Abortion Clinic Protests

I understand that it doesn't always have a positive outcome, but that's when people need to have faith in God. I don't think we ever have the right to terminate a life like that. That's God's work, not ours.
 
Sweet Pea said:
I understand that it doesn't always have a positive outcome, but that's when people need to have faith in God. I don't think we ever have the right to terminate a life like that. That's God's work, not ours.
Click to expand...
I understand why you would take that stance, but not everyone (or even every Christian) believes in the "just have faith, let God's will be" approach to medical decisions. That's why it seems most fair that we be allowed to make our own decisions in these matters. That way, I'm not forcing my view on you and you're not forcing your view on me.
 
And some people would see forcing a mother to go through with a dysfunctional pregnancy that ends up killing her as murder.
 
I believe the most common connotation of the word is termination of pregnancy by removal of the fetus from the uterus. Spontaneous abortions occur naturally and induced abortions are deliberate acts.
 
In my opinion, the condition of the baby is no reason for abortion. There is no guarantee that the baby is not going to have any problems after birth. If we come to know about the problems when the kid is say few months old, do we have the rights to take that life?
 
I think it should be addressed that an abortion is not a means to save the mother's life.

Here's an example -- one I've used before because it's pretty textbook; let's say the mother is pregnant, but it's an ectopic pregnancy (in other words, the fetus is lodged in her fallopian tubes). This is dangerous because if it is not addressed, the tubes will burst, the baby will die and the mother might die. So the doctors will have to perform a salpingectomy which will remove the fetus.

How does it result? Most commonly, the baby does die.

Is this an abortion? The answer is no. Why? Because a salpingectomy is a procedure that targets the mother's body with the intention to save as much life as possible. The medical industry still hasn't found a safer way in doing this that will commonly keep the baby from dying, but its intention is to save lives. An abortion however is a procedure that targets the baby's body with the intention of killing it by dismemberment.

Which one is humane? Which one protects life? Which one is reasonable?

If an embryo, zygote, and/or fetus was only a part organism like a hand or food or fingernail, then I'd see no problem with an abortion. However, they are whole organisms with unique DNA -- the youngest of the human family.

"Pro-Choice" is the biggest misnomer and the modern day form of outrageous bigotry.
 
Full Definition of ABORTION
1
: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: as

a : spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation — compare miscarriage

b : induced expulsion of a human fetus

c : expulsion of a fetus by a domestic animal often due to infection at any time before completion of pregnancy — compare contagious abortion
2
: monstrosity
3
: arrest of development (as of a part or process) resulting in imperfection; also : a result of such arrest
 
Ravindran said:
In my opinion, the condition of the baby is no reason for abortion. There is no guarantee that the baby is not going to have any problems after birth. If we come to know about the problems when the kid is say few months old, do we have the rights to take that life?
Click to expand...

Exactly. Slippery slope to who deserves to live.
 
Ravindran said:
In my opinion, the condition of the baby is no reason for abortion. There is no guarantee that the baby is not going to have any problems after birth.
Click to expand...
In some cases, there is a guarantee.

I think sometimes some people have this vision in their head that all pregnancies go perfectly well and any anomalies are just minor and temporary. Such people need to do some research and actually see some of the truly horrible things that can go wrong, both with the fetus and the mother. We're not talking "he has an extra finger" or "he has Down's Syndrome" here.
 
Sweet Pea said:
Full Definition of ABORTION
1
: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: as

a : spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation — compare miscarriage

b : induced expulsion of a human fetus

c : expulsion of a fetus by a domestic animal often due to infection at any time before completion of pregnancy — compare contagious abortion
2
: monstrosity
3
: arrest of development (as of a part or process) resulting in imperfection; also : a result of such arrest
Click to expand...

Oh, you did. :)

The part that says "spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation — compare miscarriage" seems very flawed though in this definition. It is suggesting direct or indirect?

Also, I'm also bringing up the question of what literally is an abortion? In other words, what's the process? What literally happens? I think this is an important question to ask as well.
 
RiverJordan said:
In some cases, there is a guarantee.

I think sometimes some people have this vision in their head that all pregnancies go perfectly well and any anomalies are just minor and temporary. Such people need to do some research and actually see some of the truly horrible things that can go wrong, both with the fetus and the mother. We're not talking "he has an extra finger" or "he has Down's Syndrome" here.
Click to expand...

I agree that all pregnancies are not going to go well.. Yes, there would be cases where the baby will have serious problems.. When there is no danger to the life of mother and the baby is diagnosed to have a serious problem, is that a justification for abortion? If the answer is yes, then why do we spend so much money on people who are diagnosed with terminal diseases? How different is it from allowing the baby to be born..
 
Ravindran,

I have seen family members go through the ordeal of being told that their unborn baby had some major, massive defects. In one case, the defects were so severe the baby was likely going to die in the womb and the doctors recommended aborting in order to protect the mother from hemorrhaging and to preserve her ability to have more children. In another, the defects were again so severe the baby was virtually guaranteed to die very quickly after birth, and be in terrible pain for whatever time it lived.

In the first case the parents elected to abort. In the second the parents chose to carry to term.

Personally I think it's important that both of those couples were able to make their own choices in consultation with their doctors. Unless any of us have been in that situation where we're sitting with a doctor who's showing us images of a fetus that's missing a brain, internal organs, etc., and is telling us all the possible outcomes, I don't think we can truly understand what it's like.

So IMO, if you think abortion is wrong under any circumstances, including those above and what Lysander described, then if (God forbid) you find yourself in such a situation, don't get an abortion and I would support you 100%. But I can't support someone outside of such situations dictating the outcome for others.
 
RiverJordan said:
Ravindran,

I have seen family members go through the ordeal of being told that their unborn baby had some major, massive defects. In one case, the defects were so severe the baby was likely going to die in the womb and the doctors recommended aborting in order to protect the mother from hemorrhaging and to preserve her ability to have more children. In another, the defects were again so severe the baby was virtually guaranteed to die very quickly after birth, and be in terrible pain for whatever time it lived.

In the first case the parents elected to abort. In the second the parents chose to carry to term.

Personally I think it's important that both of those couples were able to make their own choices in consultation with their doctors. Unless any of us have been in that situation where we're sitting with a doctor who's showing us images of a fetus that's missing a brain, internal organs, etc., and is telling us all the possible outcomes, I don't think we can truly understand what it's like.

So IMO, if you think abortion is wrong under any circumstances, including those above and what Lysander described, then if (God forbid) you find yourself in such a situation, don't get an abortion and I would support you 100%. But I can't support someone outside of such situations dictating the outcome for others.
Click to expand...

I fully agree it is the choice of parents.. Also, I stated when there is no danger to the life of mother.. I am not eloquent like LS :) But I fully support his comment on defining abortion.. My point is not to say that we should let both mother and baby die because abortion is an absolute no.. I am not looking abortion from legalistic perspective.. It is just my conviction that we cannot take away a life to avoid future suffering (as worst as it could be).. To me, it is same as killing a person who has been diagnosed with a terminal disease and we will know that he or she will have endure great pain.. I understand it is a very sensitive topic.. And every person will have a different conviction on this.. And I will respect everyone's opinion on this..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top