who supports right to choose

[pattygreen 5]

I have had a very good friend for 8 years who is married and does not have children. She is in her 50s and she's had a hysterectomy so having children is not an option for her. I have never asked her why she didn't have children. She's never volunteered the information so I figured that she wasn't interested in discussing it. It's absolutely none of my business.

And I gotta tell you, she has a wonderful life with her husband of 30 years. They have travelled the world and are completely supportive of each other in whatever they choose to do. They play golf as often as they can. They go skiing at least one every winter. They have a fabulous home, beautifully decorated. She is a great gardner and seamstress. She is totally fulfilled and quite content. And is constantly doing nice things for other people.

Who would accuse them of being disobedient to God for choosing this lifestyle? They got married. They are a family of 2. They are complete. Whether they chose not to have children, or nature did that for them, I honestly do not believe that God would accuse them of being disobedient, even if at some point in their marriage she chose to have an abortion.

Who said they were being accused of being disobedient to God? Not me. The disobedience comes in when you have sex outside of marriage, or when you have an abortion because of an 'oops'. They weren't sinning by getting married and choosing to be childless. I never said that.

[Carrie_C 9]

I really don't understand that incident at the Miami abortion clinic. Why is the woman who knocked the baby off the chair and put it in the garbage not being charged? That makes no sense to me.

Edited February 9, 2009 by Carrie_C

[gadgetlady 4]

I really don't understand that incident at the Miami abortion clinic. Why is the woman who knocked the baby off the chair and put it in the garbage not being charged? That makes no sense to me.

Why are they charging any of them? The baby's dead; that was the goal.

[Carrie_C 9]

Why are they charging any of them? The baby's dead; that was the goal.

I know you disagree, but an abortion and what they did is very different.

[gadgetlady 4]

I know you disagree, but an abortion and what they did is very different.

Not really. The woman came in to have her baby's life terminated. The clinic successfully accomplished their (and her) goal. Whether they did it by dismemberment or by suffocation or by letting the baby bleed out after being accidentally born alive is really inconsequential. The results are exactly the same.

After all, Obama believes very strongly that clinics and hospitals shouldn't be required to give medical attention to babies born alive accidentally after abortions. Which is precisely what happened in this case. If that baby had survived beyond her birth, likely the mother would have had a malpractice suit available to her because they didn't succeed at killing the baby. So it's really just unfortunate for all parties that this mother had the audacity to have contractions. Had she just waited around a little longer for the "doctor" to arrive, this would be a non-issue. Or had the baby been born in precisely the same way but not attempted to take a breath, this would also be a non-issue.

Is everyone upset simply because the baby's lungs were filled with air?

[BJean 16]

gadget your sarcasm is totally lost on me. This is a very tragic case. All of the medical personnel there and the clinic itself should be investigated. From the article you posted, it sounds like that procedure is business as usual for those people. It is wrong, by anyone's standards, as far as I'm concerned.

I do not believe that an abortion at that late stage in the pregnancy should be a medical procedure allowable "upon demand." If there are extenuating medical circumstances, that's one thing. If the lady just decided at that late date that she didn't want to be pregnant, it's a whole 'nuther thing.

Your claim about President Obama that "Obama believes very strongly that clinics and hospitals shouldn't be required to give medical attention to babies born alive accidentally after abortions" is completely and totally wrong. You are guilty of twisting his beliefs about this issue just for your own purposes.

The core reason that the then Senator Obama voted as he did on this issue is because believes that there should not be a requirement that an additional doctor has to be called in when during an abortion procedure, the baby has been discovered to be alive. That does not mean that he is against that baby being saved. Quite the contrary. President Obama believes that all measures should be taken to save a baby even during an abortion procedure, if it has been discovered that the baby is alive.

You, along with many other anti-abortion people, are putting your own spin on why he voted the way he did on this issue. If you were honest, you would understand that although President Obama is not anti-abortion, he is absolutely for saving a live baby.

This is not the only situation where anti-abortionists skew the truth and sensationalize an event for their own purposes.

[gadgetlady 4]

This is a very tragic case. All of the medical personnel there and the clinic itself should be investigated. From the article you posted, it sounds like that procedure is business as usual for those people. It is wrong, by anyone's standards, as far as I'm concerned.

Why is it tragic and why is it wrong?

I do not believe that an abortion at that late stage in the pregnancy should be a medical procedure allowable "upon demand." If there are extenuating medical circumstances, that's one thing. If the lady just decided at that late date that she didn't want to be pregnant, it's a whole 'nuther thing.

Wait a minute. You've always said abortion should be legal and it's nobody's business why a mother chooses to abort. Now you want to put limitations on it?

You've also always said that mothers don't get late-term abortions for any reason other than medical reasons. This case disproves that stance. She just plain didn't want to be pregnant at 23 weeks. Happens all the time, much as the abortion movement would like to hide it.

Your claim about President Obama that "Obama believes very strongly that clinics and hospitals shouldn't be required to give medical attention to babies born alive accidentally after abortions" is completely and totally wrong. You are guilty of twisting his beliefs about this issue just for your own purposes.

The core reason that the then Senator Obama voted as he did on this issue is because believes that there should not be a requirement that an additional doctor has to be called in when during an abortion procedure, the baby has been discovered to be alive. That does not mean that he is against that baby being saved. Quite the contrary. President Obama believes that all measures should be taken to save a baby even during an abortion procedure, if it has been discovered that the baby is alive.

According to what? According to his voting record, what you've said above is 100% false. In fact, he even came up with a new term for a baby that survives an abortion (just so he wouldn't have to use the term baby): it was something along the lines of "post-born fetus".

You, along with many other anti-abortion people, are putting your own spin on why he voted the way he did on this issue. If you were honest, you would understand that although President Obama is not anti-abortion, he is absolutely for saving a live baby.

Bulls***. If he were absolutely for saving a "live" baby, he would support some protection for them.

This is not the only situation where anti-abortionists skew the truth and sensationalize an event for their own purposes.

Nobody's skewing the truth. The article I posted is MSM. Obama's votes are a matter of record. And pro-lifers certainly haven't sensationalized what happened in Florida -- even the local NOW lady has weighed in on it.

[pattygreen 5]

I just read in todays paper, that lawmakers in 11 states are considering bills that would require an ultrasound before a woman gets an abortion. There are 16 states that have this law already. CT , where I live, has a new bill requiring it. It sounds like a great idea to me. Sometimes when women can 'see' inside themselves, they begin to understand that there is a real live human beng in there.

[pattygreen 5]

For all the women out there who have had an abortion in the past and have now come to regret their decision, let me just say that to admit to God that you made a mistake when you chose that option would be a good thing. God loves us all, and he is very forgiving. He says that if you repent of your wrong doings, no matter what they are or how severe, he will always forgive you and never hold it against you.

[gadgetlady 4]

I just read in todays paper, that lawmakers in 11 states are considering bills that would require an ultrasound before a woman gets an abortion. There are 16 states that have this law already. CT , where I live, has a new bill requiring it. It sounds like a great idea to me. Sometimes when women can 'see' inside themselves, they begin to understand that there is a real live human beng in there.

Unfortunately, they will be fought tooth and nail by the abortion industry, which desperately wants to hide the truth about what's going on in the womb. And if FOCA passes, it will all be for naught, as 100% of any pro-life legislation will be overturned in one fell swoop. It will guarantee abortion-on-demand through all 9 months of pregnancy for any reason whatsoever (even the late-term abortions "on a whim" that BJean thinks shouldn't be allowed to abort will be allowed), it will require religious hospitals to do abortions (probably causing many of them to close), it will strike down any laws requiring parental notification, and it will basically nullify any state laws that attempt to reduce abortion.

[gadgetlady 4]

I am very interested to hear from any of you who supports abortion but thinks what happened in this situation is tragic, wrong, or (insert your favorite word for "bad" here), why you think so.

[BJean 16]

gaadget you demonize anyone who doesn't support your views on this topic.

You are so full of rage that you don't have room to open your heart and mind to anything but the venom you spew toward anyone who holds an opposing view about abortion. And mostly, your comments about President Obama are just plain wrong.I can't speak to your claim that he has a special name for a fetus but I sincerely doubt if the insensitive and negative way you characterized it is absolutely correct.

My whole point in this argument is that this is not an issue that should be legislated. It is a medical issue between a woman and her doctor. You seem to think that women need to be controlled and that doctors are money-grubbing, insensitive people who aren't smart enough to make medical decisions that are in the best interests of their patients.

The fact that you are surprised (are you really?) that I find the case that you cited to be sad and unfortunate just shows how clueless you are. You put every argument for your case in neat little negative and sarcastic packages for us all to read. And you think that is convincing people that people like you should make life and death decisions for every woman in this country?

Abortion is a medical procedure and it is a procedure that should be between a woman and her doctor. You have no right to make medical decisions, even ones about life and death, for other people.

[Carrie_C 9]

I am very interested to hear from any of you who supports abortion but thinks what happened in this situation is tragic, wrong, or (insert your favorite word for "bad" here), why you think so.

What good would it do if we told you why we think it was a bad situation, you still wouldn't agree and you would just continue to argue.

[BJean 16]

I don't mind the arguments. I mind the sarcastic insults and the extremely bigoted way information is manipulated and skewed by anti-choice people. They use hate and fear and accusations to try to shame people into supporting their cause. Their behavior and the "information" they distribute is very ugly and it not representative of the way most women feel in this country. Thank God!

[BJean 16]

And Carrie you are absolutely right. How many times do we have to go through this exercise on this thread?

Normal people can't discuss the issue without some foaming at the mouth extremists jumping in. Then right away the radical, sarcastic diatribe with grisly photos and links to right wing rhetoric that they are so fond of posting, ensues.

As my sister used to say it'd gag a maggot.