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.

 

Why is it OK to kill a woman, but not a baby?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 03:01 PM
link   
There's something I just don't understand about the abortion debate. I could live with some restrictions on abortions - I don't think it should be used as a form of birth control. But what most pro-lifers want seems to go way beyond that. They don't want to save the life of the mother by aborting the child.

Why is it OK to kill the mother, but not the child?




posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 05:55 AM
link   
Or you could take it a step further and ask, why is it OK to kill everyone except babies? Have you ever noticed how many pro-lifers are staunch supporters of capital punishment?

Bottom line, nobody has the right to kill.

But the fact remains there is much debate as to when a baby is bestowed with consciousness. Surely unformed cells don't yet have one. And since this issue will always remain a matter of interruption, how can a decree of murder result?

Although current generation's lacking in of responsibility, have shed a very bad light on it, abortion was originally intended as a last resort for hopless situations.

Likewise today, abortion should be available to any woman in crisis and no government should have the power to take that right away.

By enforcing stricter regulations and altogether banning late term "evacuations," today's dramatic misuse of abortion could be sharply curtailed.

More importantly, if society frowned on today's blatant sexual promiscuity instead of encouraging it, it would go a long way at preventing the ugly aftermath.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Although there are pro-lifers that are very extreme I am not sure that the average person thinks its ok for the mother to die. I believe the thought is that in childbirth anything can happen and that God will decide the outcome in the end. After all medical attempts to save both have failed the question comes down to who will survive. I think pro-lifers are saying that we should not make that choice of mother or child but let fate determine. I also think that most mothers would choose to die to let their child live.

Now if you are talking about earlier in the pregnancy say should a woman be told you will die if you have the baby, I think that is between the parents to be as to what they want to do and not up to any groups. I think pro lifers that try and interfer at that point in time have gone to far and invaded the privacy at a very difficult time for the family to be.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Please name the medical issue which would cause the woman to die from having the baby.

My point is women who die in childbirth did not know they were going to die in childbirth. The doctors didn't know. It is sadly a risk of having a child. Thankfully we live in a modern era where it is relatively safe to have a baby.

When an abortion happens it is going to result in ending a life, nobody can dispute that. We can argue the level of importance of the life but it is still a life. The life of male sperm is measured in minutes, the life of the female egg is measured in weeks, the life of the combination of the two is measured in years.

On the question of Capital Punishment and the claim of Republicans being hypocritical look at it the other way. We believe that the baby is pure and innocent and deserving of life. On the other hand, if a human knowingly ends other human life their is no other decision other than the death penelty.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoshGator54
Please name the medical issue which would cause the woman to die from having the baby.

'The'?! :shk: There are several. Sometimes the fetus gets concieved in the fallopian tube. That is a death sentence. Sometimes the fetus is that deformed that it's insides are forming on the outside of itself.. to deliver would be a death sentence. There are even times [rare] where the dna from the egg cell is missing and the 'fetus' becomes a cancerous growth. There are also girls who are physically too small to give birth [say a 12 yo- their hipbones haven't matured].. women with severe diabetes, heart conditions etc. etc.. there would be a long list.

My point is women who die in childbirth did not know they were going to die in childbirth. The doctors didn't know. It is sadly a risk of having a child. Thankfully we live in a modern era where it is relatively safe to have a baby.

Though you still thought there was only one medical issue for childbirth deaths in this 'modern era'.. it always amuses me when people feel they have a right to comment on womens' medical issues when they obviously don't have the slightest clue about them.

[edit on 21-8-2005 by riley]



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Riley,

If it makes you feel better to talk down to people that is fine.

I was asking the question based on the Abortion issue. All of your examples deal with miscarriage type pregnency complications where the child doesn't develop or sustain life.

The one expection was the hipbone issue. Surely you know with your great knowledge of "women's medical issues" that they have C-section births to solve that problem. Or maybe you don't have the slightest clue.


I was asking a serious question and looking for serious answers. I have done research and have not found a single disease or cause where the child is healthy and sustaining life in which there is no way for the mother and child to live. Please explain to me what it is and I will gladly change my stance on that portion of the abortion debate.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 12:19 PM
link   
JoshGator - I agree, often when women die in childbirth it's completely unexpected. However, it also happens that a woman becomes pregnant and the doctors discover, during early pregnancy, that there are significant risk factors - like an undetected heart condition, or even a spina bifida condition that could leave the mother paralysed after she gives birth.

There are two options to protect the mother in those cases - A) make sure that doctors apply a more holistic approach to women's annual checkups, to ensure early detection of possible risks related to pregnancy and childbirth, and B) ensure special provisions for sure cases when it comes to abortion, because obviously, something can always escape a doctor's notice, and there is always a 1 percent chance that a woman will get pregnant even if she's using the condom and/or the pill.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoshGator54
Please name the medical issue which would cause the woman to die from having the baby.


It's called an ECTOPIC PREGNANCY, and it's the leading cause of maternal death in the first trimester. It's what happens when a fertilized egg implants itself outside of the uterus.

And while rare, it is certainly not rare enough.

In the first part of the twenthieth century, there were 400 cases of Ectopic pregnancies for every 10,000 births. Roughly accounting for nearly 4% of of all recorded pregnancies. During the latter part of the twenthieth century, the rates have decreased down to 2%, but only because the population has exponentially increased. In 1992, there were roughly 110,000 ectopic pregnancies.

Since 1970, the death rate for American women has dropped to 0.1%.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoshGator54
Riley,

If it makes you feel better to talk down to people that is fine.

No it doesn't.. I was pointing out your ignorance on womens' medical issues.. not having a go at you personally.

I was asking the question based on the Abortion issue. All of your examples deal with miscarriage type pregnency complications where the child doesn't develop or sustain life.

No they weren't. Where did I say miscarriage? I gave you examples where not aborting would result in the mother's death. I also gave you examples where 'partial birth' abortion would be needed.

The one expection was the hipbone issue. Surely you know with your great knowledge of "women's medical issues" that they have C-section births to solve that problem. Or maybe you don't have the slightest clue.

Very clever.. so how exactly can a child carry a pregnancy full term without causing herself permanent damage? If it's induced early or C sectioned early.. [say at 6/7 months] it would be a death sentence [basically abortion] for the fetus anyway.

I was asking a serious question and looking for serious answers. I have done research and have not found a single disease or cause where the child is healthy and sustaining life in which there is no way for the mother and child to live. Please explain to me what it is and I will gladly change my stance on that portion of the abortion debate.

I gave you examples [a fetus growing in the fallopian tube is 'healthy'.. there is no option but to abort it] and I do not think you have done any research.. otherwise you wouldn't have asked for 'the' medical issue that requires abortion. Sorry to sound harsh but I've known women who have had alot of trouble with pregnancies and who've had to terminate for medical reasons.. the way you come across it's as though you are assuming they made these choices on a trivial whim.

[edit on 21-8-2005 by riley]



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 01:51 PM
link   
Fetus not baby. Murderer not man or woman.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by riley

I gave you examples [a fetus growing in the fallopian tube is 'healthy'.. there is no option but to abort it]

[edit on 21-8-2005 by riley]


"Normally, at the beginning of a pregnancy, the fertilized egg travels from the fallopian tube to the uterus, where it implants and grows. In nearly 2% of diagnosed pregnancies, however, the fertilized egg attaches to an area outside of the uterus, resulting in an ectopic pregnancy (also known as tubal pregnancy or extrauterine pregnancy).1

Nearly all ectopic pregnancies develop in a fallopian tube; the remainder occur in an ovary, the cervix, or the abdomen.2 Generally none of these areas are capable of holding or sustaining a growing fetus." Taken from the WebMD site.

WebMD

If the fetus is non life sustaining it is not an abortion. It is a surgical procedure to remove a life threatening cluster of cells from the woman.

Once again I am speaking of sustainable life within the woman. I am not trying to be agrumentative. I can understand where you are coming from because I have had my own personal experiences with these issues.


[edit on 21-8-2005 by JoshGator54]



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoshGator54
If the fetus is non life sustaining it is not an abortion. It is a surgical procedure to remove a life threatening cluster of cells from the woman.
[edit on 21-8-2005 by JoshGator54]


I don't mean to confuse you with such crafty tactics as logic and reason, but that wasn't original your question. You're trying to sustain your point by using false logic that can't withstand proof.


Originally posted by JoshGator54
Please name the medical issue which would cause the woman to die from having the baby.


This was your question, and it's very much apparent to me that you're shopping for answers, molding them to suit your arguement. You made an ignorant statement, and when you were proven false, you switched gears and tried to reframe the issue to better suit your agenda.

You're supposed to deny ignorance, not wallow in it.

[edit on 21-8-2005 by brimstone735]



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 03:08 PM
link   
I am simply arguing agaist abortion. I thought with the topic of the thread that was implied. I am sorry if that did not come across in my post.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoshGator54
I am simply arguing agaist abortion. I thought with the topic of the thread that was implied. I am sorry if that did not come across in my post.


No, what came across to me is that you simply don't know enough about abortion to make informed, reasoned judgements on the procedure itself. I would simply encourage you to stick with the Corporate Jesus, faith based initiative of "God says abortion is evil", and stop trying to use logic to prove your point, because you look like a wretched fool unequivically stating, in no uncertain terms...


Originally posted by JoshGator54
If the fetus is non life sustaining it is not an abortion


When three posts before that, you unequically state, in no uncertain terms


Originally posted by JoshGator54
We can argue the level of importance of the life but it is still a life. The life of male sperm is measured in minutes, the life of the female egg is measured in weeks


My suggestion, find a position and stick to it.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Since you can't explain why a woman would need an abortion to save her life you have sunken to calling me a "wretched fool" and attacking a religion you assume I ascribe to.

Let me make it simple since you can't seem to understand my previous posts. ECTOPIC PREGNANCY = Unable to sustaining a growing fetus. If the fetus is dead it is not an abortion.

I am sorry discussing this causes you to claim superiority as a defense. And I am sorry you can't seem to understand the point I am trying to discuss. But Ectopic Pregnancy is cause for surgery not an abortion. You are not ending a life.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoshGator54
If the fetus is dead it is not an abortion.


So, that's what you need to get you through the night, eh?

I've already explained why a woman would need an abortion to save her life. You've covered your ears and closed your eyes, humming indifferently and choosing to ignore the point, because it falls under the official "Josh Gator moral loophole".

Very convenient. Following your logic, the living egg and the living sperm immediatly die when joined together.

Also very convenient, I'm the second person in this very thread that you've accused having a superiority complex. Which leads me to believe that you have an inferiority complex, which would explain your rigid adherence to dogma, even in the face of the overwhelming facts to the contrary.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 04:51 PM
link   
More over to the point, Josh, do you even know what an ECTOPIC PREGNANCY is? Did you bother to read any of the links you looked up?

The fertilized egg does not stop growing. That's the problem. It's a perfectly healthy, completely fertilized egg that continues to grow in the wrong location. By growing, as a healthy fetus would, it threatens to rupture and break other organs. Or, to make it real superior to you...

What once was small grows big in a bad place.

To save the mother, the growing life inside is ended prematurely. Now, I don't mind conservatives, a quite like a few of them. I don't republicans. I don't mind christians. I don't even mind pro-lifers.

But, what really upsets me, what really psses me off more than anything else, to absolutely no end, are the loud people who can't even be bothered to their homework.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by brimstone735

Very convenient. Following your logic, the living egg and the living sperm immediatly die when joined together.


What? First I never said immediatly, and second the definition I read of the disease you used as evidence says the fetus will not live. This seems like fact being that it was based on a widely read and seemingly accurate website.


Originally posted by brimstone735
even in the face of the overwhelming facts to the contrary.


What facts! I am really trying to understand what facts. You said, in response to my question about what would threaten a womans life when having a baby and you cited ectopic pregnancy. I simply looked up the disease on the internet at WebMD and read that the fetus is not life sustaining.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoshGator54
I simply looked up the disease on the internet at WebMD and read that the fetus is not life sustaining.


Obviously you didn't.

Because, if you had, then you would know that Ectopic Pregnancy isn't a disease that can be treated. It's a tubal disorder primarily caused by Endometriosis and/or an inflammation of the fallopian tube. The fallopian tube swells up, preventing the fertilized egg from implanting itself within the uterus

The fertalized egg is healthy, it remains healthy as it grows. Because it's healthy, because it's maturing as per the norm, THAT'S what makes it a danger to the mother's life.

Ectopic means"Out of Order"

I don't know how much clearer I can make it without using flash cards



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 08:21 PM
link   
FROM WEBMD


"Ectopic Pregnancy

Topic Overview


What is an ectopic pregnancy?
Normally, at the beginning of a pregnancy, the fertilized egg travels from the fallopian tube to the uterus, where it implants and grows. In nearly 2% of diagnosed pregnancies, however, the fertilized egg attaches to an area outside of the uterus, resulting in an ectopic pregnancy (also known as tubal pregnancy or extrauterine pregnancy).1

Nearly all ectopic pregnancies develop in a fallopian tube; the remainder occur in an ovary, the cervix, or the abdomen.2 Generally none of these areas are capable of holding or sustaining a growing fetus."




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join