[wagglebee]

Unlike most miscarriages, ectopic pregnancies don't always resolve themselves on their own and require medical intervention. The act of surgically removing the baby and therefore terminating the pregnancy is an abortion, it's just NOT an elective one. And that's where people who are rabidly pro-life run into problems.

Who are these "rabid pro-lifers" who don't want a woman to be allowed to have an abortion when the alternative is her certain death?

Can you point to a SINGLE credible pro-life group that believes this?

Or are you, and I suspect this is the case, simply trying to smear the entire pro-life movement as "rabid"?

[Judith Anne]

Wagglebee, please let this go. There are people on this thread who are suffering from the loss of a child due to ectopic pregnancy, and that suffering is life-long.

Sorrow and love are needed here. The word “abortion” can also be used for a miscarriage, as in “spontaneous abortion.” That terminology is very painful for those of us who have lost children.

No agenda.

[xzins]

Good for the bishop.

There was no indication in the link that the pregnancy was an ectopic pregnancy. If so, that information must be elsewhere.

Rather than abort the child, might someone have a procedure to relocate the implantation from the tube to within the uterus of the mother? It might be radical, difficult, or even rarely if ever successful, but at least it’s an effort to save both lives.

[TNdandelion]

No, I can't point to a "credible" pro-life group that supports this type of position and that is why I called them "rabidly pro-life." There is something very wrong with their reasoning.

Now...you were saying?