Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fetal Frontier (suggestion that women show even token concern for aborted fetus outrages feminists)
Village Voice ^ | December 7th, 2004 10:45 AM | Sharon Lerner

Posted on 12/07/2004 1:04:39 PM PST by dead

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 next last
To: diane in IL

"She really strikes me as a kind, sensitive woman. How truly compassionate of her to support offering anaesthesia to the baby before they butcher it. This article and this woman makes me want to puke."

There is simply no way to square this circle, no matter how the abortionists twist and turn it. This article has nothing to do with "moral complexity" and everything to do with strategy. It's like the 'rat atheists trying to quote scripture, all of a sudden, to the Red Staters.


21 posted on 12/07/2004 1:38:47 PM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: dead
It's amazing to me that it took the heartwrenching horror of late-term abortion to finally begin to awaken this woman's senses!
22 posted on 12/07/2004 1:40:58 PM PST by TChris (You keep using that word. I don't think it means what yHello, I'm a TAGLINE vir)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dead
Kissling suggests instead trying to change the legislation to say that fetal anesthesia should be respectfully offered as an option.

Actually, it should be required by state law, for abortions at a stage where the fetus is capable of feeling pain. State laws do not allow inhumane methods of euthanizing unwanted or sick animals.

23 posted on 12/07/2004 1:42:47 PM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy

I think it's safe to assume that PP buys low-end for all types of equipment. It is a non-profit which tries to keep the cost of all its services as low as possible. The high end ultrasound equipment is a big price hike from the basic stuff, which is quite sufficient from a medical standpoint.


24 posted on 12/07/2004 1:45:22 PM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dead
"It's gruesome," Kissling says of abortions performed late in pregnancy.

That's because you are killing a person, Frances.

25 posted on 12/07/2004 2:14:27 PM PST by siunevada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dead

Again, it boils down to them thinking "It's not what we say, it's how we say it. If we say it differently, we'll win more people over."


26 posted on 12/07/2004 2:46:57 PM PST by wizardoz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TChris
If it's a "serious decision", then it probably isn't just a "mass of cells", is it?

Well said.

27 posted on 12/07/2004 2:47:39 PM PST by T. Buzzard Trueblood ("Hell, I don't want to meet them sons of bitches." Elvis Presley on the Beatles)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: dead
It's funny to see the pro-aborts eat one of their own alive with the smallest suggestion of even TALKING about reasonable restrictions on abortion.

Keep it up, pro-aborts, this is why we are winning! People don't like extremists!

tSG
28 posted on 12/07/2004 2:53:11 PM PST by alkaloid2 (Your favorite site is now www.theSuperGenius.com! You are commanded!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
One has only to read the USSC's 1973 Roe v Wade decision to know that this kind of talk is nothing but agit-prop. FemiiNazi idealogy is famously written into the USSC decision.

Thanks to FemiNazis, the unborn child has literally no protection in the womb, and is considered fair game by any and all saline/suction-wielding abortionists.

The USSC decision specfically states that under the equal protection clause of 14th Amendment, the unborn child is not considered a "person" and therefore has no legal rights under US law (14th Excerpt: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof......").

Roe v Wade author Justice Harry Blackmun wrote that "the unborn have never been recognized in the law as persons in the whole sense" and are not entitled to constitutional protection until birth.

Here, Blackmun was aided by tenets of the Jewish faith, and possibly other faiths, who teach that life begins at birth, not in the womb.

However, the official right-to-life position is that life begins at conception. Pro aborts insist that laws built on those religious beliefs infringe on their constitutional right of freedom from religion, yet they rarely if ever mention that the concept of life beginning at birth is a religious belief.

FemiNazis made sure that Roe v Wade made the "Right to Choose" paramount. The mother's rights over the womb are absolute.....up to and including the ninth month of pregnancy. Most people believe that the court decision was based on the viability of unborn life, and that the court examined all of the existing information, then decided there was no viability. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I have had to force newspaper editors to retract editiorials on this aspect of the USSC decision.

The court based its decision on the fact that since religion and science could not decide (up to that time) when life begins, they didn't have to, either.

Blackmun wrote: "We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer."

It appears the Roe Court (or some of them) actually believed that it wasn't possible to determine when the life of a human being begins. But, by not resolving this factual issue, the Court left unresolved the legal question regarding the rights of an unborn child. So, the need to provide an answer to that question is inescapable.

Cutting edge millenium technology offers proof positive that life begins at conception. The issue of when life begins is no longer a difficult question. Scientific and medical evidence proves, without doubt, that human life begins at the moment of conception and that the child is a complete, separate, unique and irreplaceable human being from the moment of conception throughout gestation.

Since 1973, advances in technology have allowed us to obtain new information about human life on a molecular level. This information resolves all doubts that abortion is the act of killing a human being and that this tiny human experiences pain even during early gestation.

At the time of the Roe v Wade decision, abortion was completely illegal in 33 states except when necessary to save the life of the mother. The remaining 17 states allowed abortion in various circumstances. The most permissive, New York, allowed abortion for any reason up to 24 weeks, though New York did not allow third trimester abortions for "emotional health" as required by the Supreme Court.

In recent years, the abortion right has been extended to partial-birth abortions (sometimes termed infanticide) so that a perfectly viable child in the birth canal, in the process of being born, can be aborted in a most gruesome way, if the mother so chooses.

29 posted on 12/07/2004 2:58:21 PM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dead
Rosalind Petchesky, a professor of political science at Hunter College and author of a seminal book on abortion rights, points out that many who get abortions after the first trimester are young teenagers who didn't act earlier because of the climate of fear, shame, and confusion created by anti-abortion extremists.

Well, that or maybe there wasn't a clinic around the corner from their house, or maybe they had something else to do on Saturday afternoon. I mean, who are we to judge?

30 posted on 12/07/2004 3:22:15 PM PST by madprof98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: escapefromboston

Exactly. You have another choice, don't try to change the doctrine of an entire religion.


31 posted on 12/07/2004 3:24:05 PM PST by Hi Heels (Proud to be a Pajamarazzi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dead
My Choice is lower taxes,ugly guns,& fewer Democrats in positions of power.

Some how,I don't think the "Pro-Choice" crowd would support my choices.

32 posted on 12/07/2004 3:32:36 PM PST by HP8753 (France Suxs big green ones)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dead; 2nd amendment mama; A2J; Agitate; Alouette; Annie03; aposiopetic; attagirl; axel f; ...

ProLife Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

33 posted on 12/07/2004 4:48:54 PM PST by Mr. Silverback (A Freelance copywriter looking for business.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: escapefromboston

When you really piss off a unitarian they burn a question mark on your front lawn.... ;-)


34 posted on 12/07/2004 4:52:53 PM PST by festus (The constitution may be flawed but its a whole lot better than what we have now !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: diane in IL
This is such a good point. There is a Pro-life website that has a link to video footage of an ultrasound of a fetus as it is being aborted. I still lose sleep over that video. It absolutely turned me from someone who never really had an opinion on the issue either way to someone who is adamantly pro-life.

I have always maintained that if most women could be present to observe the proceedure first-hand, they would be sickened. A baby is not a diseased tonsil, no matter how much the pro-abortion folks want you to believe it is.

Some years ago I lurked on an abortion post here which turned into mostly all women making the comments, and had I known how to make & save a link back then, I'd show it to you-- but lacking that, here is what I learned:

1- the age of children asking the dreaded question, "Mommy, what's an abortion?" has dropped from the teenage years in my era to 8 or even 6 years of age. That's horrid.

2- all the children thus informed were universally repulsed. Typical was "How can a Mommy do that to her baby?"

3- but the tale that really drew me up short?
One of our female members asked her toddler ( about 2 years ) "what was it like when you were in Mommy's belly?"

My skin still crawls at his answer...

"Wet..."

35 posted on 12/07/2004 5:13:49 PM PST by backhoe (-30-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dead
We have to put the dying and suffering of women who don't have access to safe abortion onto the table.

I suspect the answer is "no," but does anyone know if there exist meaningful statistics on the REASON for abortions? Specifically, I'd LOVE to see a figure on just how many women are at risk of dying if they don't get an abortion, or at risk of significant suffering.

I doubt any such numbers exist; after all, stats like this would have to come from the abortionists themselves, and a monster capable of hacking up or de-braining an innocent baby most certainly wouldn't have any qualms about falsifying records.

MM

36 posted on 12/07/2004 5:18:59 PM PST by MississippiMan (Americans should not be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: escapefromboston
Catholics for a Free Choice is a dissenting organization made up of Catholics in Name Only.(CINOS)

From Our Lady's Warriors>Dissent>Dissenting Organizations

Catholics for a Free Choice (CFFC) Promotes artificial contraceptive "rights," including abortion. Their focus is the "intersection of Catholic teaching and public policy." Bishop Bruskewitz excommunicated those that belong to this group in his Diocese. Member of Catholic Organizations for Renewal. They have been condemned by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops (NCCB).

37 posted on 12/07/2004 5:24:00 PM PST by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MississippiMan

Most Important Reason Given for
Terminating an Unwanted Pregnancy

Inadequate finances 21%
Not ready for responsibility 21%
Woman’s life would be changed too much 16%
Problems with relationship; unmarried 12%
Too young; not mature enough 11%
Children are grown; woman has all she wants 8%
Fetus has possible health problem 3%
Woman has health problem 3%
Pregnancy caused by rape, incest 1%
Other 4%

Average number of reasons given 3.7


38 posted on 12/07/2004 5:26:11 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: dead; cpforlife.org

Ping


39 posted on 12/07/2004 5:39:19 PM PST by TenthAmendmentChampion (Click on my name to see what readers have said about my Christian novels!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

Thanks, J. As I figured. All we hear from the pro-kill crowd is how it's about the safety of the mother. 3%. Sheesh.

MM


40 posted on 12/07/2004 5:39:32 PM PST by MississippiMan (Americans should not be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson