Amazing! A baby survives being born at 22 weeks. - Page 7 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-22-2007, 06:18 PM   #91
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by partygirlvox


There has to be some cut off point - you know that, why are you being pedantic about it?
So 22 weeks is it? The fetus becomes a human being at 22 weeks.
__________________

__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 06:48 PM   #92
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 12:59 AM
^ Assuming for the sake of it that you actually accepted that in principle (or don't; it doesn't really matter), why then would you be willing to permit abortions at a later stage (or indeed any stage) were the mother's life in danger? There's no 'malice aforethought' or intentionality involved on the baby's part as there is with murder, and no 'recklessness' either--so what would your criterion be for justifying killing the baby to save the mother? On what grounds did you make that determination that her life should take priority?
__________________

__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 06:51 PM   #93
pgv
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,979
Local Time: 12:59 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON


So 22 weeks is it? The fetus becomes a human being at 22 weeks.
No.
The foetus has just developed so far that I personally think abortion shouldn't take place (excepting medical reasons) any later.
__________________
pgv is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 07:12 PM   #94
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland
^ Assuming for the sake of it that you actually accepted that in principle (or don't; it doesn't really matter), why then would you be willing to permit abortions at a later stage (or indeed any stage) were the mother's life in danger? There's no 'malice aforethought' or intentionality involved on the baby's part as there is with murder, and no 'recklessness' either--so what would your criterion be for justifying killing the baby to save the mother? On what grounds did you make that determination that her life should take priority?
I would only be willing to permit abortion if the baby is certainly dying and is also putting the mother's life at risk. If the baby is healthy and the mother is dying - all reasonable attemtps should be made to keep the baby alive outside the womb, as the baby will certainly die if he/she remains inside the mother.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 07:14 PM   #95
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by partygirlvox


No.
The foetus has just developed so far that I personally think abortion shouldn't take place (excepting medical reasons) any later.
So, do I understand you correctly - at 22 weeks the baby is NOT a human being? The 22 week old baby girl in the article isn't human? If she isn't human - what is she?
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 07:25 PM   #96
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 12:59 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON
If the baby is healthy and the mother is dying - all reasonable attemtps should be made to keep the baby alive outside the womb, as the baby will certainly die if he/she remains inside the mother.
Not necessarily. Some forms of pre-eclampsia and placenta previa are very unlikely to endanger the baby until the moment when a fatal (to the mother) cerebral or uterine hemorrhage ensues. Why not just keep the mother under close medical observation until that commences to maximize the baby's chances, then excise the baby from its 'life support system' at that point and hope technology will suffice to keep it alive? What gives anyone the right to decide that the risk to the mother's life in doing so outweighs the right of the baby to be given the maximum chance possible to survive?
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 07:46 PM   #97
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland

Not necessarily. Some forms of pre-eclampsia and placenta previa are very unlikely to endanger the baby until the moment when a fatal (to the mother) cerebral or uterine hemorrhage ensues. Why not just keep the mother under close medical observation until that commences to maximize the baby's chances, then excise the baby from its 'life support system' at that point and hope technology will suffice to keep it alive? What gives anyone the right to decide that the risk to the mother's life in doing so outweighs the right of the baby to be given the maximum chance possible to survive?
Good questions. I would rely on medical experts to tell me the possible risks to both my wife and child.

One thing is for certain - it doesn't seem anyone here supports an abortion beyond 22 weeks unless it is for some extreme medical emergency. I assume it is because we all agree it would be murder of a human being. So, why not make it illegal for those "rare" occurances where a mother does decide she simply doesn't want the child (or she begins to "show" she's pregnant and decides for whatever reason she can't go on with the pregnancy) after 22 weeks?
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 08:00 PM   #98
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland

Not necessarily. Some forms of pre-eclampsia and placenta previa are very unlikely to endanger the baby until the moment when a fatal (to the mother) cerebral or uterine hemorrhage ensues. Why not just keep the mother under close medical observation until that commences to maximize the baby's chances, then excise the baby from its 'life support system' at that point and hope technology will suffice to keep it alive? What gives anyone the right to decide that the risk to the mother's life in doing so outweighs the right of the baby to be given the maximum chance possible to survive?
I've re-read this. Isn't this supporting what I'm talking about? Doesn't this fall under the "do everything possible" category?
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 08:02 PM   #99
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 10:59 AM
I dont support abortion after 12 or so weeks, unless it is a severe medical emergency.

I dont support abortion in general. Very few people do. It's horrible. I do support a woman's right to choose it early on, however. I support even more people not getting themselves pregnant in the first place if they cannot simply be careful enough (bar the 0.7% or so of cases where contraception fails).

AEON is your sister a murderer in your opinion?
__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 08:52 PM   #100
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Angela Harlem


AEON is your sister a murderer in your opinion?
Out of ignorance - yes. She'll tell you the same thing. She believed the same hype that parades on campus - that it was her body, her choice.

What a horrible lie.

Right to privacy...my arse...
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 09:03 PM   #101
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,332
Local Time: 03:59 PM
She doesn't take full responsibility for her decision then?
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 09:17 PM   #102
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by martha
She doesn't take full responsibility for her decision then?
Of course she does. She doesn't blame anyone. But she does feel deceived. She has more knowledge now. She wouldn't make the same choice if she knew then what she knows now.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 09:24 PM   #103
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 10:59 AM
So if women are not learned on the full facts, as according to your belief set, then it is different to willingly going ahead with an abortion? It's a lesser sin if you are not aware? That is as interesting as your examples of a baby at 21 weeks, 6 days, 23 hours and 59 minutes being the same as one at precisely 22 weeks when you were trying to show the error in that view that younger is not the same as further developed.
__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 09:30 PM   #104
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,332
Local Time: 03:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON
Of course she does. She doesn't blame anyone. But she does feel deceived. She has more knowledge now. She wouldn't make the same choice if she knew then what she knows now.
Thank you for answering my question. I'm actually pleased with the answer and I'm going to butt back out of this discussion.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 09:46 PM   #105
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Angela Harlem
So if women are not learned on the full facts, as according to your belief set, then it is different to willingly going ahead with an abortion? It's a lesser sin if you are not aware? That is as interesting as your examples of a baby at 21 weeks, 6 days, 23 hours and 59 minutes being the same as one at precisely 22 weeks when you were trying to show the error in that view that younger is not the same as further developed.
I'm not interested in hunting down everyone who once had an abortion. I'm interested in stopping the lie from "women's rights' groups" and stopping the barbaric practice of infanticide.
__________________

__________________
AEON is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com