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.
So your a supporter of SSI disabled children, SNAP, ACS, and other programs and agencies to provide for the welfare of children born with defects or poverty to allow for mother's to have these kids ?
Yes.
Now where does that leave you?
By the way, how many refugees and migrants have you personally taken into your home?
My cousin was advised to have an abortion when Doctors diagnosed the fetus with microcephaly. She spoke to her Priest and on his advise declined the abortion. The baby lived for four years, blind and deaf but clearly able to feel pain because he screamed in agony day and night. He was fed through a feeding tube and had grand mal seizures at least once a day. When he passed away my cousin became very depressed, she blamed herself for not having the abortion and spending all that time watching her infant suffer. Yeah, keeping that baby was just a wonderful thing for her and the baby...not
This is the part where I wonder if there is enough communication about how the baby will be sick and tortured, and only live a year or two. Did her Dr spell this out? Are people actually getting into the childs sickness aspect of this? Seems to me the anti abortion crowd is avoiding this entirely.
What kind of sick individual could possibly agree to letting a fetus birth to short life of pain and suffering just on principle..if they were informed that was what is going to happen?
This is once again one of those subjects that people like to force their will on others without ever experiencing it themselves. They would never learn until it was close to them.
And really, anyone who thinks a baby should be carried to term just for a life of torture for the sake of principle are themselves mentally ill anyway.
Pardon us for questioning the efficacy of statements made by someone claiming their prayers to God prevented Hillary Clinton from being elected President.
Simple solution....
Pray that no woman says they "aren't emotionally ready to have a baby". Viola'........Problem solved.
Thats what the ignore feature is for. Once the unreasonables and too-far-gones started multiplying around here, I made that feature smoke. Its the only way to stay focused on the people you can have a healthy debate with. Makes everything less frustrating.
Too many people in here that are posting from Bellevue.
I don't use ignore. It serves to remind me of the dangerous people that live amongst us...…….
My cousin was advised to have an abortion when Doctors diagnosed the fetus with microcephaly. She spoke to her Priest and on his advise declined the abortion. The baby lived for four years, blind and deaf but clearly able to feel pain because he screamed in agony day and night. He was fed through a feeding tube and had grand mal seizures at least once a day. When he passed away my cousin became very depressed, she blamed herself for not having the abortion and spending all that time watching her infant suffer. Yeah, keeping that baby was just a wonderful thing for her and the baby...not
I'm sure cheesemont would have volunteered to babysit...…….
So my solution would be the current law with the exception of the "Health" component. That is the problematic section.
Again, the facts don't change. NY now has a law where a mother can choose to terminate the life of a full term healthy baby without the need for a physician to be involved. Who would do that? Not many or no one.
So why the need for the law?
they find babies in dumpsters...…….who would do that? but there are laws against it...…..
This is the part where I wonder if there is enough communication about how the baby will be sick and tortured, and only live a year or two. Did her Dr spell this out? Are people actually getting into the childs sickness aspect of this? Seems to me the anti abortion crowd is avoiding this entirely.
What kind of sick individual could possibly agree to letting a fetus birth to short life of pain and suffering just on principle..if they were informed that was what is going to happen?
This is once again one of those subjects that people like to force their will on others without ever experiencing it themselves. They would never learn until it was close to them.
And really, anyone who thinks a baby should be carried to term just for a life of torture for the sake of principle are themselves mentally ill anyway.
I have to wonder this myself. Another poster asked me what's the difference between terminating a pregnancy like that and killing the brain-damaged victim of some kind of accident.
Several things, I think.
For one thing, I generally do tend to believe that where there's life, there's hope. People have wakened from comas that were believed to be hopeless. The thing is, the baby mentioned in the linked article had no brain, other than the stem, with which to recover. Her skull was filled with fluid and nothing more. That situation is truly hopeless, and I can't imagine how anyone could consider bringing such a life into the world anything other than cruel. (Nevermind the poor woman involved - I can't even think about what it must be like to carry to term a child that is utterly doomed. The comments and good wishes from well-intentioned strangers alone would be heartbreaking.)
For another, there are advance directives, DNR orders, and living wills. All of those things allow someone whose condition is deemed to be hopeless to opt out of "heroic" measures that prolong, not life, but death.
As for why? Well, church teaching, of course. It's forbidden. Also, this lovely concept called "the redemptive value of suffering." Easy to talk about, when it's someone else's pain.
Priests like that remind me why I am a lapsed Catholic.
People pull the plug on brain damaged accident victims all the time. Some people even assign a person to make that decision. It’s not a black and white issue; it’s discretionary like aborting a severely damaged child. It’s a pointless question with no bearing on the topic.
OK, so which condition or combination of conditions would justify killing an auto accident victim with sever brain damage?
That is why I think it is usually left to the immediate family to decide...………..I believe it is referred to as allowing them to die rather than being artificially kept alive.
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.
