

You have been drilled by the pro life advocates about death and murder and now you are so willing to give the rights of you body to them and also the rights of your daughter that you can no even understand the meaning of the whole abortion issue but the drilling of "death and murder" very sad indeed.

Abortion is nothing but one of their goals in their agendas. Just like many women around they have been blind by the "Murder of the Innocent" rhetoric.

Learn my friend, learn the truth is not and never has been about fetuses and their rights but women and their rights to their bodies.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by RANT
Here's their zero exceptions, death penalty platform
for women with ectopic pregnancies.

Tubal ligation is a separate procedure from abortion.

You're right. tubal ligation (also known as tying the tubes) is a form of birth control. An ectopic pregnancy is when a fertilized egg attaches outside the uterus (usually in the tube) and must be aborted for the safety of the mother.

The termination of an ectopic pregnancy is an abortion.

(I think we need a few more abortion threads going...)

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
The termination of an ectopic pregnancy is an abortion.

(I think we need a few more abortion threads going...)

Actually for many women in this type of position with a ectopic pregnancy ofter the entire tube and ovary is remove.

I have a friend that she her only two pregnancies were in her Fallopian tubes, withing one year she became unable to have children after having to take away both ovaries and the tubes.

My sister in law also had to have one tube and ovary remove after a ectopic pregnacy.

Originally posted by marg6043
A fetus is not an independent entity it can not survived
outside the womb until is mature enough

The news this morning was talking about a baby who is one year old
and who was born at 8.6 OUNCES. She survived. Babies can survive
outside the womb at a VERY young age. She's doing fine.

Independent entity or not ... they feel the pain of abortion.

A women has the right to her body

As I said before, and I'll say for the last time because I'm beating
my head against a wall - in abortion the woman isn't aborting herself.
She's killing a different human being. It's not her heart that she is
stopping. It's not her body that she is burning with chemicals or
shredding. It's someone elses.

What you as a women are falling to see ...

What you as a woman are failing to see is that babies,
born or preborn, feel the pain.

Only pro life groups are the ones emphasizing the
"FETUS FEELINGS" here.

And that's the problem. Culture of deathers don't want to discuss
the FACT that the children in the womb feel the pain of abortion.
They give those same children pain killers to perform operations
on them in the womb, but then turn around and shred them and
burn them alive with chemicals.

And women that chose to have children without the means what about them? child abuse, child neglect is the best way to treat an unwanted child.

ADOPTION is the best way to treat an unexpected child that a
parent can't afford.

They are by the dozens in our nation children that nobody wants.

You have never tried to adopt, have you? When we started the process
10 years ago, the waiting list was ~6 years. We knew people on the list
who had been on it for four years and hadn't moved up even one spot.
The church adoption agencies were the same - Lutheran and Catholic
adoption. We ended up going to Bolivia to adopt.

Learn my friend, learn the truth is not and never has been about fetuses ........

No, not fetuses ... babies! With feelings. Who suck their
thumbs in the womb. Who open their eyes in the womb.
Who play with the cord in the womb. Who feel the PAIN!

Originally posted by marg6043
The Roe vs Wade made her choice when she was able to do it and now she has turn very religious and Catholic for conveniences. Now that she got her wish when she had the need she rather see other women been robbed of their rights. I think she has gotten old and childbearing is no a problem with her anymore.

Wrong.

The woman NEVER had the abortion. She had the baby and she
said that she never intended to have the abortion. She also said
that she LIED about being raped and was coaxed into doing so
to further the abortion cause. She hasn't disclosed how much money
she was paid to lie to get Roe V Wade through the courts.

The baby she refused to murder has grown up. She's ALIVE.

www.forerunner.com...

You may be cynical about her conversion to the Catholic Faith and
her being pro-life (heck, I'm cynical about everything so I don't
blame you), but here is the TRUE story, straight from her.
Her conversion definately wasn't 'convienient'. I'm sure it caused
a lot of difficulties breaking away from her former culture of death
life.

www.envoymagazine.com...



[edit on 9/20/2005 by FlyersFan]

Originally posted by FlyersFan
And when you look at ultrasounds and you look at how
doctors give pain killers to unborn children that they are performing
surgery on in the womb ... My heart, my instinct, and my head all
tell me that abortion is painfully killing children because of poor choices
made by the child's parents, and that killing that child is yet another
poor choice heaped on the first one.

I'd like to think that they would give pain killers if there is a chance they would feel it.. [I'm a bit confused as to why the fetus wouldn't become anethsitised if the mother is? Everything the mother ingests the baby does] Of course this would depend on their age and whether or not they have developed pain receptors. I personally object to like the idea of abortions being performed after the first trimestor.. but not knowing the individual circumstances I can't [and wouldn't] make a judgement as there are many disorders and diseases that can only be diagnosed later in pregancy. The earlier the better in my opinion but that can't always be the case.

Wrong.

The woman NEVER had the abortion. She had the baby and she
said that she never intended to have the abortion.

Though she still adopted it out.. and palmed her first two kids off to her mother and the other to the kid's father. So much for precious 'motherhood.'

5. Prior to my pregnancy with the "Roe" baby, I gave birth to two other children. My first, a daughter, was adopted by my mother. It is difficult to part with my child, yet I have always been comforted by the fact that my daughter is alive and cared for. My second daughter was raised by her father, a young intern at Baylor Methodist Medical School. He was kind enough to want to get married and make a home, but I wasn't ready for that kind of commitment.

www.reclaimamerica.org...
[btw.. afadavids do not mean much from someone who is willing to purger herself.]

She also said that she LIED about being raped and was coaxed into doing so to further the abortion cause. She hasn't disclosed how much money she was paid to lie to get Roe V Wade through the courts.

The baby she refused to murder has grown up. She's ALIVE.

The woman.. though you are praising her morality for not 'murdering' admits to lieing about being a rape victim [which is disgraceful in itself] ..in fact she apparently was trying to cover up an affair:

From Norma McCorvey: "Abortion has been founded on lies and deception from the very beginning. All I did was lie about how I got pregnant. I was having an affair. It all started out as a little lie. I said what I needed to say.

www.euthanasia.com...


and admits to having accepted an undisclosed [presumably alot] amount of money to commit purgery. Obviously her integrity is questionable.. how is the general public suppose to know that she hasn't been paid off to switch sides? If she was willing to put herself in the media spotlight to cash in.. how do you know she's not doing it now? Perhaps she decided being pro-life was more profitable. My personal feeling on this woman aside.. the outcome was the right one and if it wasn't her it would've been someone else.. backalley abortions needed to be stoped sooner or later.

[edit on 20-9-2005 by riley]

This would suggest that pain receptors simply aren't adequately developed before 24 weeks.

Of course, there are rebuttals to the article, and one is right here .

(admittedly the rebuttal is as biased as the article itself, though this doesn't negate either)

It's generally conceded to (by most physicians) that at, for example, 7 weeks gestation the fetus cannot feel pain. Does this make the question of pain moot?

And from Religious Tolerance's essay

The group determined that pain can only be felt by a fetus after nerve connections became established between two parts of its brain: the cortex and the thalamus. This happens about 26 weeks from conception. Professor Maria Fitzgerald of University College London, author of the working group's report, says that "little sensory input" reaches the brain of the developing fetus before 26 weeks. "Therefore reactions to noxious stimuli cannot be interpreted as feeling or perceiving pain."

Furthermore,

They recommended that the administration of painkillers should be considered before an abortion for any fetus which is 24 or more weeks since conception. This would give a 2 week safety factor in case the date of conception is incorrectly calculated

This last paragraph might actually be more relevant; it's acknowledging that yes, late term abortions necessitate the need for anesthesia.

Abortions are not going to disappear; they're not going away any time soon. If they absolutely must happen, does it not make sense to ensure the best treatment possible is available?

Or would we prefer to go back to death-by-infection, death by trauma, and the like?

If pain is being used as a reason to ban abortion, perhaps we should ban childbirth, because you cannot convince me that squeezing a child's head to fit through that opening isn't a bit painful. And babies almost always cry first thing. And also shots, vaccinations, etc. How cruel we are!

And I don't know about you, but I don't remember a bit of pain before my 3rd birthday. How traumatic can it be if I don't remember it?

My point? So what if it's painful? Life is painful, death can be painful, love is painful. Pain isn't fun but every one of us has pain. I have pain every single freaking day. It's not a good reason to rob a woman of her choice whether or not to procreate. It's just a distraction for the real matter at hand.

Benevolent Herectic the agenda is not how much a women can suffer to be a mother but how much a fetus feels while in the womb that is the new motto for their anti abortion pushing.

Remember fundamentalist believe in the original sin, so women sins is enough reason for her to endure her child bearing pains.

Because if you see the arguments is not about Women rights but about Fetuses rights even when one can not survive without the other.

I delivered two children without the aid of pain killers, not because I decided that I deserved the pain "it was great" but because I didn't want my children to be under any kind of drugs at birth.

It was my choice.

It doesn't matter how much you tried to exposed the reason behind the anti abortion issue it matters not to the ones that are pushing their agenda.

Even when they don't even care who's rights are being taken away, their motto is save the unborn .

But forget them when they are born.

If anti abortionist don't want an abortion don't have one but leave the other women alone with their right to their bodies and choices.

If you want to give your rights to your body for the courts, religious groups and politicians to decided make sure that is only you and not me and others that still want our rights.

Originally posted by marg6043
Benevolent Herectic the agenda is not how much a women can suffer to be a mother but how much a fetus feels while in the womb that is the new motto for their anti abortion pushing.

I couldn't agree with you more, marg, but I was talking about the baby's pain in birth. The squeezing of his widdle head.

I wouldn't think of bringing up the mother's suffering in a thread like this, that's just asking for trouble!

I just told my husband, "I must like to beat my head against the wall because I always seem to feel compelled to participate in these threads." :bnghd:

Well if we are going to bring the pain of the new born when he is been squeezed like a melon through the women birth canal, then anti abortionist should start lining out a new set of rules. Right?

But like I said is not about the born children and their pain. . . is about the unborn and their pain.

Once they save unborn fetus, the heck with the ones that make it through the birth canal. If they feel pain that is not their problem anymore, if they are abused, neglected or killed is not their busness.

Their business is the women's wombs and reporductive parts.

So much hypocrisy is just overwhelming.



[edit on 20-9-2005 by marg6043]

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
If pain is being used as a reason to ban abortion, perhaps we should ban childbirth, because you cannot convince me that squeezing a child's head to fit through that opening isn't a bit painful. And babies almost always cry first thing. And also shots, vaccinations, etc. How cruel we are!

Their is a purpose for the child's head coming through the canal.
The fluids that he/she has been breathing in are squeezed out
so the child can now start breathing air.

Shots, vaccinations, etc are all necessary to help the child grow
up healthy. That's just a pin prick and it's done.

An abortion isn't helping the child grow up healthy. It's painful
death by shredding, suction, and burning by chemicals.

Originally posted by riley
I'd like to think that they would give pain killers if there is a chance they would feel it.. [I'm a bit confused as to why the fetus wouldn't become anethsitised if the mother is? Everything the mother ingests the baby does]

Abortionists don't recognize the preborn child as a human capable
of feeling pain. So that's probably why they don't bother to
administer pain killers before killing the child. We treat those
condemned to death row better when it's time for them to die
by lethal injection. We put them to sleep before they get the
death shots. Preborn babies don't get that.

Doctors who preform surgery on preborn children give them
pain killers. Abortionists do no such thing for the preborn child
who is about to be shredded. There is an inconsistancy there.
I have seen information that shows a babies heart rate and skin
sensor rates going up during pre-birth surgery. These show that
the child DOES feel pain. I'll see if I can track those stats down
and post them here.

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
It's generally conceded to (by most physicians) that at, for example, 7 weeks gestation the fetus cannot feel pain. Does this make the question of pain moot?

Probably for those abortions that take place before 7 weeks. But honestly
many (if not most) women don't even figure out they are pregnant until at
least that point and it's even further along before they make the
appointment and have the proceedure done.

If you want to argue that preborn children under the age of 7 weeks in the
womb don't feel pain, I won't argue with you. I don't think there is any
way to know for sure at this point.