As Faerynght has said above, if you don't know the specifics of individual cases, how on earth can you comment? It's something government ministers in the UK say all the time: "We cannot possibly comment on individual cases." So, what gives you the authority to do so?
No need for the personal attack lucifer, I was genuinely confused. My apologies if you really do have "word blindness" perhaps a spell checker would help?
yeah i'm sorry aswell, i really am!! i do have a spell checker but it is full of american spellings! sorry again. and yeah your right we cannot comment on individual casses but we can put forth what 'I' think is correct evidence, yes i know differant women have differant casses but an abortion should not be a form of contracpetion and should never be considered has such either,
People will debate the authenticity of pictures in order to not have to deal with the reality of the baby killing. The pictures are real. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! http://www.abortionno.org/About_Us/lawsuits/authenticity.html
The authenticity of the pictures is imperative to the point that you are attempting to make, if you cannot see that, maybe it's a good thing that you did give up on the neurosurgery route! Overwhelming if you have trouble with your faith sandy. I do not doubt what happens to the "souls" of aborted entities. For me, it is merely unfortunate. P.S. No problems lucifer.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! EDIT
Hahah. Hey, if people want to have unprotected sex with a person they just met, more power to them. Just don't expect any sympathy from me if they are one of the millions who: get a sexually transmitted infection, have a child with no father in their life, get sexually assaulted/raped, or find that they are pregnant in which ten sleazy men are the possible fathers. If you find this normal, then go ahead and practice it with those who are willing. Like I said, I'm not the one suffering the consequences.
Hey guys, sandy is right. Abortion is a quite "violent" procedure. The procedure is actually very simple. They first dismember the baby completely, so taht theyy can take each part of the body. Then, once they get to the head, they have to "pop" it quite violently because the head is too big to easily come out. Just imagine that happening to you, it might help you understand the way sandy feels. Also, arguing that the baby feels nothing is preposterous. The baby has the nerve system developed already. So the baby can OBVIOUSLY feel. I've seen a video of a baby being aborted before. The baby even tried to "run" away from the instrument the doctor was using. It was quite gruesome...
Not only should such people not expect sympathy from such as yourself, they can expect active condemnation, and when possible, legislative roadblocks to any methods to avoid consequences. Religious authorities have always been upset by medical efforts to prevent and cure venereal diseases; such efforts were seen as attempts to thwart the will of god, since these diseases were the "wages of sin". That such attitudes persist in this time is a sad commentary on the love of schadenfreude so many humans have. Can you imagine if someone tried to block research into curing lung cancer because "Smokers deserve it!"?
The question is not whether the procedure is painful for the foetus, I've no doubt that it is - although to what degree is debatable - but whether the procedure is justified. I believe that in many cases it is justified. I have no objection to the way that sandy feels. What I do object to is the way that she uses such emotion as justification for her stance. In additon, the fact that she seems to think that everybody else should feel the same way. I also object to her demonizing anybody who does not develop such emotion, she appears to think, that her beliefs afford extra credit for her perspective. On the contrary, I see them as being deleterious to her viewpoint.
i knew a woman who had 8 abortions because she didnt want the children for some reason, and the dr's have said that they will not perform any more, if she doesnt want children then she should be sterilized and i agree with them
8 abortions because she couldnt be bothered to use the pill or get the guy to use a condom, she already had 4 children if you keep having children the dr's just said be sterilized and i agree because its not right and indeed its not all that safe for the woman either to keep having abortions
She obviously has reasons not to be sterilized. Like I said she has every right to change her mind in the future of what she does and doesn't want. I don't believe doctors should advise people to do something permanent like that, and to refuse treatment is unproffesional. They might not like it but they have a job to do. If she knows the risks and the alternatives yet still persists that's her choice. Disgusting as it might be. I'm also disgusted if a doctor refuses to treat someone regardless of what it is. So long as she can go elsewhere I suppose it isn't an issue, but it hardly encourages people to take up safer options. By the way, how do you know each and all of the circumstances of her getting pregnant? Or are you just being presumptious?
your source in my opinion is a group of assholes for trying to make pro-CHOICE people sound like holocaust deniers. First its insensative and second its just not a valid comparison.
It's fortunate for you, then, that religious authorities have very limited power in such areas. There are countless people working around the clock to create cures for such infections and diseases, but there isn't much success to show for it. Shouldn't people stay protected, at least until such cures become available?
because i personally know the woman and we talked about the abortions in great detail. and she told me that she just doesnt like to use contraception she said that the "pill" made her sick, ok i can agree that it can, but there are other forms of pill out there. she said that if her BF uses a condom she itches after because she is allergic to the rubber and she also says, she has tried many forms of contraception, now the dr's gave her a choice be sterilized or keep your legs closed! (which lets be fair that is the safest form of avoiding unwanted pregnancies)
I just have one question for right to lifers. If a girl gets pregnant by grandpa, in your opinion, is it ok for her to have an abortion? If yes, then its about the girl and not the baby right?
Like she says she's tried a lot of options, the doctors should be helping her exhaust all options as she's obviously been willing to try them and the ones attempted aren't acceptable for her. She has every right to have sex, if an acceptable form of contraception can't be found and up until that time they have to make the best of it, which unfortunately if she doesn't want a child right now can mean abortion. They should be helping her find contraception that works for her not giving her unacceptable choices. I wonder how long it'll be before she is forced into having a kid she doesn't want, what a life s/he might have in store. What a wonderful job some doctors do.
