Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why do so many people on this forum seem to ignore the fact that the overwhelming majority of people who choose to abort fetuses late in pregnancy due to major deformities, disabilities, or disease do so because they want to SAVE these potential children from possibly years of either pain or living in a vegetative state? And the fact is, according a December 1, 2005 article in Discover Magazine ("When Does a Fetus Feel Pain?" by Elise Kleeman), that until the 28th week of gestation, fetuses cannot feel pain because they haven't formed the necessary nerve pathways.
The article stated that although fetuses start forming pain receptors eight weeks into development, the thalamus, the part of the brain that routes information to other areas, doesn't form for 20 more weeks; and without the thalamus, no information can reach the cortex for processing, so no pain is felt. Although fetuses do have reflex reactions that can make them seem to be in pain, the article stated that this is just a reflex that's mediated by the spinal cord and not a conscious reaction, just as it is with paraplegics.
No, most conservatives expect the baby mama and daddy to take care of the child. If that is not possible, conservatives are the biggest advocates of and financial donors to charities that take care of those children. You are just butt hurt because the only thing liberals do is confiscate money and redistribute it and call that "caring".
Sorry to disappoint, but being 'butt hurt' would imply that I care about anything that you might say, and nothing could be further from the truth. I have never relied on public assistance and neither has anyone in my family, so there is no need to try to imply that I have.
But let's talk about these wonderful charities that are going to take care of these children. Sounds like you are talking about putting the kids in Christian orphanages where the little blue eyed babies will be snagged up in minutes and the brown and black ones will stay there learning about Gee-zus until they are 18. How many of the ethnic kids in foster care have been adopted by 'compassionate conservatives', most are there until they get booted out the door on their 18th birthday
Why do so many people on this forum seem to ignore the fact that the overwhelming majority of people who choose to abort fetuses late in pregnancy due to major deformities, disabilities, or disease do so because they want to SAVE these potential children from possibly years of either pain or living in a vegetative state? And the fact is, according a December 1, 2005 article in Discover Magazine ("When Does a Fetus Feel Pain?" by Elise Kleeman), that until the 28th week of gestation, fetuses cannot feel pain because they haven't formed the necessary nerve pathways.
And I'll be quite frank: most of my abortions are elective in that 20-24 week range. . . . In my particular case, probably 20% [of this procedure] are for genetic reasons. And the other 80% are purely elective.
Dr Martin Haskell.
American Medical News 1993
"[A]fter 20 weeks where it frankly is a child to me, I really agonize over it because the potential is so imminently there. I think, 'Gee, it's too bad that this child couldn't be adopted.' On the other hand, I have another position, which I think is superior in the hierarchy of questions, and that is: 'Who owns the child?' It's got to be the mother.
Dr James McMahon
American Medical News July 1993
The eleven points below summarize the substantial medical and scientific evidence that unborn children can feel pain by 20 weeks after fertilization.
Neither is your opinion, but here we are listening to it.
Feel free to stop interacting with me. I don't need to hear any more from someone who advocates killing third trimester babies. In fact, I find such people to be beyond reprehensible.
No, most conservatives expect the baby mama and daddy to take care of the child. If that is not possible, conservatives are the biggest advocates of and financial donors to charities that take care of those children. You are just butt hurt because the only thing liberals do is confiscate money and redistribute it and call that "caring".
Republicans hate birth control and expects people not get pregnant.
Although I definitely agree with the point you are making, this thread is focusing on abortions past 20 weeks of pregnancy. The huge majority of abortions are performed MUCH earlier than 20 weeks into the pregnancy.
The largest area for improvement is preventing unwanted pregnancies in the first place since we have the highest abortion rate of any civilized country, recommending changes that effect only around 1% of the abortions most of which are performed for very good reasons doesn't make much sense.
Both sides should be working towards education an prevention, not just to stop abortions but also the social and financial impact on single parents that carry to full term.
It's counter productive to close down clinics and turn around and run out the flag regarding 3rd trimester births, seems very hypocritical.
And I'll be quite frank: most of my abortions are elective in that 20-24 week range. . . . In my particular case, probably 20% [of this procedure] are for genetic reasons. And the other 80% are purely elective.
Dr Martin Haskell.
American Medical News 1993
"[A]fter 20 weeks where it frankly is a child to me, I really agonize over it because the potential is so imminently there. I think, 'Gee, it's too bad that this child couldn't be adopted.' On the other hand, I have another position, which I think is superior in the hierarchy of questions, and that is: 'Who owns the child?' It's got to be the mother.
Dr James McMahon
American Medical News July 1993
The eleven points below summarize the substantial medical and scientific evidence that unborn children can feel pain by 20 weeks after fertilization.
So, you are quoting two articles from 1993 versus an article written 12 years later?
Well, as I do not have any medical training, I am not going to say that I know better than the two doctors you quoted, but if a science magazine quotes doctors as saying that fetuses do not actually feel pain until 28 weeks, I am not going to say that the doctors quoted in the article are wrong, either.
I will also point out the obvious fact that early abortions are much easier on the woman than later ones -- so why would ANY woman wait so long to have an abortion if there was not a very good reason to do so? For that reason, I question Dr. Haskell's assertion that 80% of his patients who chose to have abortions in the 20th to 24th week were elective. I personally do not know of even ONE instance in which a woman chose to have an abortion after the first trimester that was NOT because the child would probably have been born with a very serious health problem. (Now, of course I am not saying that this is true in all cases -- certainly not! -- but just that I don't personally know of any woman who waited so long solely just because she was too lazy to have it done sooner.)
Also, there are a LOT more genetic conditions that can be detected now through prenatal testing than was the case 22 years ago! If more women know that there is a likelihood that the fetus they are carrying could have a significantly reduced quality of life, then it would stand to reason that there would be more women choosing to save their child from that.
Please do not misunderstand, however. I am NOT saying that I approve of torturing fetuses who have the potential of becoming children -- I definitely do NOT think that! -- but I AM saying that in SOME cases, abortion is definitely justified.
However, I do recognize and respect your right to disagree with me.
Why would anyone oppose this? I read the bill. It is short, to the point, and allows exceptions for rape and the health of the woman. It also explains the research. I don't see why the senate or anyone else would be against bans on mutilating a fetus for no good reason.
Of course Hillary is against it.
I think that abortions should be prohibited at and after the point when it possible for the fetus to be viable outside of the womb, and the fetus (now the newborn) can survive and become a normal, healthy person.
Feel free to stop interacting with me. I don't need to hear any more from someone who advocates killing third trimester babies. In fact, I find such people to be beyond reprehensible.
Who said I advocated for it or even agreed with it? My issue is when a side politicizes their opposition to it and restricts it in broad fashion just because they don't agree with it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
