who supports right to choose

[Carrie_C 9]

I just wonder how prolifers feel about these couples who have embroys frozen or destroyed because they can't use them. Are they murderers as well?

[Lori_K 0]

Here's a link to something I just posted (in a different thread) that relates to the issue of abortion; more than that, though, it's a victory story for the relationships established on LBT: http://www.lapbandtalk.com/f7/lbt-changes-lives-non-weight-related-lbt-story-79207/#post1039816

Gadget, I just read your post in the other forum - and I was truly touched by the beauty of it. It is so nice to see people working together and reaching a positive outcome, and it's especially nice to see something positive come out of this very long and arduous thread. I admire your efforts and all the research you've put into this. You deserve applause and accolades for the hard work you've done, and for practicing what you preach. It's nice to see that a mother does indeed have a "choice" when it comes to an unwanted pregnancy - and death of another life doesn't have to be one of those choices. You've accomplished so much - you helped a couple deal with a difficult decision, you helped another couple achieve their dream of starting a new family - but most of all ...

You saved a life.

Bravo to you!

[gadgetlady 4]

I do not believe that or agree with you. I believe that it is a very, very complicated biological process and that nature intervenes and that human beings intervene to prevent development of that tissue into a fully viable human being and that the reasons that those interventions occur are not cut and dried or black and white.

Yup, because there's something that happens as the "tissue" passes through the vaginal canal; it "magically" transforms from being "tissue" to being a baby. It wasn't a baby before that, but it is a baby afterwards. There must be magic dust or something in the vagina that bestows life.

Gosh, I wonder if my kids are even alive at all; I had two c-sections, so they didn't get any of the magic dust.

[gadgetlady 4]

Gadget' date=' I just read your post in the other forum - and I was truly touched by the beauty of it. It is so nice to see people working together and reaching a positive outcome, and it's especially nice to see something positive come out of this very long and arduous thread. I admire your efforts and all the research you've put into this. You deserve applause and accolades for the hard work you've done, and for practicing what you preach. It's nice to see that a mother does indeed have a "choice" when it comes to an unwanted pregnancy - and death of another life doesn't have to be one of those choices. You've accomplished so much - you helped a couple deal with a difficult decision, you helped another couple achieve their dream of starting a new family - but most of all ...

You saved a life.

Bravo to you! [/quote']

Thank you for your kind words, Rhapsody :thumbup:. I just posted this in the other thread as well, but I didn't really do anything extraordinary at all. I was just used by God (or "circumstances" if you don't believe in God) to connect two families.

One of my other friends told me, "you're a good person to know" (she's 36, single, dedicated Christian, never been married, very sweet, beautiful, and desperately wants to get married and have kids -- so I guess I'll throw this one out there too and see what the "universe" throws back -- anyone know a good man in Southern California who fits the bill?).

[BJean 16]

gadget on the one hand you do something wonderful and on the other, you're incredibly sarcastic and spiteful.

The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away.

[gadgetlady 4]

gadget on the one hand you do something wonderful and on the other, you're incredibly sarcastic and spiteful.

The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away.

Sarcasm can be instructive. The Lord has not taken anything away; my instructive sarcasm does not take away a baby that was slated for death from life and a deserving family. But thanks anyway for your backhanded compliment.

Edited October 24, 2008 by gadgetlady

[BJean 16]

You use sarcasm and innuendo like your Republican candidates. We all know I wasn't talking about the baby... I was talking about your sweet disposition. :sad_smile:

[pattygreen 5]

When you freeze and then destroy a human life, yes, you are committing murder.

[pattygreen 5]

I do believe that a fertilized egg is a life. You don't. Then tell me, WHEN does this 'tissue' become a life? Day 1? 1 month? 3 months? 5,6,7 months? 9 months? WHEN? I've heard some testimonys of doctors and nurses hearing babies scream as they are extracted during abortions. They can obviously feel pain. I have seen my own ultrasounds of my children sucking their thumbs in my womb at 3 and 5 months. They can obviously comfort themselves. I have seen ultrasounds at 1 and 2 months of my sons and observed their beating hearts. Without a blood flow, their can be no heartbeat. The scriptures of God teach that 'Their is LIFE in the blood.'

I believe that you are so into this debate, that to admit that a baby in the womb is a living being, would be very difficult for you to do now.( even though in your own heart of hearts you know that it is) Because if it is a real human life, then to kill it would be wrong and then you would have to admit to being wrong. I can see that that would be very difficult for you.

And another thing, please don't speak to me about what you believe God's will is, because from what I hear from you, you don't have a clue as to the mind of God. If you would like to know what God's will is for this topic, I invite you to read His message to all people on Earth. It's written in HIs book.

[Carrie_C 9]

I do believe that a fertilized egg is a life. You don't. Then tell me, WHEN does this 'tissue' become a life? Day 1? 1 month? 3 months? 5,6,7 months? 9 months? WHEN? I've heard some testimonys of doctors and nurses hearing babies scream as they are extracted during abortions. They can obviously feel pain. I have seen my own ultrasounds of my children sucking their thumbs in my womb at 3 and 5 months. They can obviously comfort themselves. I have seen ultrasounds at 1 and 2 months of my sons and observed their beating hearts. Without a blood flow, their can be no heartbeat. The scriptures of God teach that 'Their is LIFE in the blood.'

I believe that you are so into this debate, that to admit that a baby in the womb is a living being, would be very difficult for you to do now.( even though in your own heart of hearts you know that it is) Because if it is a real human life, then to kill it would be wrong and then you would have to admit to being wrong. I can see that that would be very difficult for you.

And another thing, please don't speak to me about what you believe God's will is, because from what I hear from you, you don't have a clue as to the mind of God. If you would like to know what God's will is for this topic, I invite you to read His message to all people on Earth. It's written in HIs book.

Are you talking to me?

[pattygreen 5]

So sorry Carrie, That was for BJean who responded to a past post of mine.

[gadgetlady 4]

The technological advance of medical arts has grown to the point where very early term premies now survive where previously such delivery would have resulted in death.

This extension of medical capacity has blurred the old legal distinction.

Very good point. If you depend on medical technology to define life, then in the 1950's an unborn baby wasn't alive at 25 weeks, but in 2008 he or she is. That smacks of discrimination right there -- how is the 1950's baby any different from the 2008 baby? Going back to pre-Dred Scott, was a black man in the 1700's really only 3/5 of a human being, where as in 2008 he's a full human being? Or was the definition just wrong?

Going back again to another point I raised earlier: scientists are working on an artificial placenta. If/when they are able to sustain life earlier than the current 18-24 months that is considered "viable", when then do we define the beginning of life? And what would that mean for the babies that were killed after that time -- earlier in history? Would it then be the case that those babies were not really "alive" before then, or would it be the case that the definition was just wrong?

Is the real goal of abortion to make a woman "unpregnant", or is it to ensure that she has a dead baby?

[Carrie_C 9]

I can hardly believe we will solve the issue in this forum.

So true. Right or wrong, it is legal and it probably will always be legal.

[losingjusme 12]

it is legal and it probably will always be legal.

i hope so...

[Carrie_C 9]

Me too. It will be very scary if it's not.