• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Mom said "six months". That's all I have to go by. I used to have some kind of a document that had my footprints on it, I don't know what it was. My birth certificate is a pretty standard affair.

So, no idea on what my odds really were?

your posts seem confused and ignorant of facts as usual

RvW is based on 24 weeks cause thats the medical science consensus of 50% viability
Earliest possible viability is 21 weeks due to lung development

This isnt made up nor is it just legal terms its based on medical science

If you were born today, rationally you would have an even better chance based on medical advancements . . no laws changed this
 
Mom said "six months". That's all I have to go by. I used to have some kind of a document that had my footprints on it, I don't know what it was. My birth certificate is a pretty standard affair.

So, no idea on what my odds really were?

So first of all depending on the months, six months could be 24 weeks (unlikely) or 26 weeks. Those two weeks are huge in terms of fetal development. Then if her doctor went by actual fetal age and not LMP, you could tack on another 2 weeks. Again that would bring you up to 28 weeks. 28 weeks seems way more likely than 24 weeks given your weight.

At 28 weeks chances are great now....back in the 40's...not so sure.

As an ICU RN, I am really curious what help they gave your for breathing back then. The 21st century accouterments make 28 weeks a blessed number (as far as preemies go), but back then with all of the surfactactant/ventilation and oxygenation issues I have to wonder what was available back then.

Regardless. I am happy you are here to tell us about it.
 
So first of all depending on the months, six months could be 24 weeks (unlikely) or 26 weeks. Those two weeks are huge in terms of fetal development. Then if her doctor went by actual fetal age and not LMP, you could tack on another 2 weeks. Again that would bring you up to 28 weeks. 28 weeks seems way more likely than 24 weeks given your weight.

At 28 weeks chances are great now....back in the 40's...not so sure.

As an ICU RN, I am really curious what help they gave your for breathing back then. The 21st century accouterments make 28 weeks a blessed number (as far as preemies go), but back then with all of the surfactactant/ventilation and oxygenation issues I have to wonder what was available back then.

Regardless. I am happy you are here to tell us about it.

Thank you for your kind words. I was hoping you could help me piece this together, there is nobody left for me to ask and I haven't been able to find anything on the web. When I was a kid I didn't think much of it but today when I look back on the state of the art even in the 1960's I can't imagine how much more primitive it was in the 1950's.
 
your posts seem confused and ignorant of facts as usual

RvW is based on 24 weeks cause thats the medical science consensus of 50% viability
Earliest possible viability is 21 weeks due to lung development

This isnt made up nor is it just legal terms its based on medical science

If you were born today, rationally you would have an even better chance based on medical advancements . . no laws changed this

As usual, you don't have the faintest idea of what I was saying but you have to get your talking points in.
 
As usual, you don't have the faintest idea of what I was saying but you have to get your talking points in.

Nice try but another fail that nobody here honest, educated and objective buys........
Next time do some research before babbling off at the mouth and understand that research, statements you made in this thread were factually wrong as me and other pointed out, your feelings dont change that fact :shrug:
 
Last edited:
Except you have no clue what is a human being.

Cougarbear: I am trying decide if you are a human being. What human being promotes killing defenseless babies?

Nobody gives a crap. What matters are facts and intelligent reasoning. Clearly you do not have any of those in your post.

Cougarbear: I'm trying to reason out your idea that killing defenseless human children that are unborn and cannot defend themselves is a sign of intelligence? Nope...It's a sign of animal instincts.

You are only demonstrating hypocrisy and ignorance. How is the life of the innocent child resulting from rape worth less than any other?

Cougarbear: If you don't know then there is no hope for you ;-)

No, be best solution is for ignorant religious zealots to stay the **** out of other people's lives and stop attempting to impose their stupidity on others.

Cougarbear: The best solution is to undermine liberal leftist's agenda to kill unborn babies.
 
Cougarbear: The best solution is to undermine liberal leftist's agenda to kill unborn babies.

How do you feel about the unborn weeks old embryos that are discarded every day in IVF clinics ?

Why is it ok to destroy the embryos that were not used in the IVF treatment ?

If you ( general you ) consider the embryo in the womb as human life.

Why don’t you think the extra embryos no longer needed for IVF can just be thrown away with the medical waste?

From the following :

The Paradox of the IVF Clinic and the Abortion Clinic: Are Some Embryos More Persons Than Others?



IVF treatments are performed in close to 400 centers nationwide.
Over 60,000 babies are born each year through fertility treatments—including, as Daily Mail notes, some of Mitt Romney’s own grandchildren.

Many of these treatments involve the disposal of unused embryos, cultivated from fertilization through to weeks-old in development, that weren’t selected for implantation.

One IVF treatment might yield as many as 20 “surplus” embryos.

An ART Embryo Lab survey conducted by the CDC in 1999 found that labs employed a variety of techniques to handle surplus embryos. Fifty-even percent (57%) of labs report that they “immediately discard” them, through incineration as medical waste, for example;

Read more:

The Paradox of the IVF Clinic and the Abortion Clinic: Are Some Embryos More Persons Than Others? - Big Think

And from the following:

Fertility clinics destroy embryos all the time. Why aren’t conservatives after them?

In contrast, all my husband and I had to do was sign a form. Our competence to choose the outcome of our embryo was never questioned. There were no mandatory lectures on gestation, no requirement that I be explicitly told that personhood begins at conception or that I view a picture of a day-five embryo. There was no compulsory waiting period for me to reconsider my decision. In fact, no state imposes these restrictions — so common for abortion patients — on patients with frozen embryos. With rare exceptions, the government doesn’t interfere with an IVF patient’s choices except to resolve disagreements between couples.

The disparity between how the law treats abortion patients and IVF patients reveals an ugly truth about abortion restrictions: that they are often less about protecting life than about controlling women’s bodies. Both IVF and abortion involve the destruction of fertilized eggs that could potentially develop into people. But only abortion concerns women who have had sex that they don’t want to lead to childbirth. Abortion restrictions use unwanted pregnancy as a punishment for “irresponsible sex” and remind women of the consequences of being unchaste: If you didn’t want to endure a mandatory vaginal ultrasound , you shouldn’t have had sex in the first place .

Read more:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...c033e6745d8_story.html?utm_term=.689ac414752a
 
Last edited:
"Protection of unborn children"

This thread was inspired by exchanges with

minnie616, years2late, Lursa and Scrabaholic

--DP's Four Horsewomen of Abortion--

whose confusion concerning the nature and nomenclature of the human being in the womb

opened my eyes

--a newcomer to abortion debate--

opened my eyes

to the confusion at law

and to the cultural confusion

underlying the confusion of our Querulous Quartet.

The Law has confused them

and through them or the likes of them confused us or the likes of us.

This is how federal law defines that critter in mommy's belly:

18 U.S. Code 01841. Protection of unborn children
(d) As used in this section, the term "unborn child" means a "child in utero," and the term "child in utero" or "child who is in utero" means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.

18 U.S. Code SS 1841 - Protection of unborn children | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

Are we all paying attention?

"a member of the species homo sapiens"

or as the federal law reads in another place:

(C) If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall...be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being.

I say, are we paying attention?

"a human being"

Now that we are aware of the legal and cultural confusion, please see Angel's clear and concise Pro-Life/Pro-Choice moral argument at
Abortion 101
Abortion 201
AP Abortion: Moral Responsibility

Think​

Call it a whatever you like. Call it gods little miracle if you like. As long as it is dead after the abortion that is fine with me. Because that is what is currently legal
 
Seems the OP has realized his thread (like all his threads) is a complete failure and has run away
fork.jpg
 
This is a perversion of that term.

Palliative care seems to be intended to provide comfort for the very unpleasant sensations experienced during the prolonged treatment of illnesses like cancer. It's not like Hospice Care. It is longer term. Maybe years.

This seems less like palliative care and more like a last meal.

I just got back from a short stay at the Mayo Clinic here in Arizona.

I have stage 4 cancer and it is killing me.

I meet my hospice care nurse tomorrow.

My palliative care lasted since 2016 when I survived a surgery that I was given a 1 in 4 chance of waking up from.

Cancer pain can be a torment I wouldn't wish on anyone.

I only hope they don't make me linger.

I don't mind or fear death, but I don't want to be kept alive when I am unable to live.
 
I just got back from a short stay at the Mayo Clinic here in Arizona.

I have stage 4 cancer and it is killing me.

I meet my hospice care nurse tomorrow.

My palliative care lasted since 2016 when I survived a surgery that I was given a 1 in 4 chance of waking up from.

Cancer pain can be a torment I wouldn't wish on anyone.

I only hope they don't make me linger.

I don't mind or fear death, but I don't want to be kept alive when I am unable to live.

I am so sorry to hear this. My heart aches for you and your loved ones...I wish you a life worth living and comfort as long as it is possible.

You still have the best online name I've ever read.
 
I just got back from a short stay at the Mayo Clinic here in Arizona.

I have stage 4 cancer and it is killing me.

I meet my hospice care nurse tomorrow.

My palliative care lasted since 2016 when I survived a surgery that I was given a 1 in 4 chance of waking up from.

Cancer pain can be a torment I wouldn't wish on anyone.

I only hope they don't make me linger.

I don't mind or fear death, but I don't want to be kept alive when I am unable to live.

My prayers are with you.
 
I just got back from a short stay at the Mayo Clinic here in Arizona.

I have stage 4 cancer and it is killing me.

I meet my hospice care nurse tomorrow.

My palliative care lasted since 2016 when I survived a surgery that I was given a 1 in 4 chance of waking up from.

Cancer pain can be a torment I wouldn't wish on anyone.

I only hope they don't make me linger.

I don't mind or fear death, but I don't want to be kept alive when I am unable to live.

So sorry to hear this, hoping yo dont suffer to much
 
I just got back from a short stay at the Mayo Clinic here in Arizona.

I have stage 4 cancer and it is killing me.

I meet my hospice care nurse tomorrow.

My palliative care lasted since 2016 when I survived a surgery that I was given a 1 in 4 chance of waking up from.

Cancer pain can be a torment I wouldn't wish on anyone.

I only hope they don't make me linger.

I don't mind or fear death, but I don't want to be kept alive when I am unable to live.

I am so sorry for your situation. I hope they can make you comfortable.
 
I am so sorry to hear this. My heart aches for you and your loved ones...I wish you a life worth living and comfort as long as it is possible.

You still have the best online name I've ever read.

Thank you.

Your kind thoughts and words are appreciated.
 
Your comments are appreciated.

I keep a positive attitude and it helps to hear encouragement.

:thanks:

I went through some very intensive chemo 6 years ago, F**** cancer
 
A fetus is no more a human BEING than a catirpiller is a butterfly.

Human =/= human being.

A single Monarch caterpillar and resulting butterfly are the same species, and indeed the same individual. A caterpillar is not a collection of Danaus plexippus cells, but an individual of the Danaus plexippus species.

We can certainly consider the caterpillar to be less worthy of life, by virtue of having less capabilities, being a "burden", and having not reached the butterfly stage. But we can not deny that it is an individual of Danaus plexippus.
 
Cougarbear: The best solution is to undermine liberal leftist's agenda to kill unborn babies.

Your nomenclature is incorrect. I am so tired of the right wing pushing the overton window further and further right with their hysteria.
 
A single Monarch caterpillar and resulting butterfly are the same species, and indeed the same individual. A caterpillar is not a collection of Danaus plexippus cells, but an individual of the Danaus plexippus species.

We can certainly consider the caterpillar to be less worthy of life, by virtue of having less capabilities, being a "burden", and having not reached the butterfly stage. But we can not deny that it is an individual of Danaus plexippus.

The caterpillar is not the same as a fetus. A fetus is required to use the organs and sustenance another body provides. One thing that has always amused me about anti-abortion advocates, or pro birthers, I should say, is that they are so focused on the short term goal they miss what the outcome of their policies would be.

Tell me, where does it end? At abortion? Since abortion exists to protect mothers from having their bodies used by a fetus (note, not a person, as personhood is required for rights to function), what would stop, for example, organ donors from using the precedent to force all deceased people to have to donate their organs on death?
 
Back
Top Bottom