Abortion Is Against Science And Common Sense, Its Murder

[marke]

Re: Love me, love my dogma

My god is pro choice.

Other gods, like the Muslim god, are pro murder also.

 

[year2late]

Re: Darwin & evolution

You claim I lied, but you cannot back up your false allegation with facts. So typically liberal.

How do I back up your false claim?

It is on you to show actual evidence.

Think of it this way....you stole food from a starving child. Now prove you didn’t with verifiable evidence.

 

[minnie616]

Re: Darwin & evolution

Actually...

The unborn have no rights.
States have rights.

States can and do protect non persons.

The UVVA is a Federal law that protects non persons.


State anti-cruelty laws protect pets and animals against cruelty.

The wicked have a history of human rights abuses. Wicked barbarians have murdered Jews, cops, blacks, whites, political enemies, and, worse, innocent little babies.

The unborn have no human rights.

Personhood and human rights come with live birth.

 

[marke]

Re: Darwin & evolution

The unborn have no human rights.

Personhood and human rights come with live birth.

Bloody abortionist savages: 'We don't give a damn about God or babies in the womb, so take your religion and shove it.'

 

[maquiscat]

Re: Love me, love my dogma

Other gods, like the Muslim god, are pro murder also.

I know, right? Who could possibly follow a God that is pro murder?

Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys. - 1 Samuel 15:3 NIV

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

 

[weaver2]

Re: Darwin & evolution

marke;1070508549]Those claiming the unborn baby is not alive inside the womb are lying.

Nobody claimed that. That's something you made up. If you think it's true post a quote and a source.

It is easy for abortionists to say killing unborn babies is not barbaric because they don't care what the victim thinks or feels about it.

. You cannot find a quote or post a source that says that's what abortionists say.

You can twist the leftist baby-killing narrative any way you like, but the baby-killers still advocate finishing the job outside the womb if a baby survives one of their botched abortion attempts, just like Gosnell did on a regular basis.

You haven't a clue what you are talking about. Nobody is advocating post birth abortion. If you think they are post a quote and a source.

I can hardly argue with your logic about that.

. And that statement certainly demonstrates your misogyny.

My wife carried nine babies to term, and one died shortly after birth, even though doctors had told her at times over the course of several pregnancies that her health was at risk. I guess every woman's health is at risk for every pregnancy, thus giving baby killers the excuse to abort any and all babies the mothers do not want.

[/QUOTE]

Bragging about your success at competitive reproduction is irrelevant. The issue is that since you and your church cannot enforce the no abortion rule you are lobbying Congress to enforce your dogma for you. Make the women in your own church follow your rules before you start sticking you sanctimonious bigoted nose into the reproductive lives of women not in your church of repetitive reproduction.

 

[weaver2]

Re: Darwin & evolution

Bloody abortionist savages: 'We don't give a damn about God or babies in the womb, so take your religion and shove it.'

You and your church don't give a damn about children or families after they are born. Your church is not about love and respect it's about power and control which is why so many people tell you to shove your power hungry religion.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Darwin & evolution

Bloody abortionist savages: 'We don't give a damn about God or babies in the womb, so take your religion and shove it.'

Who says you and your god get to force yourselves on women?

 

[year2late]

Re: Darwin & evolution

Bloody abortionist savages: 'We don't give a damn about God or babies in the womb, so take your religion and shove it.'

Those are your words, not any prochoice individuals that I know of.

If you have to make crap up to back up your beliefs.....your beliefs have no worth . Try giving accurate information.

 

[Somerville]

Re: Darwin & evolution

Bloody abortionist savages: 'We don't give a damn about God or babies in the womb, so take your religion and shove it.'

Perhaps you should do a bit more reading of the book you see as so very special. For instance, Numbers 5:11-31 and Exodus 21:22

Did Jesus abolish the Law or not? The non-believers can have so much fun going thru the contradictions found in the Bible but also the amazingly convoluted attempts by True Believers to explain these obvious problems. Apologists can be very wordy at times.

 

[weaver2]

Re: Darwin & evolution

Perhaps you should do a bit more reading of the book you see as so very special. For instance, Numbers 5:11-31 and Exodus 21:22

Did Jesus abolish the Law or not? The non-believers can have so much fun going thru the contradictions found in the Bible but also the amazingly convoluted attempts by True Believers to explain these obvious problems. Apologists can be very wordy at times.

While we're into quoting the Bible back to those who use it to judge others and justify their prejudices let's see what they say about the sanctity of all life and how abortion is murder and against God's laws after dealing with Numbers 31:15-41 or Deuteronomy 28:53 and 2Kings 6:28-29.

Anxiously awaiting the sanctimonious explanations on the divvying up of virgins and the eating of the first born :mrgreen:

 

[weaver2]

Re: Darwin & evolution

While we're into quoting the Bible back to those who use it to judge others and justify their prejudices let's see what they say about the sanctity of all life and how abortion is murder and against God's laws after dealing with Numbers 31:15-41 or Deuteronomy 28:53 and 2Kings 6:28-29.

Anxiously awaiting the sanctimonious explanations on the divvying up of virgins and the eating of the first born :mrgreen:

The trouble with basing civil law on your religious beliefs (aside from the fact that it's unconstitutional) is that all religions make frequent changes in what their God considers sacred or profane. All religions are inconsistent. One can find a quote to satisfy almost any action. They are all violent and controlling and they all squabble among themselves as to who is the most correct , most loved by their God and therefore the one to take precedence over all other religions.

It is insane to use religion as a foundation for civil law. And it is unscientific to ban a medical procedure that reduces the number of unplanned and unwanted pregnancies.

 

[year2late]

Re: Darwin & evolution

Abortion is against science and its against common sense, its murder plain and simple. We need to ban it altogether, this article hits the nail right on the head.
Penny Nance: World'''s tiniest surviving preemie shows abortion isn’t in line with science or common sense | Fox News

Bloody abortionist savages: 'We don't give a damn about God or babies in the womb, so take your religion and shove it.'

So, for Marke's sake I will bring it back to the original post one more time.

A woman at 23 weeks had severe complications of pregnancy. The fetus was at the point of potential viability outside the womb, so when they did the urgent C-section, they hoped for the best.

Baby Saybie was fortunate enough to be born with immediate access to one of the nation's most highly regarded high level Neonatal Intensive Care Units.

How does a hospital get to the point where they can save such a baby?

They need money and a lot of it. They need your tax payer money, private and public grants. They need a crap ton of well insured patients. They need the best and the brightest students to become doctors, nurses, scientists, dieticians, engineers that can help develop systems , drugs, procedures, etc to save babies like Saybie. That takes money as well.

So...when you vote, do you vote to make sure people are insured and your politicians encourage legitimate scientific research with the funds they need. Do you vote for the politicians that will assure our students have the best chance at the best education so they will be the next highly educated doctors, nurses, dieticians, scientists, etc that will save the next Baby Saybie….possibly even one smaller and younger?

Or are you a "pro-life savage" that only fights for the fetus and says "screw you" to the born.

Baby Saybie was not a miracle, Baby Saybie was a testament to what can happen when we support science/medicine.

Unfortunately most babies born as early as Saybie don't have the chance they are not lucky enough to live in close proximity to such a hospital. But at least they are paving the way for other facilities, if they can get the funding.

 

[marke]

Re: Darwin & evolution

So, for Marke's sake I will bring it back to the original post one more time.

A woman at 23 weeks had severe complications of pregnancy. The fetus was at the point of potential viability outside the womb, so when they did the urgent C-section, they hoped for the best.

Baby Saybie was fortunate enough to be born with immediate access to one of the nation's most highly regarded high level Neonatal Intensive Care Units.

How does a hospital get to the point where they can save such a baby?

They need money and a lot of it. They need your tax payer money, private and public grants. They need a crap ton of well insured patients. They need the best and the brightest students to become doctors, nurses, scientists, dieticians, engineers that can help develop systems , drugs, procedures, etc to save babies like Saybie. That takes money as well.

So...when you vote, do you vote to make sure people are insured and your politicians encourage legitimate scientific research with the funds they need. Do you vote for the politicians that will assure our students have the best chance at the best education so they will be the next highly educated doctors, nurses, dieticians, scientists, etc that will save the next Baby Saybie….possibly even one smaller and younger?

Or are you a "pro-life savage" that only fights for the fetus and says "screw you" to the born.

Baby Saybie was not a miracle, Baby Saybie was a testament to what can happen when we support science/medicine.

Unfortunately most babies born as early as Saybie don't have the chance they are not lucky enough to live in close proximity to such a hospital. But at least they are paving the way for other facilities, if they can get the funding.

At 23 weeks Saybie proved to be a viable human baby.

 

[year2late]

Re: Darwin & evolution

At 23 weeks Saybie proved to be a viable human baby.

With the help of modern science and tax payer dollars as well as a large number of well insured patients.

Baby Saybie was not a miracle. Baby Saybie is alive because proper science and medicine were supported financially through taxpayers and grants (etc)from private and public sources.

And let us not forget there was a mother that had severe complications of pregnancy. Pregnancy without proper medical supervision and access to quality facilities with properly trained individuals and properly maintained equipment is even riskier.

 

[marke]

Re: Darwin & evolution

With the help of modern science and tax payer dollars as well as a large number of well insured patients.

Baby Saybie was not a miracle. Baby Saybie is alive because proper science and medicine were supported financially through taxpayers and grants (etc)from private and public sources.

And let us not forget there was a mother that had severe complications of pregnancy. Pregnancy without proper medical supervision and access to quality facilities with properly trained individuals and properly maintained equipment is even riskier.

And, don't forget, an unborn baby is a viable human inside the mother's womb who can be saved alive if born premature if proper medical procedures are followed.

 

[weaver2]

Re: Darwin & evolution

And, don't forget, an unborn baby is a viable human inside the mother's womb who can be saved alive if born premature if proper medical procedures are followed.

A 23 week old fetus is viable in utero, only. The Saybie baby is an anomaly. Very premature babies' chances of survival are less than 20% meaning that 80% of the babies cannot be kept alive even when the latest and most extreme technology is used. The chances of a 23 week preemie being born with out some mental or physical handicap are only 20%

You keep believing that a c-section early into pregnancy puts an end to fetal death by abortion. It doesn't and it doesn't result in a normal child. The following has been posted before. C section is not a solution. Do not advocate for late term c-section after 28 weeks. That's exactly the same as telling a woman to avoid the abortion you disapprove she should carry the baby to term, give birth, then give away her child. That's an abomination to everyone except, apparently, white male religious conservatives.

Survival Rates of:
Babies born at 23 weeks have a 17% chance of survival
Babies born at 24 weeks have a 39% chance of survival
Babies born at 25 weeks have a 50% chance of survival
From 32 weeks onwards, most babies are able to survive with the help of medical Technology [EPICure data]

Outcomes
10% of premature babies will develop a severe, permanent, life long disability such as lung disease, cerebral palsy, blindness or deafness.

50% of premature babies born before the 26th week of gestation are disabled, a quarter severely so. (Fowler GA. Preemie problems: the sobering statistics. US News World Reports 2000; vol 129: pp56.)

Of children born before 26 weeks' gestation, results in 241 of the surviving children at six years (early school age) indicate a high level of disability as follows:
*22% severe disability (defined as cerebral palsy but not walking, low cognitive scores, blindness, profound deafness)
*24% moderate disability (defined as cerebral palsy but walking, IQ/cognitive scores in the special needs range, lesser degree of visual or hearing impairment)
*34% mild disability (defined as low IQ/cognitive score, squint, requiring glasses)
*20% no problems
This study also showed a greater risk of severe disability and lower cognitive function results for boys compared with girls. This supports the theory that male sex is an important risk factor in extremely preterm infants.
Cognitive and neurological impairment is common at school age amongst extremely preterm children. [N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 9-19.] Epicure data

 

[Lursa]

Re: Darwin & evolution

At 23 weeks Saybie proved to be a viable human baby.

The article conveniently left out that the infant would likely have severe physical and mental disabilities. And still may not survive to overcome them.

 

[weaver2]

Re: Darwin & evolution

The article conveniently left out that the infant would likely have severe physical and mental disabilities. And still may not survive to overcome them.

Don't upset Markie with facts. :mrgreen:

 

[year2late]

Re: Darwin & evolution

And, don't forget, an unborn baby is a viable human inside the mother's womb who can be saved alive if born premature if proper medical procedures are followed.

And let us not forget, that that means a lot of money being allotted to hospitals and researchers and education and insuring the poor and assuring those with means have insurance that will cover those costs. Making sure that the young students are receiving the proper education in the sciences - so they can foster that spark that will lead to the science leaders and innovators of tomorrow.
fact
Do you vote to assure that those hospitals and researchers and doctors and engineers get the resources they need to make sure that other communities can develop their own facilities to save their own Baby Saybies? Do you assure that your schools are teaching real fact based science? Scientist that are on the cutting edge to pioneer saving future (and even more premature)Baby Saybies are likely to be on a search for scientific reality that may fly in the face of your beliefs.

 

[year2late]

Re: Darwin & evolution

The article conveniently left out that the infant would likely have severe physical and mental disabilities. And still may not survive to overcome them.

Most would, but from what I can tell, this baby is pretty healthy. And if very healthy, that is a positive thing to say about science and the skills and decisions of medical personnel (across many specialties - whether they were doctors at the bedside, nurses, dieticians, engineers and mechanics, pharmacists (etc)

 

[Lursa]

Re: Darwin & evolution

Most would, but from what I can tell, this baby is pretty healthy. And if very healthy, that is a positive thing to say about science and the skills and decisions of medical personnel (across many specialties - whether they were doctors at the bedside, nurses, dieticians, engineers and mechanics, pharmacists (etc)

I saw no reference to the infant's condition. Were there other sources?

 

[year2late]

Re: Darwin & evolution

I saw no reference to the infant's condition. Were there other sources?

. She also managed to stop receiving oxygen before going home and was able to feed on her own for a full month before leaving the hospital.

Meet Saybie, the world'''s smallest baby - The San Diego Union-Tribune



There was a lot of skill and luck in her positive outcome.

In adults, it is pretty "easy" to put in an endotracheal tube. (breathing tube for mechanical ventilation) But for a preemie - let alone one of this tiny size it can be near impossible. Multiple attempts can lead to scarring of the airway and loss of oxygen to the brain. They were able to get it in on the first shot. Being born at a place that specifically deals with micro preemies and has amazing resources and training to accomplish this feat is what lead to this outcome. Does anybody here think that if this baby was born at a usual community hospital with a lower level NICU (neonatal intensive care)she would have had a chance at such a positive outcome?

 

[Lursa]

Re: Darwin & evolution

She also managed to stop receiving oxygen before going home and was able to feed on her own for a full month before leaving the hospital.Meet Saybie, the world'''s smallest baby - The San Diego Union-Tribune

Thanks for the quote. Lucky baby.

 

[year2late]

Re: Darwin & evolution

Thanks for the quote. Lucky baby.

Great facility.

I am curious if the pro-lifers vote to make sure they elect individuals that make sure people have the proper insurance and resources to get this high level of care.

I am curious if the pro-lifers vote to make sure they elect individuals that are supportive in word and finances of scientific/medical research that allows babies like Saybie to survive.

I have always said that there is a difference between being pro life and pro fetus. Many think they are pro-life....but are truly only pro-fetus at the polls.