Controversial Abortion Thread

[Incariol]

Check again. Nebraska, Alabama, and Idaho have laws stating that it's about 20 weeks. (And about 16 other states are considering similar laws.)

Laws aren't science. They could pass resolutions declaring that light is composed by little pixies riding unicorns if they wanted. As it is, they are wrong. Thalamocortical synapsing is only just occurring ~25-26 weeks gestation.

The development of the subplate and thalamocortical connections in the human foetal brain - Kostović - 2010 - Acta Paediatrica - Wiley Online Library

During the 22 and 23 PCW (preterm infants with extremely low birth-weight), the majority of thalamocortical axons reside in the superficial subplate of sensory and associative (Fig. 2C) cortical regions (1,11,13–15), whereas few axons have already entered the cortical plate. This dual pattern of thalamocortical connectivity with transient (to the subplate) and permanent (to the cortical plate) component was described as a salient feature of the preterm cortex (2,12). Thus, preterm infants at 22–23 PCW do possess an anatomical substrate for extrinsic cortical input from both sensory and associative thalamic nuclei. Of all the layers of the foetal cortex, the subplate is the most active in the generation of action potentials (30,38,52) and contains the synaptic machinery for the most well-known cortical neurotransmitter systems, including monoaminergic and cholinergic arousal and activating systems (3,53). Thus, the cortical system of very young preterm infants is on the verge of transition from an endogeneous spontaneous processing (30,42) to a sensory-expectant functioning (2,12). The presence of thalamocortical synapses in the subplate is a necessary, but not sufficient requirement for the conscious cortical processing, which was emphasized in attempts to explain cortical mechanisms of responding to a painful stimulation (3,5,6,18). The general agreement seems to be that due to the functional immaturity of thalamocortical connections, there is no cortical processing and no feeling of pain before 23 PCW, i.e. 25 weeks of gestation (7).

And don't forget that video of "The Silent Scream" by the abortionist who had a "come to Jesus" moment and became pro-life after making the video. It showed a sonogram of a baby being aborted and how it tried over and over and over again to get away from the tool that would eventually cause it's death.

What about it?

It always strikes me as somewhat hypocritical that often the very people who wildly protest the bludgeoning of baby harp seals are perfectly all right with dismemberment of babies our own species.

Ok.

 

[AMDG]

Laws aren't science.

I guess you missed the medical testimony from the Minnesota law site--here is an excerpt:

The evidence of fetal pain
With the advent of sonograms and live-action ultrasound images, neonatologists and nurses are able to see unborn babies at 20 weeks gestation react physically to outside stimuli such as sound, light and touch. The sense of touch is so acute that even a single human hair drawn across an unborn baby's palm causes the baby to make a fist.

Did you know that this 20-week-old unborn child can feel pain?
Surgeons entering the womb to perform corrective procedures on tiny unborn babies have seen those babies flinch, jerk and recoil from sharp objects and incisions.
“The neural pathways are present for pain to be experienced quite early by unborn babies,” explains Steven Calvin, M.D., perinatologist, chair of the Program in Human Rights Medicine, University of Minnesota, where he teaches obstetrics.
Medical facts of fetal pain
Anatomical studies have documented that the body’s pain network—the spino-thalamic pathway—is established by 20 weeks gestation.
• “At 20 weeks, the fetal brain has the full complement of brain cells present in adulthood, ready and waiting to receive pain signals from the body, and their electrical activity can be recorded by standard electroencephalography (EEG).”
— Dr. Paul Ranalli, neurologist, University of Toronto
• An unborn baby at 20 weeks gestation “is fully capable of experiencing pain. … Without question, [abortion] is a dreadfully painful experience for any infant subjected to such a surgical procedure.”
— Robert J. White, M.D., PhD., professor of neurosurgery, Case Western University
Unborn babies have heightened sensitivities
Unborn babies at 20 weeks development actually feel pain more intensely than adults. This is a “uniquely vulnerable time, since the pain system is fully established, yet the higher level pain-modifying system has barely begun to develop,” according to Dr. Ranalli.
“Having administered anesthesia for fetal surgery, I know that on occasion we need to administer anesthesia directly to the fetus, because even at these early gestational ages the fetus moves away from the pain of the stimulation,” stated David Birnbach, M.D., president of the Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology and self-described as “pro-choice,” in testimony before the U.S. Congress.
Given the medical evidence that unborn babies experience pain, compassionate people are viewing abortion more and more as an inhumane and intolerable brutality against defenseless human beings.

When I commented about the "Silent Scream" you posted

What about it?

It's a video of a sonogram of an 11 week old fetus being aborted. It *shows* evidence of pain being felt by the fetus.

BTW, all those states (checked, it's more than 16 states--probably more like 25 states) would not have been able to pass laws concerning the awareness of the pain that the fetus feels during an abortion if there wasn't evidence of it.

And actually, it shouldn't come as a "big surprise". The brainwaves of a fetus can be recorded around 43 days.

 

[Incariol]

I guess you missed the medical testimony from the Minnesota law site--here is an excerpt:

Probably, because neuroscience articles from peer-reviewed sources are more reliable than sourceless "medical testimony" that strangely doesn't appear to be in a transcript format that you would expect.

Are you even reading what I post? The connections in the brain for pain perception do not exist at 20 weeks.

Heck, look at figure 2, with comparison of fetal brains using acetycholinesterase stain. You can see that the connections aren't present in the cortical plate until 28 PCW.

When I commented about the "Silent Scream" you posted

It's a video of a sonogram of an 11 week old fetus being aborted. It *shows* evidence of pain being felt by the fetus.

It doesn't show evidence of pain, just avoidant behavior.

BTW, all those states (checked, it's more than 16 states--probably more like 25 states) would not have been able to pass laws concerning the awareness of the pain that the fetus feels during an abortion if there wasn't evidence of it.

Umm, state legislatures can generally do as they please. In any event, I've already shown that the neural connections for pain perception aren't there.

And actually, it shouldn't come as a "big surprise". The brainwaves of a fetus can be recorded around 43 days.

According to?...

 

[AMDG]

We just had a natural disaster hit the mostly Democratic northeastern corridor....and Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor all of a sudden wants to shut down FEMA money "unless cuts can be made in other areas..."

He wouldn't do that to Texas.

A small correction:

Actually, it has nothing to do with the Republicans vs Democrats. FEMA says that it's running low on money--the disasters have just about run it dry. (Daughter had mentioned that to me so I looked it up. You can too.)

Now back to our regularly scheduled discussion--I think you are right about us being able to do the unspeakable to our small brothers and sisters (cruelly kill them) simply because we don't see them. Maybe if we were able to, they wouldn't be so endangered. Hey--maybe that's what prolife groups that show pictures of them are trying to do--allow us to see them.

 

[Rhamiel]

it does not matter if the unborn can feel pain or not
we are not human based on when we feel pain or else anyone on painkillers would be a non-person

 

[Mountain King]

it does not matter if the unborn can feel pain or not
we are not human based on when we feel pain or else anyone on painkillers would be a non-person

Well said!

 

[AMDG]

Are you even reading what I post?

Yes, I am reading what you post. However, fetal brain waves are able to be recorded at 43 *days* and medical doctors who have done surgeries to *save* the babies, not kill them, have found that fetuses *do indeed* react to sharp instruments and it's been reported that additional anesthesia was necessary for the life-saving surgeries.

You know, I was alive when the the Supreme Court made abortion legal (yeah, I know that the Supreme Court is not supposed to make law, but they did.) What did they say? They allowed abortion because they said that they (9 adult men) weren't sure if the fetus was alive or not. They didn't "err on the side of caution", as would be normal, they just allowed the killing whether or not... Well that was in 1973. Things have changed. We now know that the fetus is indeed alive--has a separate blood system, a beating heart, a working brain, brain waves at 43 days, and now we know that evidence has shown that a fetus feels pain at at least 20 weeks. (Dr. Nathonson's video looks like it's actually far earlier.) And we have actually had premature babies born that lived when they were only some six months (24 weeks)--back in the 70s it was only 8 months (32 weeks).

You know this isn't the first time that adults have decided on their own that something doesn't feel pain (although this is the most important) or have made medical mistakes. When I was a child, dentists thought that it was just a waste to use novocaine on children, because, you know "they don't feel pain like adults do". And I think I was about seven when medical people thought that the placenta would protect a fetus from bad effects of a medication given to pregnant women. The Thalidamide babies--babies born without arms or legs because doctors gave the pregnant mothers thalidamide to help them get a good night's rest--were the result. There are other examples too. But considering the "track record" I think I'd rather "err on the side of caution" and on the side of the doctors who have actually worked with the unborn and *know* that the unborn feel pain at 20 weeks.

Now as to laws being passed (without evidence and if it wasn't so), have you noticed how polorizing the subject of abortion is with so many being for it and with abortion enjoying the position of "the law of the land"? You *really* believe that someone would be able to "slip" a law through that actually reduces the number of abortions performed if there wasn't evidence? I don't.

 

[AMDG]

it does not matter if the unborn can feel pain or not

One wouldn't think so, but it's been reported that when the woman has to sign a paper allowing pain medication for their fetus, there have been reports of a reduction of abortions.

 

[Incariol]

Yes, I am reading what you post. However, fetal brain waves are able to be recorded at 43 *days* and medical doctors who have done surgeries to *save* the babies, not kill them, have found that fetuses *do indeed* react to sharp instruments and it's been reported that additional anesthesia was necessary for the life-saving surgeries.

You know, I was alive when the the Supreme Court made abortion legal (yeah, I know that the Supreme Court is not supposed to make law, but they did.) What did they say? They allowed abortion because they said that they (9 adult men) weren't sure if the fetus was alive or not. They didn't "err on the side of caution", as would be normal, they just allowed the killing whether or not... Well that was in 1973. Things have changed. We now know that the fetus is indeed alive--has a separate blood system, a beating heart, a working brain, brain waves at 43 days, and now we know that evidence has shown that a fetus feels pain at at least 20 weeks. (Dr. Nathonson's video looks like it's actually far earlier.) And we have actually had premature babies born that lived when they were only some six months (24 weeks)--back in the 70s it was only 8 months (32 weeks).

You know this isn't the first time that adults have decided on their own that something doesn't feel pain (although this is the most important) or have made medical mistakes. When I was a child, dentists thought that it was just a waste to use novocaine on children, because, you know "they don't feel pain like adults do". And I think I was about seven when medical people thought that the placenta would protect a fetus from bad effects of a medication given to pregnant women. The Thalidamide babies--babies born without arms or legs because doctors gave the pregnant mothers thalidamide to help them get a good night's rest--were the result. There are other examples too. But considering the "track record" I think I'd rather "err on the side of caution" and on the side of the doctors who have actually worked with the unborn and *know* that the unborn feel pain at 20 weeks.

Now as to laws being passed (without evidence and if it wasn't so), have you noticed how polorizing the subject of abortion is with so many being for it and with abortion enjoying the position of "the law of the land"? You *really* believe that someone would be able to "slip" a law through that actually reduces the number of abortions performed if there wasn't evidence? I don't.

You haven't provided a source for your EEG claim, reacting to sharp instruments isn't necessarily pain or anything but an autonomic reflex and you don't say when in gestation said surgeries occur. We can see, with our naked eyes, that the brain isn't physically capable of pain until ~25 weeks, so repeating that they can at 20, irregardless of what the legislatures and random doctors think is meaningless. They are wrong.

And I don't know why you are trying to convince me that abortion is wrong. I am aware of that, all I am doing is pointing out that your claims about neuroscience are wrong.

 

[Ave Maria]

To those who think getting an abortion was the best thing they ever did I have this passage of Scripture:

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and shrewd in their own sight! Woe to those who are heroes at drinking wine, and valiant men in mixing strong drink, who acquit the guilty for a bribe, and deprive the innocent of his right!
(Isaiah 5:20-23 RSV)

 

[AMDG]

And I don't know why you are trying to convince me that abortion is wrong. I am aware of that, all I am doing is pointing out that your claims about neuroscience are wrong.

Gee, I seem to be trying to convince folks that abortion is wrong, just normally. I don't even have to try! Wow! Imagine that! It must be that ingrained!

No, I assumed that you, on a Catholic site, were not for abortion. What I was trying to do was answer your post. And what I was tring to explain to you why several thousand people, including doctors and anesthesiologists who have actually worked with the fetuses, the pro-life organizations, and the legislatures of about 25 states now are more than aware that the fetus feels pain (and needs to be protected).

 

[MikeK]

One wouldn't think so, but it's been reported that when the woman has to sign a paper allowing pain medication for their fetus, there have been reports of a reduction of abortions.

Emotions are a strange thing for people. I'd be curious to see how many American soldiers would follow through on their orders if they were subjected to daily videos chronicling the tears of the hundreds of thousands of families that have been destroyed by the allies as colateral damage in the war on terror. Nobody likes to see the killing of human beings, who are of infinate worth and created in the immage and likeness of God, even when they've convinced themselves and been told by their peers that it's the right thing to do I guess.

 

[Incariol]

Gee, I seem to be trying to convince folks that abortion is wrong, just normally. I don't even have to try! Wow! Imagine that! It must be that ingrained!

No, I assumed that you, on a Catholic site, were not for abortion. What I was trying to do was answer your post. And what I was tring to explain to you why several thousand people, including doctors and anesthesiologists who have actually worked with the fetuses, the pro-life organizations, and the legislatures of about 25 states now are more than aware that the fetus feels pain (and needs to be protected).

Nobody is saying fetuses don't feel pain. They become capable of feeling pain at around 25 weeks when thalamocortical neurons synapse in the cortical plate. Until that happens, there isn't any way for pain perception to occur. It is physically impossible.

 

[AMDG]

Emotions are a strange thing for people.

Hey, if it's saving a life, it's saving a life. I'm not about to "look a gift horse in the mouth." Wonder how all those martyrs in heaven begging God to avenge them feel?

 

[MikeK]

Hey, if it's saving a life, it's saving a life. I'm not about to "look a gift horse in the mouth." Wonder how all those martyrs in heaven begging God to avenge them feel?

Which martyrs? Neither aborted babies nor middle-eastern civilians are martyrs. I think to be a martyr you have to have some say in the matter, don't you? At any rate, if a soul has been purified to the point that it would have to be to exist in heaven, I suspect vengeance would be the last thing they'd be begging God for. I suspect, if the saw the souls on earth at all, they would look upon even the greatest of us with a certain amount of pity.

 

[Fantine]

The OP said:

My question is - how do you minister to them?

No the question is: Aren't there enough people in this world who are openly, achingly wounded that you can minister to?

Is it really necessary to reopen the wounds of people who have found closure because you don't think they've suffered enough?

It sounds as if the women you describe have made a conscious effort to make better choices than they did when they became pregnant. They didn't have subsequent abortions. They worked on their careers and their educations. They sought to establish emotionally healthier relationships with men.

No matter what you believe, I am sure they would have much preferred never having abortions. But they did, and they sought closure and healing, and they amended their lives (as recommended in the Act of Contrition) so that they would not be faced with the same difficult choice again.

And, while there are hurting people out there--the poor, the homeless, the unemployed, the immigrants, the sick, etc., etc., etc. you would rather "minister" to women until you feel they've said, "*I'm a murderer" enough times for you to be satisfied?

I'm sorry. I don't understand it. People who rebuild their lives don't do so without regret, but they have the sense to find closure and healing and live in the present, as all of us should.

 

[Rhamiel]

The OP said:



No the question is: Aren't there enough people in this world who are openly, achingly wounded that you can minister to?

Is it really necessary to reopen the wounds of people who have found closure because you don't think they've suffered enough?

It sounds as if the women you describe have made a conscious effort to make better choices than they did when they became pregnant. They didn't have subsequent abortions. They worked on their careers and their educations. They sought to establish emotionally healthier relationships with men.

No matter what you believe, I am sure they would have much preferred never having abortions. But they did, and they sought closure and healing, and they amended their lives (as recommended in the Act of Contrition) so that they would not be faced with the same difficult choice again.

And, while there are hurting people out there--the poor, the homeless, the unemployed, the immigrants, the sick, etc., etc., etc. you would rather "minister" to women until you feel they've said, "*I'm a murderer" enough times for you to be satisfied?

I'm sorry. I don't understand it. People who rebuild their lives don't do so without regret, but they have the sense to find closure and healing and live in the present, as all of us should.

why make it personal? why do I have to be satisfied
no crime was done agianst me
really to be blunt, i know a lot of people who i am glad that they did not have kids, do not want dumb and hateful people to raise dumb and hateful kids, but I am messed up in how I think sometimes, I am a sinner too, I have broken the laws of God and have no right to judge these women.

no I am not the offended party
God is offended by the slaughter of children

done in an unjust war, done by neglect and poverty, done as a sacrifice to Bal and Moloch like what happened in ancient Palistine before the Moses brought the jews there, done by abortion
this is a sin that screams out to the heavens and crys for retribution, read the book the Wisdom of Solomon and it talks a lot about those who kill children.
these are sins that cry out to heaven for retribution, the cheating of a worker out of his wages, sodomy, homicide, oppresing the widowed and orphan
all of these sins are RAMPET in the USA, payday loans, loansharks, wal-mart crushing unions, insurance companies cheating widows and the poor, the wide spread accaptence of homosexuality, murder, unjust war, abortion
welcome to Babylon

 

[Rhamiel]

Which martyrs? Neither aborted babies nor middle-eastern civilians are martyrs. I think to be a martyr you have to have some say in the matter, don't you? At any rate, if a soul has been purified to the point that it would have to be to exist in heaven, I suspect vengeance would be the last thing they'd be begging God for. I suspect, if the saw the souls on earth at all, they would look upon even the greatest of us with a certain amount of pity.

I am not sure how to think of this
the Bible does say that God does not wish to see the destruction of sinners but that they should turn to Him
on the other hand God is a God of Justice, the OT is rather bloody, now God came to earth to take away our sins on the cross, so now sins can be destoried without fire and brimstone wiping out cities
but He still loves justice
that is why we must repent of our sins

 

[Fantine]

why make it personal? why do I have to be satisfied

Because the question of the original poster was how she could minister to these women who had already healed, rebuilt their lives, and found closure?

And my answer was that there were lots of wounded people in the world, and, given the personal limitations we all have, isn't it better to minister to people who are openly hurting instead of reopening the wounds of people who have healed, for whatever reason?

 

[Rhamiel]

Because the question of the original poster was how she could minister to these women who had already healed, rebuilt their lives, and found closure?

And my answer was that there were lots of wounded people in the world, and, given the personal limitations we all have, isn't it better to minister to people who are openly hurting instead of reopening the wounds of people who have healed, for whatever reason?

if they have not repented of the murder of their own offspring, then while they might have healed on an emotional leval and a psychological leval they would still be hurt spiritualy and their soul at grave risk if they do not repent
people who are messed up look for help
but those who have rebuilt their lives might be foolish enough to believe that they do not need God and His mercy and forgivness, they are at more risk then those who are in pain