Partial Birth Abortion Ban and fetal pain
Pro-lifers opposing the Partial Birth Abortion Ban say it will force abortionists to commit more torturous abortions, and this may be true.
Whereas the PBA Ban prohibits breech abortions of babies delivered past the navel and head-first abortions of babies delivered past the chin, some pro-lifers say abortionists will now simply deliver a baby’s legs and rip them off before proceeding, or deliver the baby almost to the navel and disembowel the baby, etc..
However, the very pro-lifers making this argument oppose fetal pain legislation, so their argument is disengenuous. Stated Brian Rohrbaugh, president of Colorado Right to Life, in an interview
[O]ur position, as a board, is that we will never support any law that ends with “and then you can kill the baby.” That includes every type of law that would regulate abortion. So anything that allows for the abortion after you meet these certain conditions is inherently evil. It goes against God’s command of Thou Shalt Not Murder.
We took that position on the Informed [Fetal] Pain Consent… bill…. What was wrong with that bill is it’s very good to warn women that their child is going to suffer intense pain. But its evil to offer a solution and then to allow the abortion to continue, so if that bill would of just said, “You must notify women if they have an abortion, their baby is going to be tormented and tortured to death,” we would not have opposed the law.
But when you offer a solution you make abortion more humane, more palatable, you ease the conscience of society and of the mother and you undoubtedly will increase abortion by doing so.
I can only call it ruthless to purposefully withhold pain relief from someone you know is about to be tortured to death, which you can’t stop.
Even the Roman soldiers killing Jesus demonstrated some semblance of compassion by offering Him wine vinegar.
And to say offering fetal pain relief would “undoubtedly… increase abortion” is 180 degrees wrong, IMO. Rather, how many mothers would stop their abortions if their abortionist were mandated to offer pain relief for the baby they were about to kill?
Bottom line: Don’t complain about the torturous side effects of the PBA Ban if you don’t support fetal pain legislation.
[Photo is of premature baby. Doctors now routinely provide pain relief to preemies born the same age as those aborted.]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I knew this was coming. This is a tough one and why Colorado Right to Life president Brian Rohrbough debated Steven Ertelt, president of Wyoming Right to Life on the issue. Steven couldn’t be honest on the issue, and I’m wondering if you can Jill?
I’ll ask myself a question first.
Will, is it possible that alerting women their baby will feel pain, will get some women to change their minds on going through their abortion?
“Yes, that’s possible.”
Jill, is it possible that telling women their baby can receive painkiller, might cause a woman to actually have an abortion, knowing that it won’t be as traumatic as they once thought it would be? Is that possible?
Will, your question is so convoluted. Your premise is incorrect. The mother is already getting the abortion. She’s a go.
The bill would require abortionists to provide women seeking abortion after 20 weeks a brochure explaining there is “substantial evidence” the abortion will cause their baby pain, and advise them they can request pain relief for the baby.
The mother has no prior knowledge the baby will feel the pain of the abortion. She has proceeded to this point ignorant. This bill can either have no effect on her decision or a positive effect. It cannot have a negative effect, unless she is indecisive. And I think it’s a stretch to think an abortionist can talk an indecisive mom into an abortion via this route.
seems to me Jill,
that a very effective educational strategy may have a 3D (hopefully 4D) imaging tied to fetal pain relief. Maybe ?????????????? When done in isolation the impact may be lessened.
“Bottom line: Don’t complain about the torturous side effects of the PBA Ban if you don’t support fetal pain legislation.”
Just think… if the anti-choices masses actually knew that a fetus doesn’t experience pain.
LMAO
Cameron, preemies feel pain in a differnt, but *more* painful way than adults. They feel a radiating pain similar to how it feels when you stub your toe. This begins in the 2nd trimester if memory serves. There is nothing that suggests that birth in any way shifts the way a fetus feels pain.
Your memory may be fine, but the information is bunk.
Myelination of the nervous system doesn’t even begin until week 22 at the earliest, and doesn’t finish until after birth. i.e. no pain, at least up till third trimester… and gradually becoming more sensative as myelination advances from peripheral to central. I don’t know at what stage myelination of the peripheral nervous system is complete, but definately before birth, as baby’s are clearly responsive to discomfort upon birth.
Fetal Pain legislation is about telling any aborting mom that it feels pain, which is hogwash for most abortions.
You do realize that the legislation is only aimed at women abortion past 21 weeks right…
Also the information is not “bunk”
From UK News Electronic Telegraph Sunday 2 August 1998
“SCIENTISTS have shown for the first time that new-born babies have a “unique” nervous system which makes them respond differently to pain from adults.
In research that has far-reaching implications for the medical and surgical treatments of infants, the scientists have found that newborn children feel pain longer and more sensitively. In premature babies, the mechanism that allows older children and adults to “dampen down” the pain messages does not work properly.
Until now it has been presumed that a baby’s pain system was too immature to function properly, or that they reacted in a similar way to adults but less efficiently. Researchers at University College London have now discovered that babies’ sensory systems have a unique pain-signalling mechanism, which disappears as they grow older. This makes them feel pain sooner than an older child or adult and because of different “wiring” they can react to stimulation as if it is pain – even when it is not. ”
I’m looking now for the study itself.
Here’s a link to the ucl.
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/media/library/prematurebaby
And the abstract-
“Despite the recent increase in our understanding of the development of pain processing, it is still not known whether premature infants are capable of processing pain at a cortical level. In this study, changes in cerebral oxygenation over the somatosensory cortex were measured in response to noxious stimulation using real-time near-infrared spectroscopy in 18 infants aged between 25 and 45 weeks postmenstrual age. The noxious stimuli were heel lances performed for routine blood sampling; no blood tests were performed solely for the purpose of the study. Noxious stimulation produced a clear cortical response, measured as an increase in total hemoglobin concentration [HbT] in the contralateral somatosensory cortex, from 25 weeks (mean {Delta}[HbT] = 7.74
You do realize it’s different from state to state and bill to bill?? Some of the fetal pain bills were about “informing” mothers, while others were attempts to require pain killers. Yet others were to force abortion clinics to provide fetal pain killers to any mother requesting it. Take your pick. It’s a mixed bad nuts.
For example, in Virginia, they tried to get informed/offer drugs passed for anything after the first trimester. One of the federal bills was drugs after 20 weeks, as are many of the attempted state bills (23 I think). I’m sure there are few that wanted it for all abortions though. And well… the average anti-choice zealot will argue tooth and nail that the fetus, immediately after conception, is practically a fully formed human that waxes on poetically about loving it’s mommy and all it’s future plans.
OK Cameron,
Why do they give babies born prematurely pain medication as the article indicates? Just so they can charge the insurance companies more money?
Will D,
I’m waiting for an answer from you to Jill’s excellent response of 2:45 pm.
Speak up.
Camcam, 4:47p, source please.
Camerama, 5:13p, to clarify, we’re speaking of the federal bill, the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act.
Cam,I can’t find a single bill that affects the first trimester. Strange that you were so “sure” of this.
It’s also strange that you seemed so sure about the whole “practically a fully formed human” bit. You of all people should know that life is a continuem and that none of us are ever “fully formed”. It’s a nice distraction from the real issue though!
Another great distraction was the whole “anti-choicers!” lament. This bill has nothing to do with “choice”, but rather compassion for the unborn. Planned Parenthood didn’t even fight it.
I’m sure some folks wouldn’t be too happy that this bill most likely will not prevent many abortions. However, it has the capacity to prevent suffering. I think we can all agree that this is a good thing.
Andrew, just got off the ice and back to work. I can’t be a slave to JillStanek.com, sorry. I do my best.
Jill, you amaze me. ALL OF A SUDDEN, this bill (as opposed to the PBA) won’t make the news, no one will know about it EXCEPT the woman getting the abortion. C’mon. Jill, I knew you wouldn’t respond. The proof is that you and I are talking about it even though A. the law didn’t pass, and B. neither of us found out because we went in for an abortion!
FYI, my wife and I discussed this, and she said that if she weren’t pro-life, she would already have a hard time getting an abortion, but knowing that she could be the only one to have to go through pain, and that it would be much much easier to have the abortion.
Jill, do you really think anyone is going to believe that not one woman in the whole world will find out about this EXCEPT a woman getting an abortion? Ridiculous.
Will, 5:35p, said: “Jill, you amaze me.”
Well, at least we agree on one thing.
Another non-response from Jill. This isn’t a laughing matter Jill, at least not to me. You all praise the PBA ruling because “it puts a face back on the baby,” and “it has kept abortion in the news.” Yet now, all of a sudden this particular bill will be found out by no one in the whole world, except a woman getting an abortion. Unbelievable. What a double standard. Here’s the truth Jill. YES, it is possible that a woman might find out that her baby will receive painkiller, and that might just convince her to get an abortion. Why is this so hard for you to admit?
Jill, how on earth would thet get the medication to the baby? How? I still couldn’t buy the fact that the baby wouldn’t feel pain. This entire thing is nuts!
How kind. First we shall see to it that you won’t have any pain…..before we kill you!
CRTL:”But when you offer a solution you make abortion more humane, more palatable, you ease the conscience of society and of the mother and you undoubtedly will increase abortion by doing so.”
No, fetal pain legislation is a further acknowlegement that an unborn baby is a person who feels pain like a born baby, thus raising the awareness of the pro-death crowd, liberal courts of the actual horror they are sanctioning.
Should Germany have offered the Jews “sedatives” before sending them to the gas chambers? If so, would they have been
perceived to have been more compassionate Nazis?
“How kind. First we shall see to it that you won’t have any pain…..before we kill you!”
exactly Heather, this is good legislation. We have to keep pushing until there is no way that abortion can happen.
Cameron,
BTW. I forgot to ask you something earlier this week. In one of our on-line “discussions” you basically wanted everyone to buy into the nonsense that women who abort are typically financially poor married women who just have no way out other than to abort.
I then read your argument in a different post that was discussing men influencing a woman’s decision to abort. You made it clear you felt that women don’t need any influence from men as they are not that week and are capable of making their own decisions, and that you yourself probably lost a “few” without your knowlege along the way. HUMMMMM….
Are you dating poor married women????
Oh good point Sandy. Not all women who abort are poor, broke and destitute! No way. No how.
Will D,
I’m glad you responded. However I have to say that I find, in general, your responses not to be persuasive or well thought out.
This is not the first time I have noticed this. In Jill’s response to you she challenges your assertion that a woman going into the mill is undecided about whether or not to have the abortion and therefore this proposed law would swing her one way or the other.
You decide not to respond to her challenge to your assertion and instead choose to focus on whether or not she already knows about the law (if it were in place.)
The two are not connected. Do you have a valid response to her challenge? If not, then cede the point and move on.
Les, 6:15p, said: “Should Germany have offered the Jews “sedatives” before sending them to the gas chambers? If so, would they have been
perceived to have been more compassionate Nazis?”
Les, your analogy is not an analogy. Rather, it should be, “Should Jesus’ friends have knocked the sponge of wine vinegar away from Him while He was being legally but wrongfully killed?”
Jill and Jasper,
Actually a better analogy is the Jews will feel anxiety prior to their gassing so let’s give them anti-anxiety medicine. There everyone feels better about the whole thing. Especially society because their conscience is eased knowing that dying Jews are getting premedicated prior to their gassing.
Anytime you people want to make a law that ends with “and then you can kill the baby” use a different term than baby like Jew,African-American, slave, or maybe woman and see if you still like that law.
It is always interesting that no one believes there can be unintended consequences when murder is done in a regulatory fashion. That is what Will D is getting at. A woman can change her mind about an abortion while she is even on the table and the procedure is about to start. So with The Fetal Pain Act she could hear about the pain to the baby and decide no way. Or, she could hear about the pain and have her conscience relieved that the baby will not feel pain.
Other problems with this bill are multiple. Abortionists murder for a living and therefore cannot and are not honest. It would be very difficult to give the baby a pain medicine, it provides another way of getting more money for the abortion and who says they will give the baby pain medication and not just saline (salt water)? Who will police them and make sure they do what they are supposed to?
What happens to the mom who wants pain medication but, it costs an extra $100 and she does not have it? You would hope she would decide against killing her child but, it may reinforce that if she can’t afford $100 on the baby she won’t be able to afford larger expenses if she keeps the baby.
The potential downsides are fairly substantial. The largest is that society will “feel” better about abortion knowing that the babies are given pain medication prior to being murdered. These laws make abortion harder to fight, not easier.
No, no, no, no, no.
Having to give a fetus pain medication makes the public realize that it is a human being and that changes minds.
Over the course of history, who was the greatest change agent. Christ, right? He did it one person at a time, mind to mind, heart to heart. That takes time unfortunately.
Even being pro-life, I never thought about the pain a baby might feel during an abortion until some scientific articles were published on it. That realization made me even more determined to end this holocasut.
Do you think the public even realizes that most aborted babies are human and can feel pain? Just blog on this site for a while and you will get a feel on how a lot of these pro-aborts think. It’s very twisted and misguided. Don’t you think that most people who come to the realization that if babies felt abortive pain, they were human and therefore not to be aborted?
This abortion battle is not fought on a battle field. It is fought between the ears and in the hearts of people.
Otherwise make it a battle on the field. Is that what you want? I’m ready to lay it on the line, but I don;t think it will work. There’s no fence to sit on here.
That would be like someone giving you a Percocet before shooting you in the head. It’s just absurd!
HisMan, most aborted babies (in the USA) are aborted in the first trimester, and cannot feel pain.
Really, HisMan, for someone who claims to have strong opinions on the subject, you should learn more about abortion.
Lolita, 11:39p, this fetal pain thing is a very big deal to me. You’re sitting there in your air-conditioned house sipping a can of Coke thinking of esoteric reasons not to give pain relief to babies about to be legally drawn and quartered. How disgusting.
I’ve sat on the other end of things in a room alone with a legally aborted dying 21-week-old baby whose paper-thin skin felt excruciating pain to my touch or the blanket around him, who died a slow 45 minute death of asphyxiation.
And his abortion was less ghastly than others of babies his age. These sorts of abortions are going on NOW, every day, while you as a supposed pro-lifer are sitting there arguing against giving these babies humane care even animals get by law in the United States.
“while you as a supposed pro-lifer are sitting there arguing against giving these babies humane care even animals get by law in the United States.”
The end result is the same no matter what kind of “care” they get, that should be the focus, not challenging whether or not you think someone is pro-life enough for your liking as seems to be the problem between pro-lifers and is really why a lot of people are divided. I’ve met quite a few pro-lifers who seem to have a superiority complex and seem to think things should only happen their way and they can’t even consider that another way could be better. I have recently stopped giving to one pro-life group to give to another because of the way the 2 groups differ in strategy. I think a pro-life poll would be interesting…
I knew I was wrong to say that as I wrote it. I was doing what I accuse others of doing. I’m sorry.
What would your poll question be?
Jill says, “These sorts of abortions are going on NOW, every day, while you as a supposed pro-lifer are sitting there arguing against giving these babies humane care even animals get by law in the United States.”
Comparing people to animals is what liberals do. We are not the same. Our country with our “pro-life” justices starved to death a woman, Terri Schiavo. She was given a more gruesome death than an inmate would be given.
One murderer cuts a man’s ears and tongue off, draws and quarters them while they scream and then they die. Another murderer gives a man an anesthetic and then does the exact same thing. Which one should be punished. Is it okay, what the 2nd murderer did, because he was a “kinder, gentler, compassionate killer”? I guess so, in Jill Stanek’s world. Because murder isn’t murder to compromised people. It’s not about taking a life, it’s about how it’s done. That strategy will never end all abortions. Ever.
Lolita, the point of my post was we should treat humans better than animals, obviously, one of the inarguable points fetal pain legislation makes. Please give me the courtesy of not purposefully missing my point.
Furthermore, Lolita, you’re mixing murderers with those trying to stop the murders, another insult that makes the discussion futile.
My analogy to abortion in a previous comment was exact. Respond to it, please. Tell me where I’m off: Should Jesus’ friends have knocked the sponge of wine vinegar away from Him while He was being legally but wrongfully killed?
I think both sides have good points. Is there some kind of compromise that can be worked out?
Jill,
I don’t really know how I would word it but I would like to see a poll on strategy, what strategy one would think is more effective I guess. For example, I’ve really grown to admire Operatiuon Rescue because in my opinion they’re a little more “in your face about things”, like the truth truck parked outside the abortion clinics and I beleive they just got ultrasound machines that they drive around offering women who are about to go into abortion clinics a chance to see their baby. (I doubt PP even gives them the option, as we’ve seen, they don’t do as they are supposed to by law) I may be blind and just not seeing it but I could never tell what my money was being used for. Right now my only active strategy is to help financially and to have more kids, who, if I do a good job will add to the pro-life movement.
Andrew said, “I’m glad you responded. However I have to say that I find, in general, your responses not to be persuasive or well thought out.”
You’re right. If only my responses were as well thought out and persuasive as Jill’s. For example Jill said,
“Will, 5:35p, said: “Jill, you amaze me.”
Well, at least we agree on one thing.”
Andrew, are we reading the same thing? I admitted in the first post in this blog that this bill could convince a woman NOT to have an abortion. That’s definitely a possibility! I then asked Jill the reciprocal question, if it was possible that a woman actually get an abortion because she knows her baby would receive a painkiller. Her response was not thought out or persuasive. It was siimply that no woman OTHER than one already seeking an abortion would find out about this. If that’s true, how are you, me, and Jill talking about it if A. the bill didn’t pass, and B. we weren’t seeking an abortion? She’s flat out wrong Andrew, and she knows it, hence her lack of response to my posts.
PIP, you’re so sweet. You, new to the movement, are beginning to see the complexities.
Rosie, you have brought another area of strategy disagreement into the debate: activism; graphic pictures. This is a different topic than purism vs. incrementalism.
SoMG,
It’s not that HisMan needs to learn more about abortion, it’s you who needs to learn more about life – human life (beyond the textbook). You’ve probably heard about the word ‘love’. I liked the old analogy of love and swimming: you can read a library full about proper technique, but until you personally experience it you’ll never really know.
Rosie,
I like your concept of a pro-life poll on strategy. However, a meet between national pro-life leaders discussing effective-strategies might prove helpful to assist in clarifying national strategies. For instance one Canadian arm of the pro-life movement here is decidedly educational (tax loophole). Unlike, the American populace most of us Canadians are at arms-length in the political process.
We need a new strategy … one that engages the populace in the political process. [Many modern commentators (reporters) feel that their sole duty is to criticize. My Dad used to say, ‘if you cannot propose a better solution – shut up!’] We have nations filled with talking heads, who have never shed a tear in love, who have never been so saddened by cruelty that they are almost immobilized. Be at peace …. we’re just beginning …..
Great post John!
Jill, I have a question. How do or would they administer medication to the baby? What would it be? This is soooooooooo sick, but I will wait for your answer.
Heather, they would administer it directly to the baby. I don’t know what it would be. I don’t know if it would be a number or what.
Jill,great point about the Jews. Why bother to help a person out if you are just going to kill them? I want to puke just thinking about this. I shudder at the thought of an abortionist pulling at a baby’s little leg and then finishing up the gruesome slaughter. If I ever had to witness such a thing, I think I’d have a nervous breakdown. I’m dead serious. How do these nurses keep it together? They must go home and drink themselves into oblivion.
No, Heather. Obviously, these nurses wouldn’t feel the same way about abortions that you do. They would probably accept it as a medical procedure. If not, they’d start a pro-life crusade like our friend Jill did.
Jill,
“Camerama, 5:13p, to clarify, we’re speaking of the federal bill, the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act.”
That
HisMan,
Adjusting for self-serving christian biases… Hammurabi was probably the most influential historical figure of all time… his codes mark the greatest step towards civilization as we know it… world wide, and not just for 30% of the world’s current population (christians).
Camalama, I’d like your source to: “Myelination of the nervous system doesn’t even begin until week 22 at the earliest, and doesn’t finish until after birth. i.e. no pain, at least up till third trimester… and gradually becoming more sensative as myelination advances from peripheral to central. I don’t know at what stage myelination of the peripheral nervous system is complete, but definately before birth, as baby’s are clearly responsive to discomfort upon birth.”
Jill,
pick one… any one
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=myelination+human+fetus
This one’s got a pretty good abstract. Not hard to read.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=7540130&dopt=Citation
Camelopardalis, thanks for making it easy for me.
But I did not ask about myelination. I asked about fetal pain. And while you’re at it, check out google scholar for preterm pain, which you should find compelling, if you’re honestly interested.
Now before you say something snippy to me for which you will have to later apologize, determining fetal pain is not all about myelination.
And don’t bother touting the JAMA 2005 study. It was written by abortion industry proponents to try to undercut the Child Pain Awareness Act that year.
Leah, except for the nusres that quit and “outed” these clinics. Most admit to substance abuse problems while working in abortion mills.
Cammeron-
Try to keep up, dear. I was pointing out that your “observation” was innacurate, and that those *stupid* pro-lifers are correct.
I would like nothing better than for abortion to be ended. In the interiem, we must do all we can to prevent suffering. If this includes fetal pain bills, so be it.
Aside from that, why in the world are you rambling on about self awareness. Humans aren’t self aware until 18 months. Are you suggesting that we shouldn’t anethestize infants for surgery since they do not “suffer in any meaningful sense of the word”?
Go down to a nicu and look at some preemies. Take note of the ones suffering reflux who cry for hours in pain. Are they not suffering?
Jill,
You’re just equivocating, talking about legislation nuances and third trimester. I’m talking about the typical anti-choice nut job, and I run into a great many of them that think and argue that an aborted fetus feels pain during any abortion, and not just late term. My point is still the same… anti-choice masses = ignorant about fetal pain.
“But I did not ask about myelination. I asked about fetal pain.”
Without myelination, nerve cells are like a phone that isn’t plugged in. It’s a simple formula. If your phone’s not plugged in, nobody’s going to hear you when you try to call em up and tell em what it’s like over here. Would you like to argue that people without eyeballs can see?
“Now before you say something snippy to me for which you will have to later apologize, determining fetal pain is not all about myelination.”
It certainly is about meylination up to and around week 20, prior to which there’s no sensing diddly. After which, sensing is gradual, however still meaningless for lack of self-awareness.
“And don’t bother touting the JAMA 2005 study. It was written by abortion industry proponents to try to undercut the Child Pain Awareness Act that year.”
LOL… translation: any reality that is not in harmony with my notions is clearly unrealistic.
Bottomline: given a general ignorance regarding fetal pain, and nuances of legislation, your “bottomline” is pretty much moot to them. It’s like asking a christian to consider what Budha had to say about religion. They’re not interested, and it’s not within their capacity.
“Try to keep up, dear. I was pointing out that your “observation” was innacurate, and that those *stupid* pro-lifers are correct.”
ROFL
I certainly am having some trouble following you now.
So … you
Hi Cameron,
wish it were so but it isn’t. As the recent 4D imaging from the UK reveals that instead of being comatose, the baby-in-the-womb is highly active.
There a four-five senses classically and the only one requiring myelination is the sense of touch. Pain from the eyes, ears, and nose are myelination-free? [And we also not delved into psychic-pain – because we cannot record it?]
Oooh, psychic pain! Mysterious supernatural phenomenon we cannot measure! With a goo-goo-goo and a gah-gah-gah.
Do you right-to-lifers ever listen to yourselves?
John,
“wish it were so but it isn’t. As the recent 4D imaging from the UK reveals that instead of being comatose, the baby-in-the-womb is highly active.”
That’s nothing… more recent 5D images suggest fetuses are actually dancing a ballet…. :-P
I’ve heard about the yawing and scowling stuff… hardy “highly” active. Terri Schiavo supposedly “smiled” lots.
The fetus in the womb is in an environment which literally induces a chemical coma (low oxygen, low sugar, etc…). There is nowhere for the baby to flee to should it be threatened, so alert is not a necessary capacity, and any expenditure of energy for activity, mental or physical, is energy that is wasted and could have been used in development. You’re welcome to make a fool of yourself with more exagerations and dubious adjectives though, but you sound desperate more than any sort of authority.
“There a four-five senses classically and the only one requiring myelination is the sense of touch. Pain from the eyes, ears, and nose are myelination-free? [And we also not delved into psychic-pain – because we cannot record it?]”
Seems you missed the most important aspect of “sensing.” THE FRICKEN BRAIN requires myelination… as do the ganglia and spine. The brain is basicaly a mass of cells that can’t talk to each other without myelination. Even upon birth, it’s relatively lacking in myelination and connections, as it is intended to be a sort of blank slate so developmental wiring can occur in response to environment.
Cameron, I’m telling you that a fetus is “practically a fully formed human” in the same way that a 5 year old is “practically a fully formed human”
The point I’m making is that “practically fully formed” can describe anyone at any time since we are all stumbling twoards completition.
Also, an infant is born with far more connections than an adult and they are systematically weeded out.
Cameron,
That’s the best you got?
Somg, Not only do we listen to ourselves, we listen to you. You are quite nauseating as well as silly in a stupid way. hehehehe
“The point I’m making is that “practically fully formed” can describe anyone at any time since we are all stumbling twoards completition.”
Point? You’re equivocating. “development is a continuum…” Oh wait…no…”practically” irrelevant.. o wait … no… ug… your just wrong cameron.
I’m practically stumbling back into the womb… soon as I get a chance.
cameron, this isn’t hard.
My point is that because life is a continuem we are all mearly “practically fully formed”.
The pro-lifers who believe this of those in the womb are thus, correct.
Did the little guy in the picture make it? – I hope so. I was premature too. God bless him or her.
Cameron, if someone handed you a live aborted baby and asked you to put it on a utility shelf to die, would you?
Found a not wholly formed fully formed singing fetus for you … BTW… theme song to House.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fG8eQBSp9Ao&mode=related&search=
Cameron, that was a very cute video. Were you making a point?
Cameron! I love that song! The video was really bizarre though…didn’t particularly care for it actually.
Mario, 2:44p: I don’t know. I got the photo from google images.
prettyinpink asked:
“I think both sides have good points. Is there some kind of compromise that can be worked out?”
No, there are not good points on “both” sides. And there will be absolutely no compromise made on You Shall Not Murder!
Its wrong to make murdering babies more humane and painless just as its wrong to make raping a young girl more humane and painless Jill Stanek. Get it now?
I know that making it more humane and painless to murder a baby boy or girl would increase the number of moms who murder their babies. You know why Jill? Because the absence of pain in a baby aborted earlier on within the first trimester is one of the top 2 reasons that people routinely give me to justify slaughtering babies. They think “Its OK to kill this baby because they won’t feel any pain. They’ll just go away without experiencing suffering.”
I agree with Brian Rohrbaugh one-hundred percent. Jill I don’t think you’re clear on what it is pro-lifers oppose. Those of us who oppose this bill oppose… the bill. Nobody opposes the mere act of suggesting (or administering) a pain-killer. If an abortionist voluntarily suggests a pain-killer, then so be it. What I oppose is a bill who’s language says it’s okay to kill a baby. To support a bill that says “suggest painkiller to mother before killing baby” is just plain wrong. Suppose it was possible to vaporize a baby in the womb so quickly he wouldn’t feel a thing. Would you support a bill that says “suggest to mother method of baby-vaporizing is painless to the baby”?
Jill said, “Lolita, 11:39p, this fetal pain thing is a very big deal to me. You’re sitting there in your air-conditioned house sipping a can of Coke thinking of esoteric reasons not to give pain relief to babies about to be legally drawn and quartered. How disgusting.”
These babies are being drawn and quartered legally because people who believe in compromised incremental laws have allowed it. Rape/incest/health of the mother exceptions brought abortion to the entire country, starting in Colorado 1967.
When you lower yourself to personal attacks instead of staying on the issue, you are not winning the argument.
I’ve come to believe recently that the reason why so many “pro-lifers” think its better to promote pro-abortion laws with exceptions is because they believe they will NEVER see abortion re-criminalized in their lifetime. That is a self-fulfilling prophecy since the incrementalist strategy will make it pretty much impossible legally to re-criminalize abortion.
Death by 10,000 paper cuts is a great strategy as long as those paper cuts all occur within a short period of time. If those 10,000 paper cuts occur over a period of 100 years then its a totally ineffective strategy.
Quinn, thank you for some great posts!!