Why Abortion should never be Outlawed!! (an honest, personal eperience) TRUTH!!!!

[SharonL]

I firmly believe that the near death experience posted in another thread is right - the person was in Heaven and saw where all the aborted babies and babies that died early were kept - she said that you will know your baby in Heaven and I believe this - she said that it is important to name the baby and this witnesses to what the Holy Spirit showed me when I had a miscarrage -

God is a forgiving God and I truely believe that each mother who is fortunate enough to go to Heaven will spend eternity with that child. Just because its life was snuffed out on earth does not mean the soul will not be in Heaven.

 

[Cuddles333]

The mother in question in the OP just didn't want the fetus to coninue to develop to term...then face medical torment, dying slowly and in agony. She chose that the fetus be put to death quickly so if it did suffer, the suffering would have ended much more quickly than if it were allowed to have come to term. This is such a personal and sad story. How could we pass judgment on her?

 

[katautumn]

How could we pass judgment on her?

I have yet to see one post in which anyone has passed judgment on her. I might have missed it, though. Things move pretty fast in E&M.

 

[Etsi]

The mother in question in the OP just didn't want the fetus to coninue to develop to term...then face medical torment, dying slowly and in agony. She chose that the fetus be put to death quickly so if it did suffer, the suffering would have ended much more quickly than if it were allowed to have come to term. This is such a personal and sad story. How could we pass judgment on her?

Not I. Lord have mercy on all of us. I feel badly that she felt she had to make that decision. Yes, I wish she had decided differently. But I do not judge her. It is not my place. I only know the stories of others who have chosen either way and what they went through after. I only know of my experiences with my choices. I shared those. But how dare I to judge another in a world of pain. Obviously the deed is done. Even if abortion were outlawed, women have found way to abort throughout history. Instead of judgement, I suggest prayer. Prayer for the mothers, the fathers, the infants, the doctors that are being pressured to do these things. The abortionists, the ones that make daily money off of it, those people I'm more likely to judge, much to my own failings.

 

[AllieBaba2012]

Let me start off by saying I don't think that abortion is a human "right" or that it is a "privilege" for those who can afford it... and those that abuse the system to abort a perfectly healthy child just because it is going to derail their life plan are making a terrible decision that i hope one day they will be held responsible

HOWEVER.... please let me explain, through a recent personal experience, why I suddenly have what i feel is an objectively correct stance on the issue of abortion

first of all... my stance...

To argue that abortion should be made illegal for any reason (religous or non-religous), or to argue that abortion is a "sin" is completely foolish and obliviously ignorant to the facts of Life.

now.. my story....

About eight months ago, my Sister (who is 24 years old) was impregnated by her future husband to be (they were engaged at the time and are now happily married.) Everything was going smoothly for the first month and they were ecstatic to be having their first child. My sister has been in the child-care business her whole life, and she was thrilled that she was going to get the chance to raise a child of her own. About a month and a half into the pregnancy the first problems started to be seen by her Doctor. I don't remember the name of the disorder, but the fetus was failing to develop the main valve in it's heart. The doctor let her know that it was sitll early on and that there was a chance it was just not developing yet, but around the 2 month mark it was clear that the babie's heart was not developing properly. The doctors informed my sister that this is a life threatning disorder, because the brain of the fetus would not be able to develope without the proper circulation provided via the heart. The doctors informed her that when she gave birth to the child it would be likely that either

a) the child would already be dead from a lack of oxygen and circulation during the stages of developement
b) the child would be born alive but would die almost instantly
c) the child would have to be rushed into heart surgery immediately and the lack of oxygen supplied to the brain would have caused numerous mental and physical challenges for the remainder of the childs life

overall, they gave the child a 20% chance of being born alive, and a practically 0% chance of living a healthy life.

So my sister was forced to make a decision.

She made the decision that it was in the best interest of the child's well being as well as her own well being to have an abortion.

To this day she says it will forever be the hardest thing she has ever had to do.

To make matter's worse, because of all of the political debates surrounding the issue, the health insurance companies do not cover abortion as a necessary medical procedure. My sister had to get a $10,000 loan which she will be paying back for years (she is currently getting her masters degree and her loans are starting to pile up) in order to have the child aborted.

Now.... for all of you "abortion is the devils act" people, and all of you Rick Perry supporters...

What do you have to say for your argument?

Do you honestly believe that my Sister should have been forced to risk her life to give birth to a dead or dying child?

Do you honestly believe that her acts were a "sin"?

please, enlighten me.


*For the Record*

I was a christian until i was 12 years old, went to church every sunday and wednesday and had faith in the religion....

But i started to learn how to think for myself and decided a long time ago that christianity, like most religions, is a private business built to prey on the weak and the willing. Also, i believe that the objective occurrences related to religion all around the world (not just christianity) have spread much more harm than good.

I still believe in God, but not some God defined in a million different contradictions in ancient text.

We are mere animals, there is no reason why we should believe that we have the power to define God. To think otherwise is childish.

< staff edit > < staff edit >
If you have a good argument to rebuddle an honest and personal experience...

please, enlighten me.

Otherwise, stop fighting to outlaw abortion, because you are ignorant to the experiences of many like my Sister.

please, enlighten me.

Abortion for medical reasons has NEVER been illegal, and never will be. The pro-abortion crowd pretends that illegal abortion will result in women who have valid medical reasons to terminate their pregnancies will be forced to give birth to killer mutant babies, and they perpetuate that lie for a reason..to terrify women like you into believing that we must make OPTIONAL abortion legal in order to save these poor women.

I'm very sorry about your sister's ordeal, what a terrible and heart breaking experience. But her experience is NOT the experience of most women who seek abortions. And regardless of the legality of abortion as contraception, she would have been able to obtain the appropriate treatment.

 

[AllieBaba2012]

Oh no, I misunderstood. Your sister's life wasn't in danger.

Yes, it's murder to kill a baby based on the chance that it will die later anyway. Sorry. Life can be difficult sometimes. That doesn't mean we can eliminate the people who make it difficult. And euthanasia is just murdering someone who can't speak for themselves.

 

[AllieBaba2012]

The mother in question in the OP just didn't want the fetus to coninue to develop to term...then face medical torment, dying slowly and in agony. She chose that the fetus be put to death quickly so if it did suffer, the suffering would have ended much more quickly than if it were allowed to have come to term. This is such a personal and sad story. How could we pass judgment on her?

Doctors are often wrong. I see stories every day from people who said "the doctors said i would never live! And look at me now!" or "The doctors told us he would be a vegetable...today he graduates high school!"

We shouldn't terminate life based upon a scenario that MIGHT take place. We shouldn't abort babies based on the fact that they have a good chance of being criminal, we shouldn't kill babies that might have medical issues. This sort of thing is not allowed in our courts of law, where people don't get to second guess or make judgements based upon heresay or conjecture...we won't execute CRIMINALS on such flimsy stuff, why on earth should we execute babies?

 

[jayem]

Doctors are often wrong. I see stories every day from people who said "the doctors said i would never live! And look at me now!" or "The doctors told us he would be a vegetable...today he graduates high school!"

We shouldn't terminate life based upon a scenario that MIGHT take place.

I work in health care. I know that doctors can be wrong, because medicine is far from an exact science. And means that many, if not most medical decisions are based on what might take place. A pregnant woman with a severely malformed fetus might miscarry spontaneously. And an uncontrolled miscarriage might result in serious, life threatening hemorrhage. A partner of mine had a patient who suffered a major heart attack at 10 weeks, and developed congestive heart failure. Pregnancy puts a major stress on the heart, which increases as pregnancy progresses. Even an experienced cardiologist who specialized in heart disease and pregnancy wasn't sure of the prognosis. The patient might be able to deliver, but her heart failure also might worsen, and she could develop kidney failure, or pulmonary edema, or other potentially fatal complications. I saw a patient with an agressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma diagnosed at 6 weeks. No oncologist would treat her while she was pregnant. The kind of radiation and chemo she would need might well cause a miscarriage this early in pregnancy. Not to mention all sorts of other complications. It was advised that she terminate and start cancer treatment ASAP. She could forgo treatment for several months until she could be delivered. But the delay might allow the lymphoma to spread and ruin her chance at remission. It's all a question of possibilities. You're entitled to your opinion on what's moral or immoral. But your opinion on these tough medical decisions can't be imposed on others by law. These decision can only be made by the woman, and her physicians, and any significant others she wants to include. The state has to butt out. Laws must allow abortion for medical reasons based on what MIGHT happen.

 

[SithDoughnut]

And euthanasia is just murdering someone who can't speak for themselves.

A lot of people volunteer themselves for euthanasia. In Dignitas (one of the main places where euthanasia happens) they have to confirm several times that they want to go through with it and then administer the poison themselves. No one else can help them, they have to make the final decision and they have to do it.

I think you misunderstand euthanasia somewhat.

 

[ajunkyarddog]

I work in health care. I know that doctors can be wrong, because medicine is far from an exact science. And means that many, if not most medical decisions are based on what might take place. A pregnant woman with a severely malformed fetus might miscarry spontaneously. And an uncontrolled miscarriage might result in serious, life threatening hemorrhage. A partner of mine had a patient who suffered a major heart attack at 10 weeks, and developed congestive heart failure. Pregnancy puts a major stress on the heart, which increases as pregnancy progresses. Even an experienced cardiologist who specialized in heart disease and pregnancy wasn't sure of the prognosis. The patient might be able to deliver, but her heart failure also might worsen, and she could develop kidney failure, or pulmonary edema, or other potentially fatal complications. I saw a patient with an agressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma diagnosed at 6 weeks. No oncologist would treat her while she was pregnant. The kind of radiation and chemo she would need might well cause a miscarriage this early in pregnancy. Not to mention all sorts of other complications. It was advised that she terminate and start cancer treatment ASAP. She could forgo treatment for several months until she could be delivered. But the delay might allow the lymphoma to spread and ruin her chance at remission. It's all a question of possibilities. You're entitled to your opinion on what's moral or immoral. But your opinion on these tough medical decisions can't be imposed on others by law. These decision can only be made by the woman, and her physicians, and any significant others she wants to include. The state has to butt out. Laws must allow abortion for medical reasons based on what MIGHT happen.

Most people I know would not take issue with someone choosing to abort based on a severe medical threat to the mother. Is that what we are arguing here? While I know I would go through with the pregnancy in any possible unlikely scenario I could think of, what I have an issue with is people that abort when there is NOT a medical reason for the mother.

 

[AllieBaba2012]

A lot of people volunteer themselves for euthanasia. In Dignitas (one of the main places where euthanasia happens) they have to confirm several times that they want to go through with it and then administer the poison themselves. No one else can help them, they have to make the final decision and they have to do it.

I think you misunderstand euthanasia somewhat.

No, I don't misunderstand it at all.

And I really don't think it's a godly thing to kill mentally ill people at their request either.

Dignitas isn't a PLACE, it's a GROUP, incidentally.

Dignitas International

In the Netherlands, where euthanasia is not only legal, it's encouraged, they were performing INVOLUNTARY EUTHANASIA. Interesting, no? The doctor and the family could decide to off people who were unable to make the decision themselves. Nothing voluntary about that.

They also performed euthanasia on children with birth defects. Lovely.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_6899/is_1_28/ai_n28124562/

 

[AllieBaba2012]

"
Here is the heart of the problem: transforming killing from a terrible wrong into a legal right opens wide the gate to an ever-expanding culture of death. Indeed, the Dutch experience proves that once killing is defined as an acceptable solution for one cause of suffering, it is soon viewed as the answer to 100 more. Thus, since 1973, when euthanasia was decriminalized in the Netherlands (doctors would not be prosecuted so long as they followed the "guidelines"), Dutch physicians took their country right down the slippery slope from killing terminally ill people who ask for it, to killing chronically ill people who ask for it, to killing disabled people who ask for it, to killing depressed people (as illustrated by the cases recited above) who ask for it.
It gets worse. Each year Dutch doctors kill babies born with birth anomalies - - acts that the American bioethicist Joseph Fletcher once approvingly labeled "post birth abortion." Nor is infanticide a rare occurrence in the Netherlands.
According to a 1997 study published in The Lancet, a British medical journal, approximately 8% of all infants who die in the Netherlands are killed by doctors - - about 80 per year. According to the study, 45% of neonatologists and 31% of pediatricians who answered the authors' survey questionnaires have killed infants."

Dutch Euthanasia: The Dream And The Nightmare | National Right to Life News | Find Articles at BNET

Here's where that term "post-birth abortion" comes from. One of the posters on another thread said there was no such thing. Well not according to the engineers of death!

 

[razeontherock]

Do you honestly believe that my Sister should have been forced to risk her life to give birth to a dead or dying child?

Do you honestly believe that her acts were a "sin"?

No, and no. Tough situation, that I wish no one ever had to be faced with. Unfortunately, life isn't like that. My condolences.

decided a long time ago that christianity, like most religions, is a private business built to prey on the weak and the willing.

Again, life isn't like that. My condolences that this was your experience, which I do not challenge nor debate. Here you clarify the reason for those of us that use the "relationship not religion" slogan. Jesus preys on no one! His Father preys on no one! Look into his many Names, and see what all He provides ...

Otherwise, stop fighting to outlaw abortion

I echo this sentiment to those on 'my side of the aisle.' The battle is re: public funding, and minor children (even age 17) needing to have their parents at least informed of the procedure. If they drew the battle line there, we might make some progress.

 

[SithDoughnut]

No, I don't misunderstand it at all.

And I really don't think it's a godly thing to kill mentally ill people at their request either.

Good job that most places/groups/etc. don't do that. Like I said, you usually have to do it yourself, groups like Dignitas merely provide the means.

In the Netherlands, where euthanasia is not only legal, it's encouraged, they were performing INVOLUNTARY EUTHANASIA. Interesting, no? The doctor and the family could decide to off people who were unable to make the decision themselves. Nothing voluntary about that.

Because people who are suffering unbearably with no prospect of improvement (a requirement for euthanasia in the Netherlands) should be forced to live. Besides, the law in the Netherlands specifically states that the patient has to be fully aware of the situation, and understand it completely. Anything else is illegal.

Euthanasia in the Netherlands

They also performed euthanasia on children with birth defects. Lovely.

Dutch Euthanasia: The Dream And The Nightmare | National Right to Life News | Find Articles at BNET

This is quite a controversial situation, and it's technically illegal. There's something called the Groningen Protocol that allows it to happen on occasion. However, I don't see how this affects euthanasia as a whole. Personally, I disagree with euthanasia being available to anyone who is too young; I'd probably go for 16 as a limit, but perhaps younger people can understand it.

Of course, we can even agree on a ban on involuntary euthanasia, and that doesn't affect the right for people to voluntarily choose to die. Just because you want to die doesn't make you mentally ill (in fact, some people choose euthanasia to avoid becoming mentally ill, such as people diagnosed with alzheimers) and no one should be forced into a life of suffering because some people have decided that their view on life should be forced upon everyone else.

It's telling that the right to "life" (as if you can call some of the situations people are forced to suffer in "life") groups go for involuntary euthanasia, controversial situations and illegal occurrences to attack the idea of euthanasia as a whole. I understand how abortion is an issue, but denying people the right to voluntarily choose that they don't want to suffer any more is nothing more than cruelty.

 

[AllieBaba2012]

Good job that most places/groups/etc. don't do that. Like I said, you usually have to do it yourself, groups like Dignitas merely provide the means.



Because people who are suffering unbearably with no prospect of improvement (a requirement for euthanasia in the Netherlands) should be forced to live. Besides, the law in the Netherlands specifically states that the patient has to be fully aware of the situation, and understand it completely. Anything else is illegal.

Euthanasia in the Netherlands



This is quite a controversial situation, and it's technically illegal. There's something called the Groningen Protocol that allows it to happen on occasion. However, I don't see how this affects euthanasia as a whole. Personally, I disagree with euthanasia being available to anyone who is too young; I'd probably go for 16 as a limit, but perhaps younger people can understand it.

Of course, we can even agree on a ban on involuntary euthanasia, and that doesn't affect the right for people to voluntarily choose to die. Just because you want to die doesn't make you mentally ill (in fact, some people choose euthanasia to avoid becoming mentally ill, such as people diagnosed with alzheimers) and no one should be forced into a life of suffering because some people have decided that their view on life should be forced upon everyone else.

It's telling that the right to "life" (as if you can call some of the situations people are forced to suffer in "life") groups go for involuntary euthanasia, controversial situations and illegal occurrences to attack the idea of euthanasia as a whole. I understand how abortion is an issue, but denying people the right to voluntarily choose that they don't want to suffer any more is nothing more than cruelty.

It's eugenics.

And they aren't voluntarily choosing. I guess you didn't read the links. I suggest you do so.

If somebody wants to kill themself by jumping off a bridge, we try to stop them. If they try to hang themselves or cut their wrists, we try to stop them.

But I guess if they go to a psychiatrist and say "I'm depressed and I want you to arrange to kill me" that's ok. Because they're mentally ill, and if they're mentally ill, OBVIOUSLY somebody should facilitate their death!

It's just murder by another name. I don't understand the mindset of people who profess to be Christians who advocate killing of children, the sick, the mentally disturbed, the old. I was under the impression that we're supposed to minister to those people, not wipe them off the face of the earth.

 

[Beechwell]

If somebody wants to kill themself by jumping off a bridge, we try to stop them. If they try to hang themselves or cut their wrists, we try to stop them.

But I guess if they go to a psychiatrist and say "I'm depressed and I want you to arrange to kill me" that's ok. Because they're mentally ill, and if they're mentally ill, OBVIOUSLY somebody should facilitate their death!

I really, really doubt that's how it works in the Netherlands. Could you support that with any sources other than this slanted "national right to live" site?

It's just murder by another name. I don't understand the mindset of people who profess to be Christians who advocate killing of children, the sick, the mentally disturbed, the old.

... the criminals

I generally agree. Although it should be possible to choose a dignfied death for yourself over slow, painful process of fading away.

 

[SithDoughnut]

It's eugenics.

Euthanasia has nothing to do with genetics. If you're going to level false accusations the least you could do is stick to the realm of the logically possible.

And they aren't voluntarily choosing. I guess you didn't read the links. I suggest you do so.

I read the article. It claims "study after study" and then doesn't even name them, let alone quote them, cite them or give any reason why their position should be considered true. Nor do they give any details as to why this happened. Turning off life support is a type of involuntary euthanasia which is accepted worldwide, and these "involuntary killings" sound suspiciously like that, considering the only detail given is that these patients are practically dead.

If somebody wants to kill themself by jumping off a bridge, we try to stop them. If they try to hang themselves or cut their wrists, we try to stop them.

Of course we do. Euthanasia doesn't work like that, however. It's not a quick or easy option.

But I guess if they go to a psychiatrist and say "I'm depressed and I want you to arrange to kill me" that's ok. Because they're mentally ill, and if they're mentally ill, OBVIOUSLY somebody should facilitate their death!

Almost. In the Netherlands, the option is there, if the person is in a state of incurable suffering, they show a persistent desire for euthanasia free of external influences, they fully and completely understand the consequences of their action and multiple doctors agree that the patient fulfils the former three criteria. Then, and only then, is euthanasia an option. Not a guaranteed process, but an option.

Even then, this process merely means that doctors will not be prosecuted. It's neither encouraged nor supported by the law.

You say you understand euthanasia and then demonstrate that you don't. I'd advise you move beyond the right to life groups and look at the actual situation, rather than the opinions of those who have no respect for the suffering.

It's just murder by another name.

It's not remotely close to murder. The only reason you'd even try to make that comparison is for a baseless emotional argument.

I don't understand the mindset of people who profess to be Christians who advocate killing of children, the sick, the mentally disturbed, the old. I was under the impression that we're supposed to minister to those people, not wipe them off the face of the earth.

Where in the Bible does it say you're supposed to force Christian values upon everyone else? And where is killing being advocated? Euthanasia is not encouraged, just provided as a final option for those who don't want to suffer any longer. Contrary to whatever leaps to conclusions you've made, we who support euthanasia as an option are not going to start running around old people's homes killing the inhabitants. Last time I checked, God gave humanity free-will; it's interesting how many people want to try to take that away.

 

[mpok1519]

I just think of all the times the test and doctors have been wrong, telling parents their baby would be this or that and on delivery day, either God performed a miracle, or these doctors and their test are flawed, I just wonder how many perfectly healthy kids are misdiagnosed and terminated for these same reasons.......what a tragedy

I wonder how many kids are unfortunately very unhealthy with life-threatening and discomforting ailments that weren't aborted and have to suffer their entire lives, day in and day out wishing that they could die.

One cannot automatically assume that just because one is alive means they are not suffering.

 

[mpok1519]

I have yet to see one post in which anyone has passed judgment on her. I might have missed it, though. Things move pretty fast in E&M.

Those who imply she murdered her child would count as passing judgement.

If one's stance is "abortion is murder", then yes, they have passed judgement. In this circumstance, they have passed judgement on the mother as a murderer.

 

[mpok1519]

Oh no, I misunderstood. Your sister's life wasn't in danger.

Yes, it's murder to kill a baby based on the chance that it will die later anyway. Sorry. Life can be difficult sometimes. That doesn't mean we can eliminate the people who make it difficult. And euthanasia is just murdering someone who can't speak for themselves.

You're suggesting that a baby born with absolutely zero chance of living a healthy comfortable life would say "Hey, please, I'd rather live a terrible, life devoid of any happiness, dignity, comfort, joy, etc. I want to live in pain, and suffering for as long as possible, costing my mother financial ruin and the exact same pain and suffering after I inevitabely die anyway!"?

Have some common sense, will ya? Please.

Life difficult? Try insufferably impossible and miserable. Difficult is an understatement. You obviously don't know anything about true pain.

If you were in the position of pain, agony, suffering and constant non-stop misery, you'd want to die too. And don't say you wouldn't. You would. Unless you are inhuman.