Baby Born Live in Botched Abortion, Then Tossed Alive Into the Trash to Die — By the Abortion Clinic
Eighteen and pregnant, Sycloria Williams went to an abortion clinic outside Miami and paid $1,200 for Dr. Pierre Jean-Jacque Renelique to terminate her 23-week pregnancy.
Three days later, she sat in a reclining chair, medicated to dilate her cervix and otherwise get her ready for the procedure.
Only Renelique didn’t arrive in time. According to Williams and the Florida Department of Health, she went into labor and delivered a live baby girl.
What Williams and the Health Department say happened next has shocked people on both sides of the abortion debate: One of the clinic’s owners, who has no medical license, cut the infant’s umbilical cord. Williams says the woman placed the baby in a plastic biohazard bag and threw it out.
The baby was 23 weeks old, an age where most babies don’t survive, but some do. An autopsy showed that the baby’s lungs had filled with air, indicating she had been born alive.
Prosecutors are considering murder charges.
Both sides of the political aisle find this story disturbing. Conservatives, because someone apparently felt entitled to take a live human being and throw her in the trash to die. Liberals, because wingnuts might use the story to undermine Roe v. Wade.
Which aspect concerns you more?
“Liberals, because wingnuts will use it to undermine Roe v. Wade.”
Yeah, some conservative wing-nuts might make the argument that the widespread marketing and practice of abortion for several decades might have lead to a disrespect for human life. Sure hope those crazy bastards on the right don’t feel free to say that.
Brian (6e8cec) — 2/6/2009 @ 1:05 amHopefully my ironic tone came across . . .
Patterico (cc3b34) — 2/6/2009 @ 1:08 amIt did, on a 2nd reading.
Looks like I picked the wrong week to give up inhaling paint thinner…
BTW, I think 80% of voters, including those of blue states, would support restricting abortion to the 1st few months, except in cases of physical medical necessity. But the legislative edicts of the Supreme Court prevent this consensus from becoming law.
Brian (6e8cec) — 2/6/2009 @ 1:16 amPaging Jill Stanek.
Presuming this story is accurate, it’ll be interesting seeing the contortions the pro-choicers endure to minimize the impact of this incident. Here’s how Barbara Boxer tried to evade addressing the reality of partial-birth abortion in a duel with Rick Santorum.
L.N. Smithee (a26571) — 2/6/2009 @ 2:20 amIf the mother had done this, she would have been charged with murder, plain and simple.
Dr. K (6601b8) — 2/6/2009 @ 2:46 amOutrage…
In English, this is known as extremism.
In Other Words (2b7e85) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:03 am……
Obama will give places of honor to those dedicated abortion workers who put into practice Obama’s Freedom of Choice Act and his policies as an Illinois State Senator. Other Americans like myself would want these clinic bastards punished to the fullest extent of the law.
eaglewingz08 (b49b29) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:04 amThis is evil. Unfortunately, the only ones who cared were the police who investigated the anonymous phone tips, and the Thomas More Society who brought the present lawsuit. The medical examiner put the cause of death down as “extreme pre-maturity”, and the prosecutor has not brought charges in the two and a half years since the murder.
nk (61a9de) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:39 amTHESE PEOPLE SHOULD BE ARRESTED FOR MURDER.
stopthebus (dc75ec) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:41 amThat’s an unpleasant true story.
But, these places are all in the business of turning innocent and defenseless live human beings into dead ones for money.
The values on display here are only the ones that we must expect from the medical murder industry and its supporters.
David Blue (2d914a) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:44 amThis is really disturbing.
JD (b2da6e) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:51 amMurder, pure and simple. It was a deliberate act.
Had this child been born at a hospital and the staff had put her in a bag and thrown her into the trash to die, what would Liberals have said? Why is an crime at an abortion clinic any different from one anywhere else?
If the practice of putting live people in the garbage to die, perhaps we should start a list.
arch (84c50a) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:51 amEvery woman who has an abortion should have to watch it and look long and hard at the result afterword.
Peg C. (48175e) — 2/6/2009 @ 5:01 amHopefully my ironic tone came across . . .
Comment by Patterico — 2/6/2009 @ 1:08 am
It certainly did. It would be hilarious were it not so tragic – strike that – horrifically evil.
Every woman who has an abortion should have to watch it and look long and hard at the result afterword.
Comment by Peg C. — 2/6/2009 @ 5:01 am
Quite unfortunately, many do, whether or not they actually see the human remains of the baby or not.
I’d rather require that every woman wanting an abortion see an ultrasound of her baby (some 90-95% –I don’t know the exact figure but that’s close– of women doing so refuse an abortion when they see their baby moving around, the little arms and legs, etc) and get accurate information on her baby’s development (four weeks – heartbeat, six weeks, brainwaves, etc).
I’m praying for Renelique since she is going to have an extremely rough time over the next several years. Some women know, but many, especially young ones, don’t, just how “human” their babies really are, and how fully developed how early. Her seeing that was most likely a shock she won’t easily recover from, especially since she knows she is co-responsible, along with the “doctor,” for this murder.
And – since I know women who have been completely shattered by the “legal, safe” killings of their unborn children, my usual abortion-post links to free and confidential post-abortion help for anyone who may be reading this:
http://www.hopeafterabortion.com
http://www.abortionchangesyou.com
no one you know (65b7aa) — 2/6/2009 @ 5:33 amAnd the mother, who seems to have had quite a change of heart having watched her living baby being born.
Someone tell me again how safe abortion is, and how it doesn’t harm women.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/6/2009 @ 5:37 amAnd from the article:
“It really disturbed me,” said Joanne Sterner, president of the Broward County chapter of the National Organization for Women, after reviewing the administrative complaint against Renelique. “I know that there are clinics out there like this. And I hope that we can keep (women) from going to these types of clinics.”
These people are infuriating. She admits to knowing there are clinics out there like this but she does nothing to put the resources of NOW (what a joke of a name) behind rooting out and stopping them. This isn’t even the only kind of abortion that damages women and destroys children and they just couldn’t care less.
no one you know (65b7aa) — 2/6/2009 @ 5:38 amPresuming this story is accurate, it’ll be interesting seeing the contortions the pro-choicers endure to minimize the impact of this incident. Here’s how Barbara Boxer tried to evade addressing the reality of partial-birth abortion in a duel with Rick Santorum.
Comment by L.N. Smithee — 2/6/2009 @ 2:20 am
Thanks very much for that link, L.N.; have it saved now. How revealing is that? Proabortion people get really, really upset when you actually try to get down to cases, don’t they?
IMO no proabortion person wants to think too hard about what they’re doing; it’s impossible to do so without either becoming completely evil or becoming pro-life.
One kind becomes Bernard Nathanson. Another becomes a local abortionist in my city, who’s privately called “The Animal” by local doctors (I worked for a few of them in a clinic and that’s how I found out) for stories getting out of his more-than-usual brutality to both women and their unborn children during the killing “procedures.”
no one you know (65b7aa) — 2/6/2009 @ 5:45 amIs air in the lungs the decisive proof of life? How can we say that it was not a very young human life just before this happened?
I don’t see the big difference between what was done here and the other million abortions performed every year in this country.
Amphipolis (fdbc48) — 2/6/2009 @ 5:47 amI wonder does Peg C. and ‘No one you know’ believe in other forms of torture?
pitchforksntorches (12026e) — 2/6/2009 @ 5:57 amIf you were going to incorporate these ‘lessons’ in Sex Ed class, maybe. But to submit a pregnant woman to that is sheer hatred in my view. Yeeeesh
But to submit a pregnant woman to that is sheer hatred in my view. Yeeeesh
Comment by pitchforksntorches — 2/6/2009 @ 5:57 am
To a pre-abortion ultrasound? Torture? I’m not following you. Women have expressed lots of gratitude for getting this information before they go to have their baby killed. Typical comments (that I know of from working with doctors who oversee these ultrasounds with prolife clinics): “Wow, that’s my baby!” “Look at her moving around” and “Is that a heartbeat? Is that the head? No way I’m having this done now!”
Torture? Not in the least. Loving, positive, lifegiving truth. True love, not the lie of hiding essential information from women about to make a lifechanging – or lifetaking – decision.
no one you know (65b7aa) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:05 amI say we give this clinic $102 Billion from the new stimulus package so they can upgrade their program and infrastructure.
SteveG (a87dae) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:06 amIts a win win for the left
Anyway, pitchforksandtorches, I’d be willing to bet a very large amount of money that Sycloria Williams wishes she’d had the information she’d have gotten from an ultrasound at some point before she witnessed her own fully formed dead baby knocked to the floor and then stuffed into a trash bag. And she’ll get to remember that happy scene for years to come.
But showing her a living unborn baby before she makes her decision —that’s “torture.”
*rolls eyes*
no one you know (65b7aa) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:11 amThere is no torture in forcing those committing these atrocities, including the mothers, to witness exactly what it is they are doing. I also agree in having to view ultrasounds beforehand. The only torture is is that which the pro-abortion crowd undergoes in trying to excuse and explain away the horror and inhumanity of the act. I say this as a woman who was a lefty feminist and pro-abortion for many years (no, I have never had one and never would).
Funny how lefties are simply obsessed, to the point of mental illness, with “torture.” Torture is sharing the planet with people who hate human beings as much as lefties do.
Peg C. (48175e) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:15 amAnd broadcasting scenes from Dachau to Germans would have been awfully cruel as well. Ugly facts are so much easier to deal with when you can avoid having to face them.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:18 amI can think of no other medical procedure in which there is such strong resistance to the doctrine of informed consent.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:19 am24
Amen
EricPWJohnson (46a4e2) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:28 amPablo
Amen, Pablo.
Peg C. (48175e) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:29 amThroughout most of history and in most cultures, some form of infanticide has been practiced. Christian doctrine has always opposed it, and Christian missionaries worked diligently to eliminate it from any culture they went to.
Strange that it’s coming back, innit?
Pious Agnostic (291f9a) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:44 amPablo: Very well said.
Old Coot (who also wants DRJ back) (529757) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:51 amMy twins were born at 21 weeks, roughly 3.5 months early and they are alive and healthy! This act was murder no matter what side of the arguement you are on. A mother would be charged with murder if she did this at home and this clinic worker should be charged also IF this story is accurate…
C. Leonard (c57ae7) — 2/6/2009 @ 7:00 am1. I think you should fire your headline writer. This wasn’t so much a “botched abortion,” this was a non-abortion. I had a different image of a botched abortion; was I the only one?
2. I’m pro-choice(ish), and, *if true*, this meets all the elements of a murder, probably a first degree murder. I hope the people responsible get charged.
–JRM
JRM (355c21) — 2/6/2009 @ 7:02 am1. I think you should fire your headline writer.
Well…you may be right; the headline should probably have read “botched assassination attempt” instead, as every “failed” abortion is indeed just that.
no one you know (65b7aa) — 2/6/2009 @ 7:13 amI think every birth by a single mother should now be referred to as a “botched abortion”.
If single women are still out there having babies, still seeing giving birth as a choice… the system obviously has broken down and needs more funding so no more botching occurs.
The biohazard bagging was a real nice touch.
SteveG (a87dae) — 2/6/2009 @ 7:16 amIf I can get my cranky old rich great uncle into an abortion clinic and then wrap his head in a biohazard bag is it just a late term abortion?
My great aunt would like a ruling ASAP
This sounds like 1st degree murder to me, plain and simple.
I find the liberals and their lack of respect for human life unless they are enemies of the USA to be beyond revolting.
I still hear liberals sniveling about dead Iraqis and Palestinians, yet they have a right to murder helpless American babies at their altar of selfishness.
Its just a modern version of human sacrifice like the Aztecs and other barbarians practiced.
ML (14488c) — 2/6/2009 @ 7:20 amAbortion and the peddling of dead baby parts has become a huge industry in the US. Surprisingly, while conservatives are busy wailing on the “left” for this obscene situation, many “neo-cons” and their fortune 500 Wall Street allies are financing and profiteering on the trade and “research”. after almost 8 years of a GOP dominated government which failed to push an anti-abortion agenda in any meaningful way it is unlikely we will see a reversal of RvsW in our lifetimes. In fact, ONLY a Constitutional Amendment will end the butchery.
John Dogget (1593b0) — 2/6/2009 @ 7:45 amThe Office of the Former President Elect has no problem with the actions taken by the clinic and its management.
having opposed the Baby Born Alive act at every opportunity.
quasimodo (edc74e) — 2/6/2009 @ 7:46 amit’s tough to push an anti abortion agenda when the laws in effect were passed by our nine black robed masters and the party of the Former President Elect would oppose via filibuster any non-judicial limitations with the aid and support of Rinos
quasimodo (edc74e) — 2/6/2009 @ 7:49 am“It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish. America needs no words from me to see how your decision in Roe v. Wade has deformed a great nation. The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has sown violence and discord at the heart of the most intimate human relationships. It has aggravated the derogation of the father’s role in an increasingly fatherless society. It has portrayed the greatest of gifts — a child — as a competitor, an intrusion, and an inconvenience. It has nominally accorded mothers unfettered dominion over the independent lives of their physically dependent sons and daughters”
And, in granting this unconscionable power, it has exposed many women to unjust and selfish demands from their husbands or other sexual partners. Human rights are not a privilege conferred by government. They are every human being’s entitlement by virtue of his humanity. The right to life does not depend, and must not be declared to be contingent, on the pleasure of anyone else, not even a parent or a sovereign.”
-Mother Teresa
Comedian Peter Wolf (37dd85) — 2/6/2009 @ 7:51 amI don’t quite understand the point you are trying to make,
Prior to birth there is amniotic fluid in the lungs,
during birth the amniotic fluid is squeezed out by the pressure going through the birth canal,
air in lungs mean the child was born alive and with enough vigor to breath on his/her own.
As far as jurisprudence goes (I guess), the defense cannot say the child was stillborn hence no crime was done.
Can anything be done in regard to the DA who choose to do nothing with this case?
As said above, the only problem with this case in the perspective of then State Senator Obama was one of aesthetics. Remember, he would not have wanted Ms. Williams “punished” with that baby.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 2/6/2009 @ 7:56 am“Both sides of the political aisle find this story disturbing. Conservatives, because someone apparently felt entitled to take a live human being and throw her in the trash to die. Liberals, because wingnuts might use the story to undermine Roe v. Wade.”
– Patterico
You realize this merits a “fuck you”, right? Because I’m a liberal, and I find this disturbing for the same reason you presumably do. And my family is liberal, and they would say the same thing.
I’m sure there are a great many liberals who actually have genuine regard for the lives of infants, regardless of your ill-considered insinuations.
Leviticus (a89520) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:16 amWhat a horror. I… don’t even know what to say.
But, to the blogger:
I fail to see what this has to do with politics– conservative or liberal. I dare you to find anyone who thinks this is okay. I’m as liberal as the day is long, but this is hardly the desired effect! You act as if is was legal; it isn’t. You act as if “liberals” are out lobbying Congress to allow this; they’re not.
This wasn’t an abortion— botched, partial-birth or otherwise.
karinova (d7cc25) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:40 amMD –
My point is that the baby was a living human being before it took its first breath. It just didn’t have enough vigor to resist the bag it was put in.
I understand the legal significance of this baby not being still born. What I don’t understand is why so many babies of the same age are killed with impunity. I don’t see any significant difference. Before you have a baby with amniotic fluid in the lungs, after with air. This is just one of hundreds of developmental changes a human goes through.
How is it that killing the one is a horror, and killing the other is routine?
Amphipolis (fdbc48) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:52 amRe Comment #15 by Pablo:
>
And the mother, who seems to have had quite a change of heart having watched her living baby being born.
I have no sympathy for “mommy”. She was an accessory before, during, and after the fact. The police were not contacted by her, they got anonymous phone tips. A lot of murderers, and not just only first-time ones, have queasiness and regret after the fact. Damn her to hell, too.
nk (61a9de) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:05 amI consider myself a liberal but damn… thats messed up.
Abortion should be restricted to the first two months or so.
And it’s definitely ONLY a last resort.
Max (cb9afd) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:12 amAdoption is a much better option.
As someone who is very much pro-choice (but I personally would never have an abortion), I believe this situation is murder, plain and simple. I believe that abortions after the first trimester should absolutely not be allowed unless it is physically and medically necessary to save the mother, and even then sometimes the baby can be saved.
So many comments here bring politics into it, and I don’t see the point. It’s not about being conservative or liberall…it’s about life, and the choices each one of us makes. Yes, there are women out there who have had abortions and wouldn’t care if they had to have more. Yes, there are women who had an abortion and will never do it again, and there are those who thought they could go through with it, but chose not to. Who are we to pass judgement on every single one of them? We don’t know their story and situation…all we see is the person in the doctor’s office. People don’t care about what might be going through that woman’s head, all they’re worried about is how it’s going to affect THEM.
Well, I’ve got news for you…if you’re not the one making the choice, it ISN’T going to affect you, and no amount of religion or politics is going to change it.
bleuberi21 (490154) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:12 amO’rly?
Rob Crawford (6c262f) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:19 amThinking human beings.
Rob Crawford (6c262f) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:20 am@ Rob Crawford: Would you want to be taunted, tormented, and humiliated for the rest of your life for a mistake you made?
bleuberi21 (490154) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:24 amThe comment about not showing a pregnant woman the ultrasound of her baby as torture is an example of the strange thinking of the pro choice community. Their emphasis is always on the problems, real or perceived, of the woman. There is never any understanding of the child that is going to be killed. It is as irrelevant in their discussions and arguments as a tumor or a cyst that needed to be removed. There is no way to come to a “mutual understanding or compromise” with people who think this way. Abortion is just plain wrong and should be avoided as a solution to a woman’s problem unless her life is at stake.
bio mom (a1e126) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:35 amWhy still murder the poor thing after giving birth to it? I mean if the aim was to get rid of the child in her, why still kill it after being separated from it? This is cold-hearted murder. The aim of an abortion is to terminate a pregnancy. Now that she was no longer pregnant, why still kill the child? I don’t understand this wickedness.
Emperor7 who wants DRJ back! (0c8c2c) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:37 amWell, I’ve got news for you…if you’re not the one making the choice, it ISN’T going to affect you, and no amount of religion or politics is going to change it.
I have news for you, It effects society and all who live in society.
ML (14488c) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:39 amI am confused. If this woman went to the clinic to have her baby killed, what’s the problem?? And why is she suing? Isn’t this the same situation as occurred in Illinois that resulted in legislation being passed to protect the LIVING infant;legislation that Barack Obama voted against. Oh, I forgot, he won.
colin mcdonald (907b77) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:43 amWould you want to be taunted, tormented, and humiliated for the rest of your life for a mistake you made?
How is deciphering between right and wrong tantamount to taunting, tormenting and humiliating someone?
ML (14488c) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:51 amThe only reason for the “pro-choice” position is to allow women to act as irresponsibly as men sexually. To give it its true name the pro-abortion ( there being no real controversy on any other choice ) position is anger at God/nature/evolution/whatever that men don’t get pregnant so women should be able to kill to even things up.
bleuberi,
Ken Hahn (6ff151) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:57 amI would not like to be taunted, tormented and humiliated for any reason. If, however, I participated in this I would deserve it.
Patterico.
Both sides of the political aisle find this story disturbing. Conservatives, because someone apparently felt entitled to take a live human being and throw her in the trash to die. Liberals, because wingnuts might use the story to undermine Roe v. Wade.
Which aspect concerns you more?</i
I think this is a very unfair statement by Patterico. Politicizing this matter takes away the human element in it. Liberals are humans too. They have feelings for human life. Both conservatives and liberals have respect for human life. (I hope.) So this is not a matter of political persuasion but a moral one. I know die-hard Republicans who engage in secret abortions. Not once. Not twice. I also know of liberals who are pro-life. What this woman and those evil doctors did is nothing but pure evil. One that all right-thinking human beings will condemn. I would expect Patterrico to change the wordings of that last phrase. At least in the spirit of bipartisanship.
Emperor7 who wants DRJ back! (0c8c2c) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:04 amOops! Mistakenly posted my comment with italic.
Patterico.
Both sides of the political aisle find this story disturbing. Conservatives, because someone apparently felt entitled to take a live human being and throw her in the trash to die. Liberals, because wingnuts might use the story to undermine Roe v. Wade.
Which aspect concerns you more?</i</i
I think this is a very unfair statement by Patterico. Politicizing this matter takes away the human element in it. Liberals are humans too. They have feelings for human life. Both conservatives and liberals have respect for human life. (I hope.) So this is not a matter of political persuasion but a moral one. I know die-hard Republicans who engage in secret abortions. Not once. Not twice. I also know of liberals who are pro-life. What this woman and those evil doctors did is nothing but pure evil. One that all right-thinking human beings will condemn. I would expect Patterrico to change the wordings of that last phrase. At least in the spirit of bipartisanship.
Emperor7 who wants DRJ back! (0c8c2c) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:09 amIt’s more removed than that. In the case of a tumor or cyst, an explanation of what it is and why it needs to be removed would be included in the required informed consent.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:09 amEmperor7 (10:04), I think the point you are missing is that many of us on the pro-life side see what happened in Florida as a natural extension of a generation’s worth of abortions-rights arguments in the United States. Western Europe, it is often noted, is a pro-choice society, but from what I understand they are very strict in allowing abortion only in the first trimester. Here in the U.S., thanks to decades of lobbying by NOW and NARAL, we have fully legalized abortion in the first trimester, mostly legalized abortion in the second trimester, and in many cases loopholes to allow abortion in the third trimester. Is it any wonder then that these people in Florida seemed to thinking nothing of a “retroactive abortion” when the baby was born alive? I know that even most liberals find this abhorrent, but let’s not forget that our new President voted against a bill that would have mandated protection for this infant in Florida.
Pro-choice policy in the U.S. over the last 35 years has done nothing more than cheapen nascent life to the point where a large segment of the society probably would have acted just as the Florida clinic people did. This is the world that abortions rights have made, even if they never intended it.
JVW (bff0a4) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:18 amWell, I’ve got news for you…if you’re not the one making the choice, it ISN’T going to affect you, and no amount of religion or politics is going to change it.
If you permit unfettered first-trimester abortions, you’ll get unfettered full-term abortions. If you permit unfettered full-term abortions, you’ll get post-partum infanticide. If you permit unfettered full-term abortions, you’ll also get legal drop-off points for unwanted infants. If you permit legal drop-off points for unwanted infants, you’ll get legal drop-off points for unwanted non-infant children. If you permit legal drop-off points for unwanted non-infant children, you’ll get legal drop-off points for unwanted 17-year-olds (Missouri).
If you permit doctor-assisted suicide, you get doctor-instigated granny-cide… and old people afraid to drink the orange juice the hospitals provide (Netherlands).
Do not ask for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for you.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:23 amErr, I believe that was Nebraska and not Missouri.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:24 amApparently, bleuberi21 isn’t familiar with child support. Or with the notion that the father of a murdered child might be affected by it. Or that choice involves at least two options.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:28 amComment by JVW — 2/6/2009 @ 10:18 am
Emperor7 who wants DRJ back! (0c8c2c) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:36 amI understand your point. My point is that no one should try to take ownership of respect for human life. It’s a human impulse. What she did was in-human. By the way, was this a second trimester abortion?
I am confused. If this woman went to the clinic to have her baby killed, what’s the problem?? And why is she suing? Isn’t this the same situation as occurred in Illinois that resulted in legislation being passed to protect the LIVING infant;legislation that Barack Obama voted against. Oh, I forgot, he won.
Comment by colin mcdonald — 2/6/2009 @ 9:43 am
From what I have seen, she is not the one suing. The lawsuit is a public interest one by the Thomas More Society. I’ll give her that much credit — that she is not trying to make a buck out of this although she really could have on the grounds of medical malpractice.
nk (61a9de) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:40 amPablo: I’m quite familiar with child support, actually. Thank you for your assumption. Has it ever occured to you that some of these abortions might be forced by the father of the child?
bleuberi21 (490154) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:40 amYeah,
I like Pablo but his defense of irresponsible male rabbits is something I disagree with him bitterly on.
nk (61a9de) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:42 amWhat concerns me Patterico is this particular horse-shit statement in your post “Both sides of the political aisle find this story disturbing. Conservatives, because someone apparently felt entitled to take a live human being and throw her in the trash to die.Liberals, because wingnuts might use the story to undermine Roe v. Wade.”
This sentence pretty much sums up the whole “Liberal vs Conservative” con game that you still seem to buy into at some level.
EdWood (c2268a) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:49 amYou apparently are defining “Liberals” as “people who are more concerned about abortion rights (ie. their ideology) than about the fact that a viable child was thrown into a trash can to die”. That’s a pretty thin definition of a “Liberal”. Under your definition I personally know no “Liberals” at all and probably few other people posting here do either. In which case who cares about the 5 or 6000 “Liberals” running around out there?
On the other hand you may be equating “Liberals” who don’t care if viable children are thrown into trash cans with “everyone in the country who thinks that there should be some form of legal abortion”. In which case your statement above is complete horse-shit.
If you want to divide the country up into two kinds of people, why not stuff them into the pigeonholes of “those who want reasonable abortion rights” and “those who want unreasonable abortion rights (unlimited or NO rights”)????
When that mistake cost someone their life?
Well, I wouldn’t want it, but I’d expect it.
Rob Crawford (6c262f) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:51 amWould you want to be taunted, tormented, and humiliated for the rest of your life for a mistake you made?
Being a Christian since grade-school, and a pro-life Christian Conservative since middle school, I have been taunted, tormented and humiliated virtually my entire life for the stances I have held. I could spend hours telling those stories and still not run out of stories to tell. So, that attempt at a misdirect falls on deaf ears on this side of the monitor.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:56 amI don’t defend that at all, nk. I simply note the iniquity. Call it deconstructing choice, if you like.
OK bleuberi, so then you’re aware that the choice can and DOES affect those who aren’t making it. That’s funny, because you just said it doesn’t.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/6/2009 @ 11:00 amNo, it’s not. Most of human history has been marked by an obvious lack of respect for human life. Even the concept of not intentionally targeting non-combatants during war is a recent (and European) innovation.
You have to teach people to respect human life. You need a culture that reinforces that respect, and that at least stigmatizes the casual violation of that respect. The easier you make it to violate that respect, the more violations you’ll see.
Rob Crawford (6c262f) — 2/6/2009 @ 11:04 am##39;MD in Philly
corwin (07884c) — 2/6/2009 @ 11:23 amI agree with you.And it’s a moot point,but I think it’s likely the baby was over 23 weeksbased on it’s survival.However,most abortion clinics date via U/S ,so I could be wrong.
Comment by Rob Crawford — 2/6/2009 @ 11:04 am
Emperor7 who wants DRJ back! (1b037c) — 2/6/2009 @ 11:30 amAre you saying that liberals are evil, cold-hearted, haters of human life?
In Comment #3 Brian wrote,
Is there anything in Supreme Court opinions that would preclude a state from prohibiting abortions after the first trimester?
Ira (28a423) — 2/6/2009 @ 11:39 amEmp, the “people are basically good” thing doesn’t work. Rules, regulations, laws are created specifically to constrain human activities. If “people are basically good” then just a few laws would have had to be written and once those laws were written, no more laws would ever have to be written. As it stands, people are continually finding new ways to get around the law, so people have to continually write new laws to stop people from being their base selves.
“Slippery slope” would never be a concern if people were basically good. Once the devaluation of human life begins, that devaluation always expands and encompasses more segments of human life. Liberals may not be haters of human life, but they want to determine which innocent people should be allowed to be killed.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 11:43 am“You have to teach people to respect human life. You need a culture that reinforces that respect, and that at least stigmatizes the casual violation of that respect. The easier you make it to violate that respect, the more violations you’ll see.”
– Rob Crawford
The problem is in assuming a disrespect of human life in a group just because your stereotype of that group tells you that all members of that are proponents of abortion.
It’s the same as liberals assuming that all conservatives have a “Bomb ’em all and let God sort ’em out” philosophy in war just because some conservatives advocate that position.
Leviticus (35fbde) — 2/6/2009 @ 11:46 amIra, Foxfier responded to my Roe v Wade isn’t abortion on demand blog post by properly pointing out that Doe v Bolton effectively made abortion on demand throughout pregnancy the law of the land. You can see Foxfier’s response here.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 11:48 amWhere did I say that?
Rob Crawford (6c262f) — 2/6/2009 @ 11:51 amComment by Rob Crawford — 2/6/2009 @ 11:04 am
Are you saying that liberals are evil, cold-hearted, haters of human life?
Comment by Emperor7 who wants DRJ back! — 2/6/2009
The majority seem to behave that way.
Have Blue (974cdf) — 2/6/2009 @ 11:51 amWhere did I say that?
Rob Crawford (6c262f) — 2/6/2009 @ 11:52 amIs there anything in Supreme Court opinions that would preclude a state from prohibiting abortions after the first trimester?
Comment by Ira — 2/6/2009 @ 11:39 am
I would say several opinions throwing out carefully crafted partial birth abortion bans would tend to preclude that.
Have Blue (974cdf) — 2/6/2009 @ 11:54 amWhere did I say that?
Comment by Rob Crawford — 2/6/2009 @ 11:52 am
Emperor7 who wants DRJ back! (1b037c) — 2/6/2009 @ 12:04 pmThat was the point of my complaint with Patterico. He should not make it sound as if liberals only cringe at this evil because of some perceived political disadvantage it poses for them. Doing so does injustice to their basic humanity.
The majority seem to behave that way.
Comment by Have Blue — 2/6/2009 @ 11:51 am
Emperor7 who wants DRJ back! (1b037c) — 2/6/2009 @ 12:11 pmThis is exactly how they feel about consservatives who are pro-war.
President Obama did not have a problem with this. Here is his vote. Here is Bill No. 1662.
Pons asinorum (220265) — 2/6/2009 @ 12:11 pmSomething to keep in mind amidst all the outrage: Things like this are literally an everyday occurrence. The strange and shocking aspect is merely that it’s being reported, talked about, and perhaps might even lead to prosecution.
Christina (eb6178) — 2/6/2009 @ 12:15 pmYou realize there are people actively campaigning to prevent any laws that could apply to cases like this, don’t you?
No one is “pro-war”. Some just recognize that it’s occasionally a sad necessity.
Rob Crawford (6c262f) — 2/6/2009 @ 12:17 pmThe majority seem to behave that way.
Comment by Have Blue — 2/6/2009 @ 11:51 am
This is exactly how they feel about consservatives who are pro-war.
Comment by Emperor7 who wants DRJ back! — 2/6/2009 @ 12:11 pm
My parents and grandparents were saved from fates worse than death by the armed might of the United States of America and it’s fighting men. Should I deny that salvation to others due only to your squeemishness?
Have Blue (974cdf) — 2/6/2009 @ 12:30 pmPlease do not engage the troll calling itself Emperor7. It is a slimy little worm who insinuates itself in conversations only to poison them.
nk (61a9de) — 2/6/2009 @ 12:39 pmMillions have died.
Civil War II ?
torabora (af6833) — 2/6/2009 @ 12:41 pmI don’t defend that at all, nk. I simply note the iniquity. Call it deconstructing choice, if you like.
But it it is an argument you cannot win. To whatever degree Roe v. Wade* took into account the value of children, reaching into a man’s wallet and reaching into a woman’s belly are two entirely different things in the balance of things.
*And I hope that there is no doubt that I think that Roe v. Wade and progeny are travesties and that babies are not things.
nk (61a9de) — 2/6/2009 @ 12:47 pmIt really disturbed me,” said Joanne Sterner, president of the Broward County chapter of the National Organization for Women, after reviewing the administrative complaint against Renelique. “I know that there are clinics out there like this. And I hope that we can keep (women) from going to these types of clinics.”
…because if you don’t go to these types of clinics but go to the other types of clinics, the brutal reality of what is occurring will be conveniently hidden from you. Therefore you are not responsible for taking a life but rather removing “tissue”. It’s all about illusion and keeping a vulnerable pregnant women ignorant, that’s where the power is and what keeps the multi-billion dollar industry booming. Keep them ignorant, keep them dependent on the abortionist’s *knowledge* and *experience*.
At the end of the day though, when that woman is alone with her aching heart and wounded soul, she knows better.
You have to teach people to respect human life. You need a culture that reinforces that respect, and that at least stigmatizes the casual violation of that respect. The easier you make it to violate that respect, the more violations you’ll see.
And with this, one is able to tell what value human life is given by how their elderly and the most innocent are treated. When we have abortion available through the 9th month and people screaming that this is a fundamental right , then the lack of intrinsic value and worth for life in our culture is clearly exposed.
But to submit a pregnant woman to that is sheer hatred in my view. Yeeeesh
Comment by pitchforksntorches — 2/6/2009 @ 5:57 am
I suggest pitchforksntorches, that the dead baby most likely would have thought otherwise, given the chance. But that baby will never, ever have the chance to give voice to anything, will they?
Dana (be9504) — 2/6/2009 @ 12:53 pmThat is one of the best arguments against abortion. Especially men who have impregnated underage girls and force them to get abortions. Planned Parenthood enables their crime by getting rid of the evidence, and politicians dependent on pro-abortion votes discourage laws mandating parental consent (or even informing them after the fact).
carlitos (c4c10e) — 2/6/2009 @ 12:58 pm[…] of our erstwhile President: Patterico describes how a 23-week baby was born alive in Miami (after the mother’s cervix was …. Obama had voted against a bill in the Illinois Senate that would make actions like this illegal, […]
This Is Not Civilisation; This is a Descent into Tyrannical, Anti-Life Hell at Haemet (9b0c50) — 2/6/2009 @ 1:23 pmComment by nk — 2/6/2009 @ 12:39 pm
Emperor7 who wants DRJ back! (1b037c) — 2/6/2009 @ 2:39 pmDon’t you have a blog to look after? Who’s the troll here?
To Pons asinorum et al:
Again, I dare you to find any evidence that Obama, or anyone else supports something like this incident. For one thing, at 23 weeks, she should not have been having an elective abortion. For another, this was not an abortion; it was a clearly illegal murder (on top of a series of horrendous ethics breaches). If, in the course of doing something legal, you commit a crime, it’s still a crime. Supporting abortion doesn’t mean that you support this.
Furthermore, the law allows a lot of things it doesn’t necessarily encourage. The law allows you to drink alcohol, and to cut off life support for a loved one, but it certainly doesn’t encourage those things.
Finally, I support legal abortion, but obviously, this is not the desired effect. This should not have happened. A lot of people abuse/misuse their rights. That is, and always will be. Witness the case where a single woman who is unable to work, with 6 small children, had octuplets via IVF. That shouldn’t happen, but I don’t see anyone railing against IVF– they’re (rightly) railing against this crazy, irresponsible woman.
karinova (d7cc25) — 2/6/2009 @ 3:01 pmWomen are going to lose the “reproductive freedom” that legal abortion represents because the Pro-Choice side apparently cannot bring itself to abandon support of Partial Birth Abortion or opposition to Parental Notification. Regardless of how one views these positions on a moral level, politically they are pure poison, easily able to taint the whole abortion issue.
The political Lefties doing the modifier bop over incidents such as this simply illustrate the point. If they want to defend Partial Birth Abortion, they must defend this kind of thing too … and so they try, and look like swine for doing so.
C. S. P. Schofield (2f879a) — 2/6/2009 @ 3:25 pmAgain, I dare you to find any evidence that Obama, or anyone else supports something like this incident.
Check further up in this thread, karinova. Look right here and follow the two links he provides.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 3:31 pmKarinova – It is fairly apparent that you cannot be bothered with Baracky’s actual record on abortion.
JD (b2da6e) — 2/6/2009 @ 3:32 pmWell then, when you sign consents for any other medical procedure (And believe me I don’t agree with the actions as they occurred in this instance in ANY way, yes it was murder.) Let’s say for a vasectomy, I want you to show films of all the horrible permutations of the procedure. Scrotums sloughing off, massive infections etc. I mean REALLY educate people about every possible thing that could wrong in their medical care. Especially right after they expressed their decision to have the procedure.
pitchforksntorches (4dd8c4) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:43 pmNow before you howl about the differences between abortion and other procedures please try and find the gist of my viewpoint:
A woman who has made the most important decision in her life should be shown and informed long Before. However, they way it sounds to me, this ultrasound viewing and etc are to be done after the decision? If so, then my view that you stand for torturing those who have made this grievous decision stands.
As I stated in my earlier post, this all should have been provided in advance in Sex Ed etc. But once the decision is made, it’s made.
In closing, I agree that Abortion should only be available before the end of the first trimester. Especially in light of the availability of Plan B.
President Obama (before he was our President) did support and protect this practice. It was one of the few issues he voted definitively. He believes (as evidenced by his limited voting record), that a baby once born can still be killed provided the birth of that baby was the result of a failed abortion.
The Born Alive Infant Protection Act in Illinois was designed to protect any child born alive from being subsequently killed – this included any child that survived a botched abortion attempt.
He voted against this Act, specifically because of his pro-choice position. The evidence is indisputable.
I agree; however, a pro-choice position does not necessarily exclude this practice either.
At the very least, perhaps we can (mostly) all agree that when a baby is born, at that moment without qualification, a human being exists.
(Now, if we could just convince our new President…)
Pons asinorum (220265) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:48 pmI’ve got to admit, while I am not personally a supporter of Abortion, BS emotional pandering like this irks me to come down on the side of pro-life.yeeeeeeesh.
pitchforksntorches (4dd8c4) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:50 pmIT IS TORTURE TO INFORM A WOMYN WHAT HAPPENS IN AN ABORTION ! TORTURE ! LEAVE MY UTERUS ALONE PENIS PEOPLE !!!!
JD (b2da6e) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:55 pmI remember a story told on Focus on the Family about a mother and daughter attending a Pro-Life rally in D.C. The teen-aged daughter was wearing a T-shirt that read “I survived a saline abortion.” A pro-abortion counter-demonstrator saw the shirt and said “I had a saline abortion, too.” The daughter said “you don’t understand, my mother had the procedure but I survived it.”
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:57 pmWas Ms. Williams already in labor when she went to have the abortion? Or was she having a miscarriage or spontaneous abortion? Giving birth at 23 weeks is rare and unusual under any circumstance. Giving birth while being prepped for an abortion after 23 weeks gestation even more so. Did she seek the abortion knowing her child was going to be born prematurely, and thus very likely to die; seeking to cut short the process and get it over and done with. Did she ever think to get emergency medical care?
For NK and his fellow travelers: Your understanding and Christian charity are an inspiration for us all. Without your hard, diligent work God would have an entirely unearned reputation for forgiveness and mercy.
Alan Kellogg (e4d258) — 2/6/2009 @ 4:58 pmWe actually agree.
I was pointing out the reality that this was a child living and breathing on its own outside the mother’s womb, emphasing that all of the typical (and inadequate) arguments used to justify abortion couldn’t be allowed to cloud the issue.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 2/6/2009 @ 5:40 pmHowever, they way it sounds to me, this ultrasound viewing and etc are to be done after the decision? If so, then my view that you stand for torturing those who have made this grievous decision stands.
Comment by pitchforksntorches — 2/6/2009 @ 4:43 pm
Am not sure how I could have made myself any more crystal clear above. I specifically said, more than once, that the ultrasound I suggested was to happen before the abortion was done.
As I stated in my earlier post, this all should have been provided in advance in Sex Ed etc. But once the decision is made, it’s made.
And yet the consequences for the woman continue. Prolifers believe that we continue to try to reach the woman after the fact. Some believe showing a woman the naked truth of what was done is the first step toward healing. Some believe she already basically knows, instinctively, even if she doesn’t know all the details of the child’s development when killed, and so we offer post abortion help like the two very sensitive links I posted above.
In closing, I agree that Abortion should only be available before the end of the first trimester. Especially in light of the availability of Plan B.
But, you see, it is. And butchers like the one above and lies like Planned Parenthood’s withholding of essential information about the unborn child continue to kill children and damage women.
And, all due respect, we pro-lifers are not going to lie down, shut up and go away, and stop trying to help save these children, tell the truth to their mothers, stop the liars and killers, and try to reach out to women after they’ve made this terrible decision. Truth-on-its-head “torture” accusations notwithstanding.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 5:44 pmit is = it isn’t (abortion, thanks to Doe v. Bolton, is legally available through all nine months of pregnancy)
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 5:46 pmOh, it’s more than that, nk. How do you pay? Why, you work, of course, and men are often ordered to do so if they’re not currently doing so. That means your body is not your own to do with as you please. You are forced by the state to do something with your body against your wishes and in violation of your choice. And what happens if you don’t work and/or pay? Your ass, and the rest of your body, gets locked up. Where’s the sacred choice in that?
The argument is a matter of logical consistency and intellectual honesty. Pro-abortionists have a “Choice for me, but not for thee” mentality. I can win that argument all day long, except for when it descends into screeching about The Patriarchy. That’s when I start laughing.
The part that isn’t funny is the other side of the lack of choice men have, that which would allow them to love and raise a child whose mother wants it dead.
But then, as you’ll hear every time the discussion takes place, the man shouldn’t have been one of the two people fucking, so he has it coming.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:15 pm“For NK and his fellow travelers: Your understanding and Christian charity are an inspiration for us all. Without your hard, diligent work God would have an entirely unearned reputation for forgiveness and mercy.”
Alan – Based on the comments you seem confused over your Christian theology. Perhaps you haven’t been to church much lately. Then again, if I recall correctly, you were expressing outrage at the possibility of Roman Polanski’s prosecution over his relationship with Nastasia Kisnki here so maybe you lack a moral compass completely. The failure of outfits like Planned Parenthood to adhere to statutory rape reporting laws probably doesn’t bother you at all, does it, Alan?
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:20 pmBS emotional pandering like this irks me to come down on the side of pro-life.yeeeeeeesh.
Comment by pitchforksntorches — 2/6/2009 @ 4:50 pm
It certainly isn’t intended as “emotional pandering” but it’s interesting you see it as that. Life and death issues don’t require pandering to make a point. The blunt reality speaks for itself. This wasn’t a blob thrown in the trash, this was a baby girl who never had a chance to give voice to anything. That’s the fact.
Dana (137151) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:30 pmA woman who has made the most important decision in her life should be shown and informed long Before. However, they way it sounds to me, this ultrasound viewing and etc are to be done after the decision? If so, then my view that you stand for torturing those who have made this grievous decision stands.
What’s missing in this is the reality that when a woman finds herself wanting an abortion, most doctors will not show pictures, ultrasounds, or anything that may sway the decision. Planned Parenthood most definitely does not and they are the nation’s leading abortion provider. Again it is a multi-billion dollar industry and most businesses are not prone toward talking clients out of their services.
Another consideration is that when a young woman makes the decision to have the abortion, very frequently there has been a lack of real information. Girls usually seek out their friends and peers for help and advise. If those people are not particularly strong in a commitment to life or if they are the kind to just say what they think the person wants to hear, or if they too are uninformed, there can also be a serious lack of information there.
Perhaps if before a woman has the procedure and after the decision has been made, they were to look at an ultrasound, hear a beating heart, see little feet or hands and have a very real and full understanding of the impact of their decision – which obviously affects another being in the most devastatingly extreme way possible – perhaps they would change their mind. And if they did opt out of the abortion and gave birth instead, would that child born have been the result of torture?
Dana (137151) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:44 pmThe fact that Roe V Wade is still being debated today is proof that legislating from the bench is bad for the legal system, the political system, the country and it’s people.
How could a human being take a breathing child and throw him in the trash? So sad.
I predicted this would happen two generations ago when Roe v Wade passed. I knew the people pushing the decision were attempting to change the way we think about human life. I hope the people around me don’t start looking at me as if I am disposable.
tyree (158c98) — 2/6/2009 @ 6:46 pmAlthouse says it very well,
Shouldn’t anyone having an abortion need to visualize what is being done to the life/potential life she is destroying? To claim damages from seeing the death is to admit that you didn’t understand what you were doing when you sought the abortion. If women are to have a right to choose to have an abortion — if the decision to have an abortion properly rests with the woman, as the law says it does — then it is crucial that she understand what she is doing. This lawsuit is a claim that she did not comprehend what she was doing. If that is true, it undermines the whole basis for the right to choose to have an abortion. Choices imply competent understanding. Either women know what they are doing or they do not.
Dana (137151) — 2/6/2009 @ 7:05 pmAgain, I know of no other medical procedure where informed consent is resisted so strenuously.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/6/2009 @ 7:11 pmSo let me see if I get this — if the MD did do it at 23 weeks then it was OK but the fact she went into labor and they threw a child in the garbage at 23 weeks makes it murder?
Memo to Pro-Abortionists — I hope there is an after life to atone for your views in a bad place.
Memo to Conservatives — “laws” don’t mean shat when they are used to protect the immoral. Can’t say the “law” out of one side of your mouth when the child is killed in-utero and say murder when it is not. SOOOOO, stop laying patty cake with Pro-Death people and call a spade a spade.
Frankly, they all should be rounded up and shot dead. Why should their lives be any more important than the baby.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:19 pmLet it be known this adamant Pro-Life Christian does not hold the extremist views of OUA.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:21 pm“How could a human being take a breathing child and throw him in the trash? So sad.”
Sad, no. Sad is dead puppy dogs. This is called Evil.
I can not being to imagine the depravity of those involved, starting with the MDs, Nurse and other murders in the Clinic.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:21 pmExtremist? John, you really must be kidding. Whoever did that really does deserve the death penalty. But let us talk about this ….
“If the MD did do it at 23 weeks then it was OK but the fact she went into labor and they threw a child in the garbage at 23 weeks makes it murder?”
This place is filled with contortionists, errrr lawyers.
How do you make heads or tails of this?
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:24 pmFrankly, they all should be rounded up and shot dead.
That is extremist and no sane person would say such a thing.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:28 pmAnd let me point out — no women needs to become pregnant in this day and age in this country.
Take an OD of birth control pills the day after. You can get the treatment plan off the Net ….
…. or go to your favorite Public Health place — they love pushing the morning after pill stuff.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:28 pmJohn Hitchcock,
Should is a key word. Let me give you and example ….
Frankly, all the Nazis should have been rounded up and shot dead.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:30 pmWhat’s even more detestable is all the people in society (most of them of liberal persuasion) who would be more incensed by or indignant towards a news report involving an animal (say, a dog or pet whatever) that had been treated in some cruel manner — much less killed — by its owner.
And what makes this so grotesquely laughable is a lot of these same people probably fancy themselves as humane and kind-hearted.
Mark (411533) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:31 pmI dont understand why all the fuss, this is an abortion clinic (murder clinic). oh, guess its tough when you have to look it in the face and call it like it is. These women (girls) are more informed, after all its 2009. There is no respect for human life in this society. If there was this would never be legal.I’m so sick of liberals!! You dont have the right to take life, thats Gods job!
rumar (e0a8f0) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:31 pmMark, amen
John, playing verbal patty-cake when expressing indignation leaves the counter party suspect to how strongly you feel about a subject. When you see some thing so clearly wrong, saying it loud and proud and leave nothing to ambiguity.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:33 pmLove the sinner, hate the sin. Of all God’s gifts, love is the greatest.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:37 pmJohn, playing verbal patty-cake when expressing indignation leaves the counter party suspect to how strongly you feel about a subject. When you see some thing so clearly wrong, saying it loud and proud and leave nothing to ambiguity.
Comment by Obama über alles!!!!! — 2/6/2009 @ 8:33 pm
Then how about this:
No one has the right to take an unborn child’s life and it should be against the law.
Also, no one has the right to take the life of a criminal (absent capital punishment, which I’m also against in most cases but that’s another thread) so no, proabortionists should not be “rounded up and shot.”
And as long as we’re being straight, just FYI, the “morning after pill” is an aborifacient, not a contraceptive.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:39 pmFor NK and his fellow travelers: Your understanding and Christian charity are an inspiration for us all. Without your hard, diligent work God would have an entirely unearned reputation for forgiveness and mercy.
Fuck my understanding, and fuck Christian charity, and fuck a God who allows this for that matter. And fuck you, child-killer.
Man is the measure of all things and my measure of Man is one who does not kill His children.
nk (a12124) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:40 pmYou can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:41 pmLove the sinner, hate the sin…
Comment by John Hitchcock — 2/6/2009 @ 8:37 pm
That’s right. It’s perfectly possible to hate abortion with every fiber of one’s being and also to wish the best, and conversion, for abortionists and those who support and promote abortions, as well as the women who ask for them. Especially the latter IMO – having seen firsthand the devastation that some women go through for years when they have abortions, not to mention the incredible pressure many get from those around them to “just take care of it.”
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:44 pmno one you know,
The morning after till prevents pregnancy. If you want to call that fghusmsdedh to make yourself feel better. Go right ahead. It is basically contraception.
With respect to taking the life of criminals — I have no issue with it whatsoever. I don’t live in patty cake world. Some folks deserve to die and Gov.t should be front and center in making it happen.
John,
You can only have a lobster meal by first bringing the water to boil. I think the days of patty cake with the abortionist is over because they won’t stop till throwing out a 6 month old is considered OK but killing a dog lands you in the Fed Pen.
Some sins are not to be forgiven but buried with the the sinner. Needless to say, I am not a turn the other cheek christhun.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:51 pmThe morning after till prevents pregnancy. If you want to call that fghusmsdedh to make yourself feel better. Go right ahead. It is basically contraception.
Sorry if I sound pugnacious here but “contraception” means something prevents conception. The morning after pill does not prevent contraception; it stops a nascent life from developing. By definition, abortifacient. A tiny human life, yet a life nonetheless.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:54 pmFunny enuff, I have tremendous empathy for the women MOST OF THE TIME yet find myself remarkably devoid of any sympathy for the social workers and medical professionals who partake in marketing abortions as a cure-all for the problem.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:54 pmLike I said, pure cruelty.
Emperor7 who wants DRJ back! (1b037c) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:56 pmdoes not prevent contraception = does not prevent contraception.
Sigh – preview is my friend…
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:57 pmum, conception. LOL
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:57 pmNo One You Know,
A fertilized egg is not life in my book.
A fertilize egg in a women’s womb burying itself into the uterus more fits my definition.
But my definition of abortion is not empirical per se but more emotional.
The whole argument of “is it life at 100000 seconds” or “1 second” does not wash with me.
It is life once a women knows she is carrying it and it is abortion/murder when she knowingly kills the child.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 8:59 pmA fertilized egg is not life in my book.
It is, however, life in any high school biology book.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:00 pmIt’s perfectly possible to hate abortion with every fiber of one’s being and also to wish the best, and conversion, for abortionists and those who support and promote abortions, as well as the women who ask for them.
I wish that they rest in peace, forever.
nk (a12124) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:02 pmNo One You Know,
No.
Living organisms are capable of growth and reproduction, an egg can not do that.
An egg embedded into a uterus can.
Get your facts straight and take off the religion lens.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:04 pmLiving organisms are capable of growth and reproduction, an egg can not do that.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:09 pmMules are incapable of reproduction.
Mules are not living organisms.
And he trained in Haiti? He identified antique instruments as beiong the same as the ones he used. How did this guy pass any US boards?
KateC (fcedd5) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:09 pmLiving organisms are capable of growth and reproduction, an egg can not do that.
A fertilized egg most certainly can, “embedded into a uterus” or no – you’ve heard of IVF, I’m sure.
Get your facts straight and take off the religion lens.
Comment by Obama über alles!!!!! — 2/6/2009 @ 9:04 pm
Can’t help but note that that is rather amusing, since you’re the one above who a) says you consider an implanted egg “life” (your personal definition but, no, really it’s more “emotional” for you, not “empirical” but forget implantation, since for you abortion isn’t abortion until the woman knows it’s there and “knowingly” takes the life.
Abortion is abortion whether the woman “knows” it or not and life begins not with an emotional definition but with an empirical one. I’m afraid it is you, dear sir or madam, who needs to get your facts straight and take off the [emotional] lens.
I have not brought up religion once, by the way. I’m talking about facts. Why is your self-admitted emotional definition more acceptable than scientific and verifiable fact?
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:11 pmJohn, would the “and/or” between growth and reproduction make you feel better?
That is like saying a sterile person is not alive. Don’t be so stupid and argumentative.
Living organisms require a way to grow and reproduce. By their very nature an egg with a womb, placenta et al can not.
The morning after pill prevents imbedding of the egg into a wall of the uterus in the most early stages of pregnancy when very little empirical signs of life exists.
It is at about 16 days an egg become a fetus and it starts to GROW and in a few dozen year maybe REPRODUCE.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:13 pm“without a womb” … sorry,
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:14 pmLook, I don’t want to fence with OuA (it’s tiresome).
But…
You might want to, well, study biology a bit before you tell someone else to get their facts straight and begin insulting them.
Particularly because a fertilized egg (as NOYK stated) indeed grows and reproduces (that is, divides) prior to implantation in the uterus. Ova are fascinatingly complex, full of interesting biochemical gradients and signals. They are not static. Rather than pontificate, you might want to, well, study up on blastocyst formation which occurs prior to implantation:
http://www.advancedfertility.com/blastocystimages.htm
That’s high school biology, incidentally.
So…you might want want to get your own facts straight, and take off your own quite evidently partisan lens.
And even apologize to NOYK, not that that is a likely event.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:15 pmIt is at about 16 days an egg become a fetus
Sorry, that is not correct. The order is: Fertilized egg, blastocyst, embryo, then only later fetus.
But here’s the real question:
When you say “16 days”…that means 16 days from what?
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:16 pmNo One, let me clear up some things for you since you seem a bit slow on the draw ….
I consider it murder when a women knowingly terminates a fetus in the womb ….. USUALLY women figure that out a few weeks into the cycle and well beyond the point a fertilized egg implants itself into a womb.
I don’t consider the morning after pill abortion because a) she does not even know she has a fertilized egg floating in her uterus and b) I don’t consider a fertilized egg life ANYWAY since it is not capable of growing.
I was just refuting your argument that fertilized eggs are life. That is just false. Bad science and “over reaching” religiosity,
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:19 pmEric Blair my dear fellow.
A fertilized egg is not life since it is not capable of growing without the presence of a willing host. We are not reptiles whose eggs come with yokes.
So are you trying to tell me the millions of fertilized eggs sitting in freezers are “alive” and should be treated as humans?
Just a wacky set of thoughts.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:23 pmUmmm….and your qualifications in science are?…..
Because you are stating nonsense, you know. And it is independent of religion. Review your recent statement:
But they do grow. The zygote quickly begins dividing into a blastocyst, and implants about Day Five.
You can say it isn’t human, but saying it isn’t alive isn’t…um…accurate.
Move on, would you?
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:25 pmNo one — at about 16 days it is guess-timated some vital signs are present in the baby. Why ask? Go to Wikipedia.
But no gentlemen, a fertizlized eggie floating in a petrie dish or freezer is not life. At least not scientifically speaking.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:26 pmOkay, one last time, you irritating troll:
Go read a textbook.
A fertilized egg divides (= grows) many times before implantation. Did you even bother to read the link?
It appears you know as much about biology as you do some of the other topics you post here.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:26 pmA fertilized egg is not life since it is not capable of growing without the presence of a willing host.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:26 pmA tapeworm needs a host to grow.
A tapeworm is not life.
Also, no one has the right to take the life of a criminal (absent capital punishment, which I’m also against in most cases but that’s another thread) so no, proabortionists should not be “rounded up and shot.”
That’s another thing that is so ass-backwards about quite a few liberals. They not only are rather cavalier about abortions, but they also have a tendency to squeal and cry over convicted murderers being sentenced to death.
But hardly surprising, since the left has a tough time differentiating the truly good guys (or deeds, or situations) from the truly bad ones. And so it’s to be expected when liberals in particular are incapable of understanding the huge difference between the snuffing out of innocent life compared with snuffing out the existence of, say, a scumbag who’s murdered a clerk at the local 7-11 or a young girl walking home alone from school.
Mark (411533) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:27 pmYou are speaking, but hardly scientifically.
And I am basing this on what you wrote. Don’t change the goal posts.
By the way, juxtaposing “…fertizlized eggie floating in a petrie dish…” and “…scientifically speaking” in your post does not make you look more informed.
Just move on, would you? You are waaaaay outside your own knowledge base right now.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:29 pmEric,
You are shitting me right?
The fact it sub-divides means to you it is capable of GROWTH and/or REPRODUCTION? What science facts have you that the fertilized egg IN THAT SIMPLE STATE can continue to grow without a few other “small things?”
Are few others biological steps required by the eggie and potential mommie’s uterus for the eggie to develop into a reasonable facsimile of its end state?
Show me a machine to create/approximate a placenta and attach it to the egg and we have a discussion.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:31 pmI love the spelling errors when this character writes about biology, incidentally.
Although that last sounds like something Snoop Dogg raps.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:31 pm#
No One, let me clear up some things for you since you seem a bit slow on the draw ….
*laughs* Well, that’s a relief to know you think so; I thought I was shooting from the hip too fast here…
Comment by Obama über alles!!!!! — 2/6/2009 @ 9:19 pm
First, when you said “16 days,” you obviously meant 16 days from the beginning of the life of the human in question. , that is, conception. Conception is the beginning, despite your denials. Fertilized eggs are life, are certainly capable of growing, and your (again, self-admitted) emotional definitions would earn you a failing grade on a high school biology test.
But I want to be clear on your last comment, since “murder” is a legal term, not a scientific one, and strictly speaking, anyone committing legal abortion isn’t guilty of murder in the legal sense.
I prefer the term “killing” in any case: it’s less emotional, more factual and takes the fact that murder is a legal term out of the equation – a life certainly is ended in abortion whether the woman is mentally handicapped or in a coma or is otherwise unaware of the existence of her own fetus/baby’s life. Your definition is emotional and depends on the mental state of the woman. The definition of abortion in the scientific community is not emotional but factual.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:33 pmSo are you trying to tell me the millions of fertilized eggs sitting in freezers are “alive” and should be treated as humans?
Comment by Obama über alles!!!!! — 2/6/2009 @ 9:23 pm
Yes, that is exactly true. They are human (if not , you tell me what species they are if not Homo sapiens) and they are alive (the freezer has stopped their growth though). And yes, I do think humans “should be treated as humans.”
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:36 pmOK fertilized eggs are now human life to the Pro-Life crowd.
Eric, yes I am changing the goal posts Eric — I added “Human” to “Life” when discussing “Human Life.”
Fertilized Female Eggs are not Human Life because they have not way of growing into it end state without the creation of a mechanism to feed it. That mechanism is a womb with all of its fine features.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
What passes for intellect is bizarre nowadays. Must be all those gold stars they hand out to the mediocre students on graduation day.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:36 pmNOYK, that fellow is just a troll. This kind of discussion is serious business, no matter where a person places abortion on their spectrum. It merits thought and research and soul searching, not flippant insults.
But I did love this character lecturing me on biology (inaccurately and with those wonderful misspellings), since I hold a PhD in the subject. And our host knows that it is true, and not a troll-like brag.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:37 pmJust change the subject before you embarrass yourself further.
Or read a book. I recommend the latter, since it will force you to go away for a while, and you might learn something.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:39 pmSo I guess my sperm is human life too.
It swims and it moves and it has a purpose, a conscience shall we say — even if single purpose to burst down the walls of “eggs”.
This discussion is beyond your pay grade oh noble conservative foot soldiers.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:39 pmAnd we have the BEST PROJECTION LINE EVAH from a troll:
That one made me laugh.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:40 pmNOYK, that fellow is just a troll…But I did love this character lecturing me on biology (inaccurately and with those wonderful misspellings), since I hold a PhD in the subject.
Comment by Eric Blair — 2/6/2009 @ 9:37 pm
The lecture was pretty amusing, Eric. Didn’t know that was your PhD area. You should comment on these abortion threads more often –though, as you saw tomight, even the facts won’t get in the way of what someone just wants really badly to believe.
I found the repeated open admission that his/her definitions are emotional, and personal opinion (“my” definition) extremely interesting, though.
OUA, for the last time, a fertilized egg is life. It grows, reproduces, and has in itself all the DNA that you and I have today in our bodies. All it needs is nutrition and time to grow into, well, us. That you eschew this perfectly straightforward biological definition of life in favor of your own feelings is, well, more revealing of you than you perhaps know.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:45 pmUmmm. Gametes are quite different from zygotes, in terms of their chromosomal complement.
Your sperm (grotesque as this topic has become) I certainly hope are human. And they certainly are alive. But indeed, a gamete cannot divide, at least in non-gametophytic arrangements. Though there are some haploid animals, yes.
But this is a silly argument. I just get irritated by people who don’t know a bloody thing about a scientific topic misstating and misspelling with abandon…because of their freaking politics.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:46 pm#
So I guess my sperm is human life too.
It swims and it moves and it has a purpose, a conscience shall we say — even if single purpose to burst down the walls of “eggs”.
This discussion is beyond your pay grade oh noble conservative foot soldiers.
Comment by Obama über alles!!!!! — 2/6/2009 @ 9:39 pm
*sigh*
A sperm by itself cannot reproduce. An unfertilized ova by itself cannot reproduce. When fertilization happens (aka conception) all this changes.
Did you not take high school biology, OUA? Sorry to be so blunt.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:46 pmEric,
You want to call fertilized eggs human life then go right ahead. Make a fool of yourself. Shout it loud and proud.
But again, an object in its current state can not be called something it might become in a future state. Like calling a caterpillar a butterfly.
A fertilized egg in it actual state is not human life nor can it become human life without a viable method for it nourish itself and grow and missing piece is a womb.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
But what do I know. I must be missing Eric’s PhD.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:47 pmNOYK, that post was not in reference to you! You have always been civil and polite, even to people with whom you disagree. I tip my hat.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:48 pmWell, yes, OuA. You apparently are missing a degree or two in the biological sciences. I think your “human” line is particularly interesting. You consider your sperm not to be human? How about your liver? Your brain?
As I say, this is about your politics, not about biology. Why not take your passion for this topic, and work some extra hours to donate to whatever charity you favor.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:50 pmBut what do I know. I must be missing Eric’s PhD.
Comment by Obama über alles!!!!! — 2/6/2009 @ 9:47 pm
Indeed you are, as am I; perhaps we ought to listen to his expertise, then, no? 🙂
But first: if it’s not life, then why is it growing and dividing? Why would you say “at 16 days” unless you were tacitly admitting you know that 16 days prior, the life began?
And:
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:53 pmIf it’s not human, then what species is it?
OuA definitely got tired of my dialectic examination of his arguments. And will soon tire of EB’s overwhelming drubbing of his arguments.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:53 pmNOYK, folks who support abortion have to think this way, because if they didn’t…then abortion would be….
You know.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:54 pmNo One,
Don’t mistake sarcasm for lack of knowledge.
I know of not ONE OB/GYN or MD that I have ever practiced with, or know off, or heard off, or read about that would call a fertilized egg — human life.
There are plenty of medical ethics questions around fertilizing eggs that are not going to be used to create babies, et al.
If the point is preventing fertilization is a good idea. Yes, no need to fertilize if you have no plans of letting it become ….
But morning after pill is by no means abortion in any medical sense or spiritual if you ask me.
But I don’t have Eric’s PhD.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:55 pmComment by John Hitchcock — 2/6/2009 @ 9:53 pm
Indeed, John. Nice job, Eric. As L.N. Smithee illustrated so nicely with a link upthread, people who favor even some abortions hate it when prolifers try to nail down details about what the facts are and where one draws the line.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:56 pmI know of not ONE OB/GYN or MD that I have ever practiced with, or know off, or heard off, or read about that would call a fertilized egg — human life.
That’s interesting, because I know a lot of doctors (used to work with several for many years, almost 15 in fact). Most of the ones I know are pro-life, and ALL of them would call a fertilized egg “human life.”
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:58 pmNow that is as funny as #157.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 9:59 pmFertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Err, Eric, I abhor abortion, don’t support it — yet in #167 “folks” present these arguments to rationalize murder.
You think the Morning After Pill is Abortion?
Let us be specifics and get your head out of your …. because you struggle with hypotheticals when they are used to generalize concepts.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:01 pmAgain, folks, this is just politics.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:01 pmHey, Patterico, is this OuA one of The Usual Suspects? The repetitious post looks really familiar to me.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:02 pmno one you know,
Please source me one reputable article saying fertilized egg = human life
Sure would love to see that.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:02 pmOUA,
I notice you haven’t answered my questions in # 164. Would you mind doing so, please? I’d really like to know what your answers are, though it’s interesting you keep saying “if you ask me” and “according to me” and so forth.
(BTW, it’s also rather interesting to note that none of us disagreeing with you is using that language at all, or saying our positions are “emotional,” as you did, but saying “this is true, period.”)
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:03 pmFertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
Fertilized Egg + Working Womb = Human Life.
We did see it the first time, thanks.
Your repeating it doesn’t make it more true.
Fertilized egg = human life. Period.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:05 pmAgain: if it’s not alive, why is it growing?
If it’s not human, what species is it?
Eric,
Yes, call daddy Patter-EE-koh. I am sure that will end the discussion all have avoided.
If fertilized egg = human life then …..
… you feel morning after pill = abortion.
I just want to understand what I am talking to.
You can have your daddy moderate your discussions then.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:06 pmOh, here we go. “Source me one reputable article.” That’s cute. Any article that says a fertilized egg is human life will not be reputable in the eyes of any pro-abortionist, so there’s your out automatically. You can easily tinker with the reputability of any article to make it fit your world.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:07 pmHorror, horror and more horror.
How much horror?
Enough to convince any doubters that even anti-abortion campaigners know in their core that dispatching the fetus isn’t at all the same as trashing a living, breathing baby.
Yes, indeed.
A baby born alive with airs its lung is life, so taking it is horrific, as the horror-fest of high dudgeon here shows. A fetus? Not the same thing.
Is abortion really the same as murder? Not to the people commenting here, apparently.
So, indeed. Patterico is half right. Pro-choice people will use this as evidence for their cause. But not in the way he cooked up.
Hax Vobiscum (edacf7) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:08 pmThe problem here (and I am being foolish for continuing this) is OuA’s use of the term “human life.” To be fair to him (!), I suspect he means “human being.”
But even so, since he asked for some kind of reputable statement, how about a judge?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4492781
NPR is not a reputable news source, due to it’s religious fundamentalist bias, I know.
“Human being” is a very slippery concept (ask Peter Singer). But human life basically refers to something that is genetically Homo sapiens, with metabolism running. Thus, one’s kidneys are human life, surely? Gametes, not so much—because they only have half the normal chromosomal complement.
Again, I think that this TdJ is simply playing with the concept of “human being” and is mistakenly referring to it as “human life.”
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:09 pm“if it’s not alive, why is it growing?”
Because in its actual state it neither has the capacity nor ability to grow into its end state.
For it to be in a “state” which allows it to do so requires working womb which a women can eliminate with the morning after pill.
What do you understand the pill (the normal thing) to be anyway? contraceptive or abortion thingy?
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:11 pmPlease source me one reputable article saying fertilized egg = human life
Sure would love to see that.
Comment by Obama über alles!!!!! — 2/6/2009 @ 10:02 pm
How about a couple of books?
The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 6th ed.
Keith L. Moore, Ph.D. & T.V.N. Persaud, Md., (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1998), 2-18.
“[The Zygote] results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being. Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm … unites with a female gamete or oocyte … to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”
and
Williams Obstetrics, 16th edition (sorry, I don’t know about later editions) refers to the fetus as the “second patient” of the obstetrician.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:12 pmYou really are a jerk OuA. Please, by all means, continue to insult Patterico. That worked out so well for you before, and your post really does speak to your maturity and overall class.
As you almost certainly know very well, there are a number of sockpuppeting trolls around here. You may not be one of them.
On the other hand, instead of being a jackass, you could go create your own blog and say whatever you like. Of course, no one would post there, would they?
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:12 pmAgain, not one person can source anything calling a fertilized egg human life — yet here we are arguing it because folks want to make some other point but have no idea idea what it is.
Yes, children, I don’t like fertilizing eggs for no reason. Better we not fertilize them but let us not stigmatize the use of the PILL as being akin to abortion.
The pill simply prevents eggs from attaching itself to the uterus. Morning after pill does this via a massive overdose of “THE PILL.”
That folks are comparing this to abortion is plain crazy talk by yahoos.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:16 pmUm. Got reading skills?
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:18 pmMy daughter, before she turned 12, asked me how “the pill” worked. I explained it does three things. First, it prevents an egg from being expelled. Second, it prevents the expelled egg from being fertilized. Third, it prevents the fertilized egg from being implanted. Her response was “so it kills the baby?” I was pleased she understood.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:18 pmEric, how did I insult Patterico?
But yes, I am a jerk. No argument there.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:19 pmAgain, not one person can source anything calling a fertilized egg human life
Comment by Obama über alles!!!!! — 2/6/2009 @ 10:16 pm
I did, in post 182, and Eric did, in post 180.
Your reply?
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:19 pmJohn,
I am very happy your daughter feels that way.
I realise it a wonderful position and wish you the best with her.
God bless.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:21 pmEric, how did I insult Patterico?
But yes, I am a jerk. No argument there.
Comment by Obama über alles!!!!! — 2/6/2009 @ 10:19 pm
Since you ask, you repeatedly mock his nick by using what’s meant to be a one-time help to pronunciation (on the side of the page) into a permanent spelling. Not too respectful.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:21 pmAlso, you did know that the Pill (as you charmingly call it) primarily acts to prevent ovulation, right?
Which isn’t implantation, as you suggest above.
From Wikipedia:
Let’s go back to #157, again.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:23 pmA zygote is not human life by any definition. May make for nice 9th grade bio class talk.
Do zygote have a way of growing and developing in their current state or would they simply die-off without some other extraordinary measures and events happening?
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:25 pmJohn, I am referring to our suddenly seemingly polite friend OuA with the prior post.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:26 pmDo 2-year-olds have a way of growing and developing in their current state or would they simply die-off on their own?
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:27 pmEB, I’m not worried.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:28 pmEric,
Again, you got to be kidding me. The pill does all of the above. Why cherry pick a or b?
So the pill is abortion when it prevents the egg from imbedding itself but contraception when it prevents ovulation.
So if a women ovulates when taking the pill she is possibly aborting a child but if she does not ovulate then it is fine?
Looopy.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:29 pmI think I’ve come up with a way to quiet OuA down. If everyone uses dialectic examination on his statements, he’ll find some place else to haunt.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:30 pmAgain, #185.
Please say what you mean. I think you mean “a human being.” If you mean that a fertilized egg is not human life, again, what would you call your brain (I’m not going for the cheap shot here)? “A human being” is a philosophical argument, but “human life” is pure biological definition…and not in your favor.
Why do you try to talk biology when you clearly have no expertise in the area? And then you insult people with whom you disagree?
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:31 pm#196: okay, it is now 10:33 PM PDT.
Within two minutes, please state the direct physiological effects of the “birth control pill.” Be specific.
Or quit calling people who do know what they are talking about “loopy.”
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:33 pm2 year olds in their current state have all the biological material they need to grow up fine. They are very much human life.
An 8 week old “fetus” (baby) has all the biological material it needs to become an 99 year old. It is human life.
A zygote does not have everything it needs to become a 99 year old. It needs a uterine wall that functions to progress any further.
No uterine wall, no possibility of human life developing until science comes up with a brave new world thingy.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:33 pmA zygote is not human life by any definition. May make for nice 9th grade bio class talk.
Comment by Obama über alles!!!!! — 2/6/2009 @ 10:25 pm
So, if I understand you correctly, an embryology textbook (see post 182) isn’t to be believed, because “in your book” your “more emotional than empirical” (your words) definition trumps embryology.
*laughs* Well, that makes it official, then. No source will be good enough for OUA. He or she asks for links then basically says they don’t matter. Not interested in facts because the “emotional” definition is what matters.
Or to paraphrase a recent troll, “He work here is done.”
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:33 pmAnd I mean all the hormone interactions, too.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:34 pmJohn, NOYK, you are both correct. It is a waste of time. And the topic is far too important and complex to fence with this person.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:35 pm2 year olds in their current state have all the biological material they need to grow up fine. They are very much human life.
A fertilized egg has all the biological material it needs.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:38 pmA fertilized egg is human life.
I’m so sick of liberals!! You dont have the right to take life, thats Gods job!
Comment by rumar — 2/6/2009 @ 8:31 pm
You see Patterico? Yes rumar “liberals” want to take lives, especially by aborting living babies! Then they dip their matzohs in the aborted babies blood! wait wait crap, that’s not right, the matzoh thing refers to one of those OLD scapegoats that people could blame all their problems on. Now we have a better one; “liberals”!
EdWood (6c7662) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:40 pmNo uterine wall, no possibility of human life developing until science comes up with a brave new world thingy.
Comment by Obama über alles!!!!! — 2/6/2009 @ 10:33 pm
As John so aptly pointed out above about the 2 year old, dependent human life is still human life. Like a zygote, a newborn baby will also die if not given nutrition and other help to live, but that doesn’t mean that it isn’t human, or alive, or worthy of protection and care.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:41 pmEric,
Let us go to the beginning here …..
I said the morning after pill is not akin to abortion.
No one knows said it was.
I disputed that by saying even a fertilized egg (zygote) is not human life.
No one know said it is.
I said for it to be human life it needs to be a state where it can grow and/or reproduce. ** There can be other conditions to describe life but since we were discussing a simpler organism I choose these two parameters **
No one knows said it is growing.
I said, OK, but it is not really in a state where it can grow or reproduce in a human sense. It is a bunch of cells dividing and looking for a host which will then develop a few keys things that will allow it to become “human.”
No one knows disputes this assertion.
Which gets back to no one knows is saying the Pill can be Abortion. He is being consistent so no beef there.
I am saying the use of the pill does not abort human life because I don’t believe a zygote qualifes for that.
If I am missing something, let me know. If it is a fair representation then great. At least I am clear on what you believe.ds
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:43 pmSo, not feeding a child and letting it die is akin to taking the pill and expulsing zygotes?
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:45 pmI mean this with the utmost respect but I think a few of you are three sheets to the wind on this issue.
I thought I was hard core but there are dudes here who believe taking the pill is as bad as an abortion.
Enjoy your party.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:47 pmComment by Obama über alles!!!!! — 2/6/2009 @ 10:43 pm
Just to be clear, I did not say “the Pill” is per se an abortifacient (it is true that the hormones have abortifacient properties in some women) but it it primarily a contraceptive.
The morning after pill (not “the Pill”) is an abortifacient.
Also, I think it’s important to include the fact of your post #131, actually in its entirety is instructive of your views, but especially this sentence: “But my definition of abortion is not empirical per se but more emotional.“
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:49 pmBTW, it is the zygotes attachment to the uterine walls which enables the creation of human life. A beautiful child in its earliest stages at about 16 days.
But yo, a bridge is not a bridge unless it connects both sides of the river. It is sort of a bridge at best.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:50 pmOUA, am not a “dude” or a “he” by the way – am female.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:51 pmA beautiful child in its earliest stages at about 16 days.
Let’s complete that sentence, shall we: about 16 days…from the beginning of its life.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:52 pmNo one,
Yes, I believe (not science based) that if a women feels she is pregnant she should do everything in her power to protect her child.
This includes refraining from risk behavior which would jeopardize her child’s life.
But to me, morning after pill + zygote does not meet this standard.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:53 pmWhatever dude.
Take your ideas seriously, not yourself.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:54 pmGood night boys and girls.
Let me go create a zygote tonite with my wife.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:56 pmTake your ideas seriously, not yourself.
Comment by Obama über alles!!!!! — 2/6/2009 @ 10:54 pm
Good advice. And it’s been clear for some time on this site that you have a great sense of humor. I only wish you took your advice more completely and took your ideas a little more seriously in the sense of making sure they’re based on facts and not emotions.
Hope you have a good evening.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 2/6/2009 @ 10:58 pmActually, our friend is shifting goal posts back and forth. He makes overreaching statements, then when corrected, changes the original statements. Repeatedly. And ignores answers to questions. Repeatedly.
Whatever.
In the interests of humor (and because of the insults, it is warranted):
I believe that result would be, well, uniparental, if you get my drift.
NOYK, you continue to be civil and well spoken, even in the face of what I predict are literally sophomoric displays.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/6/2009 @ 11:10 pmOb Uber
“OK fertilized eggs are now human life to the Pro-Life crowd.”
Yes that’s right. That’s been true for a large portion of right to life advocates for a very long time now. You may know some “right to life” people OUA but you obviously don’t know very many of them if you haven’t figured out the above.
Pulling an OD on birth control or morning after pills = abortion = murder to a large group of people.
Good comment by Karinova 93
“Furthermore, the law allows a lot of things it doesn’t necessarily encourage. The law allows you to drink alcohol, and to cut off life support for a loved one, but it certainly doesn’t encourage those things.”
and by No one you know
EdWood (6c7662) — 2/6/2009 @ 11:33 pm“And, all due respect, we pro-lifers are not going to lie down, shut up and go away”
I agree. Right to life advocates should continue to advocate for women to choose to carry their pregnancies to term. At the same time quit trying to take away their choice to do so. As I am sure you know there are many effective ways to bring people around to your point of view on this issue that have nothing to do with overturning court decisions.
So in summary, fertilized eggs are human life because we believe it to be so.
Yet from a pure science perspective, they are not capable of growing or reproducing, which are preconditions for being labeled human life.
I don’t go quite as far as this article but I think it quite long but generally on point AND IN SUPPORT of PRO LIFE FOLKS like us.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.all.org/abac/abac2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.all.org/abac/jch008.htm&usg=__0JPGtl72tubLuEkARJpCDDybcDE=&h=252&w=750&sz=34&hl=en&start=14&um=1&tbnid=9Dz3dB58R0dbcM:&tbnh=47&tbnw=141&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dembryo%2Bhuman%2Blife%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26hs%3DJLU%26sa%3DG
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/7/2009 @ 7:07 amit is also logical. forgot to ad that.
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 2/7/2009 @ 7:14 amAnd if the egg is Muslim?
Hax Vobiscum (edacf7) — 2/7/2009 @ 7:29 amWhat does the religion of an egg have to do with anything, Hack Scum?
JD (fb1fc9) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:03 amJeez. For the last time:
You are WRONG. A fertilized egg divides quite a few times (that is growing and reproducing from that single cell) into a blastocyst, and that blastocyst then implants into the uterine wall.
You can discuss politics all you want, OuA, but your studied ignorance of basic biology (while, again, caling people who do know biology stupid) is tiring.
You. Are. Discussing. Politics.
Quit trying to couch it in biology.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:07 amAnd therein lies the stridency of the pro-lifers tone. They realize that this is a hearts and minds battle. And that women who , in desperation, turn to abortion need to have every trick in the book played upon them in order to bring themselves to the decision not to abort.
pitchforksntorches (4dd8c4) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:19 amWhile a noble and righteous viewpoint, the road to hell is paved with these intentions. Regardless of the argument or viewpoint a pro-choicer (regardless how moderate you are) the pro-lifers will dial back the point of conception until they feel that have a bullet-proof argument against abortion that will- miriable dictu- stop all abortions. Well they can’t, and they haven’t so the only way Pro-lifers can foist their morality upon everyone (much like the missionaries of days gone by)is to make it law (Or promise the wrath of Gods hell…). Well, they can’t seem to do that either- yet.
Good luck to everyone in this effort. While I agree this incident does point up the need to refine and dial-in the constraints on the provision of abortion, I also know that we can not go back to the bad old days of unregulated procedures in foreign countries or back alleys.
It’s just the awful maudlin drama that some apply to this discussion that gags me. The bombings, the murder (On both sides!) meh and feh. Abortion stays legal but the terms need to be better defined.
The bombings, the murder (On both sides!) meh and feh. Abortion stays legal but the terms need to be better defined.
And yet it is essentially murder you believe should remain legal with the terms better defined. The irony made me laugh.
Dana (137151) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:52 amMurder sez you and yours. This melting pot society is a melange of mores and standards.You make MY point exactly. I too am chuckling. yeeeesh
pitchforksntorches (4dd8c4) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:57 amBut at least you aren’t shrieking….yet.
pitchforksntorches (4dd8c4) — 2/7/2009 @ 8:57 amHad this baby girl been neatly aborted inside the womb hidden from sight it would not have been murder, but because it happened outside the womb, it was murder. And so goes the insanity.
Dana (137151) — 2/7/2009 @ 9:12 amkeep dialing it in Dana. Maybe you’ll find the holy grail of consensus. LOL
pitchforksntorches (4dd8c4) — 2/7/2009 @ 9:14 am“Yet from a pure science perspective, they are not capable of growing or reproducing, which are preconditions for being labeled human life.”
OuA – What are they then, reptile life? I was under the impression that you were pretty drunk or high last night because you just kept repeating the same shit over and over. Are you still drunk this morning or just stupid?
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/7/2009 @ 9:35 amOuA – Why don’t you just say my “non-scientific emotional definition of life says that fertilized eggs…..”
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/7/2009 @ 9:37 amOUA In you desperation to be “right” that your definition of when “life” really begins is the only logical one you are completely disregarding the real argument that, to many people, once two gametes merge that is when a human being receives a soul. There are plenty of Pro-life people who don’t believe in souls but many more who do. To them your argument that an egg needs to be implanted to “really” be alive is irrelevant. If you knew anything about the pro-life movement you would also know this information. Your arguments aren’t bad but you are arguing past people who you seem to essentially agree with.
pitchforks – Amen to your comment below,
EdWood (789aaf) — 2/7/2009 @ 9:43 am“While I agree this incident does point up the need to refine and dial-in the constraints on the provision of abortion, I also know that we can not go back to the bad old days of unregulated procedures in foreign countries or back alleys.”
I didn’t read all the comments with the predictable ones by pro-life and pro-abortion (sorry, pro-choice) sides. I would be interested in what the baby weighed. 23 weeks is very early but in 1967, I operated on a one pound-ten ounce baby girl who had doudenal atresia. The preemie nursery folks had watched her for a day before even calling the surgeons to see if she would survive. There were no respirators small enough in those days so she was on her own. I did the surgery under local anesthesia, a simple procedure. She was fed through a tiny gastrostomy tube. By the time she was 4 pounds, she could kick herself down to the end of the preemie bassinet. I have often wondered what happened to her. She is over 40 years old now.
Today, she wouldn’t stand a chance as her mother was unmarried and gave her up for adoption. She would have been aborted or put in a biohazard bag and thrown out.
We didn’t report the case for some reason and a year later some guys in Florida got world-wide publicity for operating on a two pound baby. Oh well.
Mike K (2cf494) — 2/7/2009 @ 9:50 amStrong work there Mike K. I am an OR nurse over 30 years and recognize strong work when I hear it. Shame you guys didn’t publish though.
pitchforksntorches (4dd8c4) — 2/7/2009 @ 10:04 amI also know that we can not go back to the bad old days of unregulated procedures in foreign countries or back alleys.
I highly doubt that modern society — supposedly now so humane and loving — is going to return to the era you describe.
No, people nowadays are more likely to get red in the face over Trigger or Secretariat being sold to a rendering plant (eg, the voters of supposedly humane and enlightened Calif in the late 1990s banned owners of horses from selling them to food-processing businesses) or Fido or Fifi not being treated with the utmost respect and adoration.
So the extremists — the wackos — in parts of America that are more along the lines of true-blue, blue-state California now are notorious not for harassing, if not also trying to harm abortion clinics and their operators, but researchers at universities, as described below.
The mindset such kooks revel in, and one loaded down with tons of screwball moral equivalency, comes at a time when many people (certainly those who say things like “I think Obama and Clinton are wonderful!!”) perceive themselves as nurturing a more advanced, caring and concerned society.
Mark (411533) — 2/7/2009 @ 10:18 am
While Animal Right Activists and Pro -lifers may dress the same as it were, I am not ready to brush them with the same strokes
pitchforksntorches (4dd8c4) — 2/7/2009 @ 10:21 amA zygote is not human life by any definition. May make for nice 9th grade bio class talk.
Do zygote have a way of growing and developing in their current state or would they simply die-off without some other extraordinary measures and events happening?
Comment by Obama über alles!!!!! — 2/6/2009 @ 10:25 pm
Using your point, doesn’t the life have to begin before the implanting into the uterus, because the zygote must do that inorder to complete it’s stage of life, leading to what you say must happen???
If you skip the first part, the second cannot occur. That is prevention of contraception. If the first part occurs, life has to have begun by your own definitions here.
reff (ee9f7a) — 2/7/2009 @ 12:57 pmThe infanticide described in your article shows clearly that American society is rapidly approaching
Claus Breckner (c23687) — 2/8/2009 @ 4:09 amthe brutal disregard for human life displayed in the death camps of Nazi Germany.
From legalizing the murder of unborn and even born babies to the “culling” of the old and sick and then mass genocide in death camps it will only be a small step.
And believe me, it will come.
Most of you hedonistic, pleasure instead of
God worshiping Americans have convinced yourselves that it is quite normal and your right to kill your own offspring and throw them into a trashcan.
Claus Breckner (c23687) — 2/8/2009 @ 4:43 amExcusing yourselves by claiming that it is not human life. Aren’t you glad your parents didn’t think like you and you were born to see the miracle of life? You liars! God sees your wicked hearts and one day soon you will reap what you have sown unless you repent and turn from your evil ways.
Claus,
pitchforksntorches (4dd8c4) — 2/8/2009 @ 6:30 amYou’re waaay off base here pal. The fact that the clinic and all those who are involved with it are being investigated proves that our society doesn’t condone this at all.
Second, the rigorous debate that abortion is in this country also shows that we are indeed well aware of the moral ramifications in this procedure.
finally, do not mistake the Roe v Wade decision so much an acceptance of abortion but rather, a lack of acceptance of the alternative.
In closing I look forward to the time when abortion opponents can file away the fire and brimstone damning rhetoric, cleave to a rational policy/guideline and ram it through the legislative system. And BTW comparing this country and it’s policies to Nazi Germany is a routine done to death, by the Bush haters of 2000-2009, let’s try for a new Act OK? yeeeesh.
It’s interesting to see you focus on labeling fire and brimstone, routine, acts, madulin drama, etc , rather than addressing the specifics of the act of the death taking place inside the womb. Your avoidance makes for interesting reading too as you claim decades on the job as an OR nurse, which makes me wonder if you’ve participated in abortions and need to keep this neatly away from the personal, therefore the condemnation of those who exhibit any passion on the pro-life side of the coin. I’ve noticed as well that you have kept neatly out of any discussion with empirical evidence laid out and the question of what actually is in the womb. It’s easier to mock I suppose.
Dial it back in? Yep.
Dana (137151) — 2/8/2009 @ 9:37 amI have been an OR nurse for over thirty years yes. And no thank you, I do not need to avoid my feelings on abortion. I know what they are and I practice them (no abortion for ME and MY family thank you)as I see fit. Nor do I foist my values on other people. My sister as a young 16 year old was counseled by ME as to her Choices, all those years ago. She was given facts. Not ’empirical facts’ and not fire and brimstone god will hate you crap. She was concerned that an abortion would be killing. I agreed that it just may well be. I also agreed that the other options has its own costs of conscience as well. That un-aborted young lady is now 28 years old thank you.
pitchforksntorches (4dd8c4) — 2/8/2009 @ 11:39 amI have also taken care of and spent many late night hours working on young victims of unregulated/butcher job abortions.
I have long known when a fetus/gamete/zygote becomes life, the problem is that legally it seems to change.
I also know that anti abortion people have a tendency not to be there the day the baby is given up for adoption or the day the “Father” abandons the late term “Mother” and desperation really sinks in.
So Dear Dana, simply because I abhor and detest the manipulative tactics that the current Pro-lifers choose doesn’t necessarily mean I myself am not pro-life, Rather, I try to be a good Nurse. Presenting the facts and let the patient view them through their own mores and values.
PFNT:
That was a good post, for several reasons. Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this complex and difficult topic.
I have always detested how politics invades this topic. Suddenly a blastocyst is no longer “human life”…because if it was human life, aborting it would be (insert that unpleasant word here).
The other side is important, as you state. I know that there are many grass roots religious groups who offer pregnant mothers assistance and placement.
When I say that, people who see abortion as a privacy right will immediately assail me. And probably call me names besides.
We have become very polarized, on all sides.
I just wish that everyone would see—on both sides—that abortion is a horrible thing. Obviously for the fetus, and obviously (no matter what males like myself might say or think), the woman. And yes, the man involved as well.
It shouldn’t be about “D” versus “R,” but it has become precisely that. Think of Nancy Pelosi’s bizarre (and inaccurate) restatement of the policies of the Catholic Church, in an effort to defend her own political position.
There is no good solution to this, and it remains a tragedy all around.
Eric Blair (1aa50b) — 2/8/2009 @ 11:57 amI also know that anti abortion people have a tendency not to be there the day the baby is given up for adoption or the day the “Father” abandons the late term “Mother” and desperation really sinks in.
I hope you’re not suggesting that a big pro-choicer — if not, given his fervent stance on late-term abortions, even a pro-abortionist — like the guy now in the White House therefore is more generous and compassionate that some of the so-called “fire and brimstone” folks you’re sniffing at.
Mark (411533) — 2/8/2009 @ 12:01 pmMark,
pitchforksntorches (4dd8c4) — 2/8/2009 @ 1:44 pmAll I am saying is that if you are going to be loud and proud against abortion, you’ll need to be as loud and proud in funding and giving of your time to help raise or place the children that are born from your viewpoint/values. Now, I am not in all places at all times, so from my one person limited perspective I don’t see the same numbers of pro life types in the hospitals and maternity units as I see them screaming at me on the way to work.
As for liberals we have a saying in the old neighborhood:
“All yak and no shack” Translation: If you need a place to stay they’ll talk about your dire need but still can’t help put a roof over your head.
Comment by pitchforksntorches — 2/8/2009 @ 11:39 am
Thank you for sharing where you are coming from, PFNT. It answers alot. And as much as you are passionate in your determination to be a good nurse who informs her patients as well as attempting to not let your personal views affect their decisionmaking, it is equally so that there are those who due to their own involvement with the issue are just as passionate (what you ascribe as manipulative tactics)and just as determined or even moreso, to not see this occur inside or outside their families because saving a life is quite simply, worth it.
And of course the legal definitions are in a continual state of flux. We can kill 35 weeks inside the womb, it’s a criminal act outside… again the madness continues.
Dana (137151) — 2/8/2009 @ 7:01 pm[…] Patterico puts it well. […]
Abortion Clinic Covers up Murder « Something should go here, maybe later. (ea1fd5) — 2/9/2009 @ 1:47 amDana 1:47
Just for the record I am male.
pitchforksntorches (12026e) — 2/9/2009 @ 7:16 amAnd your right the madness continues. But I hope these whack-jobs that run the Clinic are
prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Regardless where one stands on abortion, this is an outrage.And yes, murder.
Regardless where one stands on abortion, this is an outrage.And yes, murder.
And I would most passionately argue that this is so representative of what takes place inside the womb conveniently hidden from sight, that both acts are an outrage and yes, murder.
Dana (be9504) — 2/9/2009 @ 7:43 am
Beth (d4c661) — 2/9/2009 @ 12:11 pmThis story is revolting and a disgrace to humanity. How would she like to have been thrown away? Abortion is sickening.
#246 Comment by pitchforksntorches — 2/8/2009 @ 6:30 am
Although you are against anti-abortion laws, you may wish to reexamine the laws of Germany.
The comments by #244 Claus Breckner (although hostile in tone) are not as outlandish as you might think.
The chain of events that Clause theorized may or may not occur here in our Country, but he is correct that such thinking did devalue human life and contributed to Nazi philosophy.
The “rigorous debate of abortion” in this country is a joke compared to what occurred in post WWII Germany.
Post WWII Germany did adapt strict anti-abortion rules and not just because of religious objections. Their intimate history with human eugenics fostered a strong desire for strict moral and ethical codes of human decency and respect to human life.
————————————————-
#251 Comment by pitchforksntorches — 2/8/2009 @ 1:44 pm
All I am saying is that if you are going to be loud and proud against abortion, you’ll need to be as loud and proud in funding and giving of your time to help raise or place the children that are born from your viewpoint/values.
Time or money is not required in order to condemn an immoral act. Such requirements are illogical (people with little time or money cannot condemn immoral practices).
Being against murder does not require employment as a police officer nor donations to a victim’s fund.
Being against (or “for”) abortion does not require that a person adopt a child or give any money. Yet such a person could insist on the protection of a child (as in this case) and remain logically and morally consistent.
Possibly you are seeking a practical solution that would enormously reduce abortion. If such is the case, then I suspect there is large agreement in this area and certainly time and money would be a requirement for those who wish to implement such a solution.
Pons asinorum (76e8a2) — 2/9/2009 @ 2:24 pm[…] I didn’t write about this terrible story — Patterico did, on his site — I’m happy to bring you some good […]
Common Sense Political Thought » Blog Archive » Abortionist’s License Revoked in Case Involving Killing of Baby Born Alive after Abortion (73d96f) — 2/9/2009 @ 5:56 pm