Baby boy survives for nearly two days after abortion

[Peikko 1,575]

Up until around 45 years ago, this was standard procedure for any baby born with severe disability, the baby was left to die of 'natural' causes. the article states that this is standard procedure for babies aborted in this gestational period in Italy - whether that is true, whether that is standard I don't know. I expect the difference for disabled births now is that when a Dr knows the child will probably die soon after birth, they talk to the parents and the parents care for the baby until that happens.

[SMR 368]

OK dude, that was a little hysterical and took a bit of a giant leap from what I said.

Do I really need to point out to you I see this as a nuanced issue, where nothing is clear-cut or predictable? Shouldn't that be a given?

I am a guy on an online forum - I'm not a politician making an abortion policy along arbitrary lines. So why can you not accept some degree of nuance to what I said? Because of course no reasonable person would see any distinction whatsoever between a child with Diabetes, Downs Syndrome, catastrophic brain damage or quadriplegia.

And no, we really don't need the Hitler references do we, let's not go down that silly road.

I realize the issue is nuanced and complicated. That's why abortion is so ridiculous. It's not a nuanced or complicated response. It's just killing someone.

While a reasonable person sees a distinction between a person with Diabetes, Downs Syndrome, catastrophic brain damage, quadriplegia, or other disabilities, there isn't a difference between killing them. Alive, they are different, unique people. Dead, they are all simply murder victims.

When I said that I hesitate to use the example of Hitler, it wasn't because I don't think it's a good comparison, but only because I think the comparison is overused. Hitler similarly justified killing people on the basis that they couldn't lead a "normal" life and that they would be a burden on society and their families.

So what? That wasn't the focus of what I was saying - can you at least accept that there are multiple dimensions to this story? The failure to cover every base doesn't imply something sinister. Why would you think that it does?

I don't really understand why you feel a need to be hostile right off the bat. I get that abortion is a charged issue, but seriously... you need to calm down.

The only reason I quoted your post is because it was the only one that attempted to address the topic before Col. Lingus when off on his usual nutcase rants. Is it more offensive to you that someone would respond on-topic or that they would use a thread like this for the purposes of trolling?

Well, I just mentioned it because I didn't understand why you were quoting my post yet talking about something completely different.

In any case, I didn't see my post as hostile and don't after a re-reading. I simply stated that your view on this is a tenet of National Socialism. If you see that as offensive or untrue, elaborate on how your views differ.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

True, but at least the child is alive. Perhaps if there are disabilities, there can be a chance to overcome them. Just saying.

Entirely depends what they are. Personally, I wouldn't want to have a child that I knew would be bedridden for its entire life and needed to be fed with tubes.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I realize the issue is nuanced and complicated. That's why abortion is so ridiculous. It's not a nuanced or complicated response. It's just killing someone.

While a reasonable person sees a distinction between a person with Diabetes, Downs Syndrome, catastrophic brain damage, quadriplegia, or other disabilities, there isn't a difference between killing them. Alive, they are different, unique people. Dead, they are all simply murder victims.

Excuse me? No, they are not "murder victims" because the legal designation of killing "murder", "manslaughter", "accidental homicide" etc. etc. requires human beings to make a subjective determination on a specific series of events. If that were not the case, everyone who kills anyone whether by accident, design or misadventure would be a murderer.

This is not the case.

Furthermore, I doubt you'll find anyone who is pro-choice who believes that abortion should not be subject to some controls. I know I don't.

When I said that I hesitate to use the example of Hitler, it wasn't because I don't think it's a good comparison, but only because I think the comparison is overused. Hitler similarly justified killing people on the basis that they couldn't lead a "normal" life and that they would be a burden on society and their families.

So you think it is a good comparison to take a single quote and suggest that on the basis of it that my beliefs must somehow be synonymous with the policies of the 3rd Reich? Do you honestly think that this is reasonable?

Well, I just mentioned it because I didn't understand why you were quoting my post yet talking about something completely different.

As I said, I quoted you because you were the only person who addressed the topic directly and didn't appear to be basing an opinion on the basis of emotional argument.

On the basis of what you've just written, I see that it was a mistake on my part to make that assumption. You clearly aren't interested in a sober discussion about the subject because if you were, there would be no need for hysterical comparisons to Adolf Hitler and you would be able to address a complex subject beyond the limit of your preconceived ideas.

In any case, I didn't see my post as hostile and don't after a re-reading. I simply stated that your view on this is a tenet of National Socialism. If you see that as offensive or untrue, elaborate on how your views differ.

You respond to a post that was offering an opinion on the subject under discussion and you immediately compare that opinion to Adolf Hitler... and you don't see that as hostile? inflammatory?

Unbelievable

Why should I? Because if I don't your ridiculous comparison stands?

For some reason, I don't feel much inclined to carry on this conversation.

Edited April 29, 2010 by Its a MADHOUSE

[Anna C. 4]

Very disturbing. Terrible. And someone compared the 22 week baby to an amoeba. Right, cause that weighs 2 pounds too and can feel pain as well.

[SMOKE 1,426]

Entirely depends what they are. Personally, I wouldn't want to have a child that I knew would be bedridden for its entire life and needed to be fed with tubes.

WOW! thanks for the true view of your character.

'** IT KILL IT! its a burden to me not a showpiece'

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

WOW! thanks for the true view of your character.

'** IT KILL IT! its a burden to me not a showpiece'

Thanks for adding yet more hysterics.

I could elaborate on that point, but something tells me you aren't interested

[The_Dude 1,142]

WOW! thanks for the true view of your character.

'** IT KILL IT! its a burden to me not a showpiece'

Clearly someone needs to take some Midol

[SMOKE 1,426]

Thanks for adding yet more hysterics.

I could elaborate on that point, but something tells me you aren't interested

its what you said. 'elaborate' aka- say something else if you like.

Clearly someone needs to take some Midol

go get some if you're have vag issues again.

[The_Dude 1,142]

its what you said. 'elaborate' aka- say something else if you like.

go get some if you're have vag issues again.

I only suggested it because you're making absolutely no sense, and whining like a b!tch.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

its what you said. 'elaborate' aka- say something else if you like.

go get some if you're have vag issues again.

So in short, you are not interested in talking about the topic, but you want others to take your moral outrage about abortion seriously.

Good luck!

[SMOKE 1,426]

I only suggested it because you're making absolutely no sense, and whining like a b!tch.

i made perfect sense. i called him on what he said. YOU went all butt hurt about something that did not concern you. whos the whinny b!tch?

So in short, you are not interested in talking about the topic, but you want others to take your moral outrage about abortion seriously.

Good luck!

sucks when you get called huh?

[The_Dude 1,142]

i made perfect sense. i called him on what he said. YOU went all butt hurt about something that did not concern you. whos the whinny b!tch?

Still you Marge....

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

i made perfect sense. i called him on what he said. YOU went all butt hurt about something that did not concern you. whos the whinny b!tch?

sucks when you get called huh?

You aren't interested in my opinion, only the specific words used and the fact that I didn't write a big essay with a bunch of disclaimers.

Again, all this proves is that you treat a subject that you supposedly feel passionate about as a joke. Frankly, I find that kinda offensive.

Edited April 29, 2010 by Its a MADHOUSE

[besaangel 17]

Bottom-line is this: taking another's life is wrong, whether by murder or abortion, its still taking something that does not belong to you and depriving one of their God-given right to live.